Reply
Ubiquiti Employee
Posts: 3,832
Registered: ‎12-10-2015
Kudos: 1352
Solutions: 298

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments

@Brandon-W the priorities are: implementing linked subscriptions for other gateways and adding new gateways (along with bunch of other requests).

That's why, you'd better create the feature request for "creating subscriptions via API". If it turns out it's needed by many users, we will surely boost the priority for this. The feature requests help us a lot in this way.
Member
Posts: 196
Registered: ‎03-19-2018
Kudos: 32
Solutions: 7

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments

Thank you for the input @UBNT-Petr

 

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/UCRM-Feature-Requests/Creating-Subscriptions-via-API/idi-p/2342937

HTML, SCSS, Javascript(Ember.js), Ruby(Ruby on Rails), PHP
Emerging Member
Posts: 103
Registered: ‎03-05-2018
Kudos: 49

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments

Hi i was wondering if there is a plan to integreate a linked/auto pay method for authorize.net still or not? i see for Stripe but unfortunatly for us we are not able to use Stripe. 

 

I've already created a request in the past on the new features but thought i'd ask again . 

 

Thanks. 

Ubiquiti Employee
Posts: 3,832
Registered: ‎12-10-2015
Kudos: 1352
Solutions: 298

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments

@sergiov87 yes, it's in our plan. However, we need to proceed to the most useful and most requested tasks first. You can share the link to your feature request and/or create a new thread to open this topic and get more votes. This would help us prioritize the development of this.
Highlighted
Member
Posts: 117
Registered: ‎02-01-2014
Kudos: 14
Solutions: 1

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments


@UBNT-Petr wrote:
@starwireI understand your concern. We will check all the payment gateways we currently support whether they enable this. The improvement for the most used gateways could be released in 1-2 months.

Which gateway do you use?

Just for the record, "1-2 months" was stated almost a year ago.  I put off my plans of migrating to UCRM under the impression that the linked subscriptions (as I see it is now called) would be easily be available this winter, which is my slow season.  I was hoping to migrate my whole ISP to UCRM over the next month or two, so I fired up my virtual machine, upgraded to the latest version, and it looks like there is STILL no option for this on IPPay, which I have to assume is one of the most used gateways as you have included support for it by default.

 

I'm losing faith in the speed of development that UCRM is a good choice for us.  I get that things like UNMS integration is big and on the roadmap, but this is BASIC BILLING functionality and it's been requested for a year.  Not having linked subscriptions is extremly clunky.  Overall, I think that UCRM is a great start and is SOOOO close to being what we need, but if I wait a year for this and it still doesn't exist, how much longer should I hold my breath?

 

Thanks,

Joe

Ubiquiti Employee
Posts: 3,832
Registered: ‎12-10-2015
Kudos: 1352
Solutions: 298

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments

@starwire I understand that it can be frustrating that some particular feature is not implemented. We work hard to add more and more features, but we can never satisfy everyone. Once we implement A, we let down everyone requesting B. The feature requests section helps us a lot to identify which ideas have the most followers and we always try to make it a priority.

 

Additionally, talking about payment gateways, we have decided to involve the community in the development, because there were approximately 30 paygates requested (+ different kinds of subsriptions for each). The current plugin's architecture is capable of handling online payments and anyone can create the plugin. Read more: https://community.ubnt.com/t5/UCRM-Plugins/Custom-payment-gateway-integration-using-a-plugin/m-p/262...

 

Of course, this doesn't mean we can't implement IPpay linked subscriptions explicitly. We can, but, for now, the prority was to do something bigger and useful for more than just IPpay users. (Btw, from our stats IPpay is one of the least used paygates in UCRM)

 

Please help us identify the priorities by upvoting the feature requests you like. Also share the request link in here.

