Payments Economics Recovery
Your payment program is live.
Your payment program is live.
The economics aren't working.
Interchange is lower than projected. Margins are compressed at scale. Revenue isn't materializing despite volume. In almost every case, the cause is architectural — and it's recoverable. We've been inside these programs. We know exactly where the money is going.
30-minute economics diagnostic. No cost. No commitment.
42%
of payments monetized — vs. 5–15% industry average. The difference is architectural design.
$350M
AP payments revenue business operated. We know what the economics look like at scale.
0→$1B
digital bank built in under 12 months. Program economics designed from day one.
The Real Problem
Most programs that fail to capture payments revenue didn't make wrong decisions. They made no decisions.
The fee structure, interchange routing, float mechanics, and bank terms defaulted to vendor configuration because they were never explicitly defined. The program was built. The economics were inherited.
That gap is recoverable. But it requires someone who has operated at the economics level — not just advised on it. We ran a $350M payments revenue business. We know exactly where programs leak, why it happens, and how to fix it.
Where Programs Leak
Six categories of payments economics leakage
Each one has a root cause, a recoverable gap, and a defined fix sequence. Most programs have at least two of these operating simultaneously.
Interchange Capture Failure
"Our interchange is lower than projected and we don't know why."
BIN structure isn't optimized. Card type mix defaults to lowest interchange categories. Level 2/3 data isn't transmitting. Revenue sharing terms were set by vendor defaults, not negotiated against a defined economics model.
BIN restructuring, L2/L3 transmission audit, interchange pass-through renegotiation, card mix optimization
Float Economics Not Captured
"We have significant customer balances but no yield on them."
Float economics were never negotiated into the bank relationship. The bank keeps yield on your customer balances by default. Most BaaS arrangements don't surface this as a negotiable — because it isn't in the bank's interest to.
Bank relationship restructuring, float revenue carve-out, direct bank program model assessment
Fee Structure Underperformance
"Our fee revenue is a fraction of what the volume should generate."
Fee schedules inherited from vendor defaults or copied from competitors. Speed tier pricing never designed. Transaction fees set below value delivered. Programs consistently undercharge because fees were never designed against actual value.
Fee architecture redesign, speed tier modeling, value-based fee structure, competitive benchmark analysis
Payment Rail Economics Mismatch
"Our payment mix isn't generating the margin the volume should support."
Rail selection wasn't modeled against economics. ACH used where RTP or VCC would generate more. Check volume persists because orchestration wasn't built to suppress it. Each rail carries different economics — and most programs never model the mix.
Rail economics modeling, orchestration logic redesign, VCC enablement, check displacement architecture
Processor Dependency Trap
"Our processor margin is growing faster than our revenue."
Infrastructure was selected before economics were defined. The processor captured more of the economics than the program model allocated. Switching costs are now high and the contractual structure locks the dependency in.
Program model reassessment, processor contract analysis, migration pathway design, hybrid model evaluation
BaaS Scale Failure
"The economics worked at $10M. They're broken at $50M."
BaaS pricing is a flat percentage. Your cost scales with volume at the same rate as revenue. The margin compression was predictable — and should have been modeled before the BaaS contract was signed. Now you're operating on a model designed for small scale.
BaaS economics stress test, direct/hybrid model evaluation, migration roadmap, bank partner selection for scale
What Changes
Before and after an economics restructure
Before
Interchange flowing to the infrastructure layer — not captured by the program
Float economics owned by the bank by default
Fee structure inherited from vendor schedule — not designed
BaaS margins compressing as volume grows
Payment mix defaulting to lowest-value rails
No Level 2/3 data transmission — losing interchange optimization
Revenue architecture exists on paper — never wired into execution
After
Interchange architecture designed — BIN structure, card mix, and revenue sharing renegotiated
Float economics explicitly negotiated into bank relationship
Fee structure designed against value delivered — speed tiers, transaction fees, premium rails
Program model restructured for scale — direct, hybrid, or renegotiated BaaS terms
Rail mix optimized — VCC, RTP, ACH in correct proportion for economics
L2/L3 transmission active — interchange optimization captured
Revenue mechanics wired — every lever generating as designed
How It Works
From diagnosis to recovery in four stages
01
Economics Diagnostic
We map your current program against the six leakage categories. Interchange capture rate, float economics, fee structure, rail mix, processor margin, and bank terms — all assessed against what the program should be generating at your volume.
02
Root Cause Architecture
We identify which decisions — or non-decisions — created each gap. Program model, bank relationship structure, infrastructure contract terms, BIN configuration, and fee design are all assessed. Most programs have 2–4 recoverable gaps operating simultaneously.
03
Recovery Roadmap
We sequence the fixes by economic impact and implementation complexity. Some gaps close in weeks — renegotiated terms, BIN changes, L2/L3 activation. Others require structural redesign. You get a prioritized roadmap with expected economics at each stage.
04
Implementation Support
We stay through execution — bank negotiations, processor contract restructuring, infrastructure migration if needed. The economics don't change until the architecture changes. We make sure the architecture actually changes.
Want to know exactly where your program is leaking?
Tell us your volume, your current program model, and what the economics look like. In 30 minutes we'll tell you which leakage categories apply to your program and what fixing them is worth.
30 minutes · No cost · No commitment · We respond within 1 business day