Veteran Member
Posts: 5,880
Registered: ‎07-03-2008
Kudos: 1863
Solutions: 139

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments


@UBNT-Petr wrote:

Of course, this doesn't mean we can't implement IPpay linked subscriptions explicitly. We can, but, for now, the prority was to do something bigger and useful for more than just IPpay users. (Btw, from our stats IPpay is one of the least used paygates in UCRM).


Interesting.  Given their success in the WISP industry I would have expected to see more IPpay usage. They came up pretty quickly when I asked other WISPs about discount rates and policies (e.g. they charge a small auth fee and a separate transaction fee, so if a card fails you pay much less).  Must be a very small percentage of their WISP userbase running UCRM.

Member
Posts: 117
Registered: ‎02-01-2014
Kudos: 14
Solutions: 1

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments


@UBNT-Petr wrote:

@starwire I understand that it can be frustrating that some particular feature is not implemented. We work hard to add more and more features, but we can never satisfy everyone. Once we implement A, we let down everyone requesting B.


I understand that... I really do.  The reason I'm frustrated is because you said that the most used gateways would be 1-2 months, and then it was added to Stripe, but then NONE of them were developed further.  It's been a YEAR since then and development seems to have really slowed down from my perspective.  When I watched the development of UCRM for the year leading up to that point, new features were being developed and added quickly.  When I look at what has been added over the last year, it seems pretty marginal.  Maybe a lot of big features have been worked on that just haven't been announced yet, or maybe the staff was cut in half.. I don't know.  I'm not trying to criticize, but you have to understand that UBNT has a LONG history of getting products 90% of the way done, and then abandoning them to work on something else, and I worry that's going to happen again. 

 

I'm not trying to take it out on you.  I was just hoping that after delaying my plans and suffering without a good CRM for another year, that UCRM would have implemented the few things that prevents a WISP like myself from using it.  I understand you can't make everyone happy, and I know there are some things I requested that are probably not things that a lot of other ISP's would use.  But the way the current subscriptions work now is so incredibly non-standard for the US at least, that it makes things horribly clunky.  In my whole life, I've never setup auto pay with a company that couldn't adjust the charge on my card to reflect my account balance, and it would look bad for our customers if that's how we had to do it.  It's surprising because it seems like time is being spent on some strange features like pro-forma invoices, which I don't really get the point of, but not on basic billing functionality. 

 

Don't forget that a lot of people won't vote or get involved with the community either.  Especially if they consider it to be basic functionality.  If "auto pay" for the account balance doesn't exist, how many just skip over it and say "Well if they can't even have that, why bother at all".  And most people don't want to get developers to help finish building their billing/CRM system.  They just want it to work.  I guess what I don't understand is that you guys already developed the Authorize.net and IPPay gateways... you even developed payment subscriptions for them.... how much more work could it possibly be to just finish implenting Autopay or Linked Subscriptions or whatever you want to call it and add that funcionality to those gateways?  Again, it's the UBNT 90% done, close enough thing I've seen over the years, and that's what I don't understand.

 

Sorry for my long rant.  I'm just frustrated and disappointed because I had high hopes for UCRM, but I can't wait 5 more years for it to catch up with other system available today.  I was hoping waiting a year would get it done enough to start using, but it didn't, and that's why I'm frustrated.

Member
Posts: 117
Registered: ‎02-01-2014
Kudos: 14
Solutions: 1

Re: UCRM Dealbreakers: Recurring Payments


@MimCom wrote:


Interesting.  Given their success in the WISP industry I would have expected to see more IPpay usage. They came up pretty quickly when I asked other WISPs about discount rates and policies (e.g. they charge a small auth fee and a separate transaction fee, so if a card fails you pay much less).  Must be a very small percentage of their WISP userbase running UCRM.


I agree, they basically cater to WISPs.  I wonder how much of their low usage is becauase the features weren't finished for that gateway.  For example, if linked subscriptions were available for IPPay, I'd be another person using it.  The fact that it is avaialbe for Stripe is ALMOST enough for me to just switch to that gateway, but processing fees would cost me $100/mo more than IPPay.

Reply