PEP Episode 072 — Inside Payments Since 2003: Digital Transactions Sr Editor Kevin Woodward Discusses Industry Now

Risk keeps moving even when the rules look settled. Christopher Dryden, Esq., and COO Jeremy Stock, sat down with Kevin Woodward, senior editor at Digital Transactions (https://www.digitaltransactions.net/), to trace where the real pressure is building in payments: Visa’s VAMP and its oversight shift, tokenization that works until it doesn’t, and AI that can help teams underwrite faster without surrendering judgment. The conversation starts with a hard truth—most portfolio fires begin with poor or selective underwriting—and follows that thread into how VAMP could push acquirers toward cleaner books by making constant onboard-offboard cycles a red flag, not business as usual.

• poor or selective underwriting as root cause of losses
• tokenization’s strength vs failures in token migration after terminations
• VAMP as an oversight shift drawing acquirers closer to monitoring
• fairness of fine regimes weighed against cleaner commerce aims
• communication gaps and unintended consequences in early rollout
• AI for onboarding, underwriting signals, and attrition prediction
• residual transparency for agents and detecting bundled spreads
• content quality and compliance as credibility signals

Then we get practical. Tokenization has reduced fraud and enabled seamless recurring billing, but when a high-risk merchant is terminated, those vaulted credentials often become immovable. Without a secure and standardized path to token migration, legitimate businesses face revenue cliffs and consumers face needless friction. We explore why that gap exists, how incentives lock data in, and what a fair migration framework could look like for processors, merchants, and cardholders.

Finally, we dig into AI’s real uses: accelerating document checks, classifying business models, scanning web footprints, and predicting attrition so portfolios don’t bleed out quietly. It’s not about replacing experts; it’s about turning noise into signal so risk teams can act early. Along the way, we talk fines versus fairness, communication gaps in new program rollouts, and the small credibility details—like clear, compliant content—that still matter to regulators and partners.

If you care about underwriting discipline, token portability, and AI that actually reduces risk, this one’s for you. Follow and subscribe for more conversations at the edge of payments, and drop a review to tell us where you’re seeing the most friction today.

Payments Experts Podcast Episode 72

*Matters discussed are all opinions and do not constitute legal advice.  All events or likeness to real people and events is a coincidence.*

Transcript

Christopher Dryden (00:00):

Anytime I get some sort of default, whether it’s from a financing obligation or it’s from merchant processing, which is either led to fines or some sort of merchant loss, all of it’s poor underwriting in my opinion, or selective underwriting, looking at dollars versus potential loss. And I see that as, again, when I had this conversation with this other person about vamp, I almost thought maybe it was pushing down risk of loss and then oversight and heightening the oversight obligations of other market players below the card brands and the acquirer or the bank to say, look, you guys need to do a better job, and if you don’t, then there’s going to be problems. We’re going to make you responsible because ultimately, look, a merchant goes out of business, the iso, the agent, whoever else below, they’re responsible, right? I mean, if the bank’s not taking as any risk of loss, visa and MasterCard aren’t taking any risk of loss, so who knows?

Jeremy Stock  (01:07):

Welcome to the Payments Experts podcast, a podcast of global legal law firm. We hope you enjoy this episode. We’re really excited today. We’ve got joining us in studio founding and managing partner of global legal law firm, Christopher Dryden, as well as our special guest. We have Kevin Woodward, who’s the senior editor over at Digital Transactions. You can find kevin@digitaltransactions.net. Digital transactions has been in the industry a long, long time. Kevin, we’re really excited to have you on this podcast. Welcome.

Kevin Woodward (01:46):

Yeah, thanks for coming on, Kev. Yeah, I appreciate it. It’s great to have visibility and to talk a little bit about what’s going on in industry from our perspective.

Christopher Dryden (01:56):

Well, I mean that’s the thing. Your perspective is really why we’re, thank you for being on, because I will tell you, when I was becoming an attorney in this space, this is one of the industry mags I read to kind of educate myself on what was going on. I mean, our first client was a particular type of ISO with a particular type of acquisition model, kind of loss leader, heavy leasing, which wasn’t really payments. I mean, payments is a much, much broader topic, and throughout the years, digital transactions, awesome publication. I mean, you guys, even today putting out content that is entirely relevant all the time, kind of on the front end of things. It’s funny, we’ll do a podcast on something and then I’ll see an article almost come out the day. We haven’t even published a podcast, but something come out for digital transactions.

Christopher Dryden (02:50):

So you guys, you’re super relevant and it’s nice to have you on because as we were talking beforehand, we see a lot of dumpster fires, and so a lot of times those get anchored around something that’s a subject matter that is relevant, but we kind of sit in a very almost like sequestered space, and when you’re out and about and you’re finding content to write about, you’re on the front end of things and which is great because things that are kind of getting traction in our industry, look, our industry’s a little bit like the Titanic. It takes a little while to turn the ship here and there, so I do believe that we sit on some subject matter for a while, but that’s because we’re dealing with large corporations and banks before things really start to move. But we really appreciate you having you on, and I think what would be great for our view or our listenership, I always say viewership. Our listenership is tell us about digital transactions, and I mean senior editor, you’ve been there a long time. Tell us exactly kind of its genesis and what you do, what you focus on.

Kevin Woodward (04:04):

That’s great. I appreciate being here. Digital transactions got its start, I believe in about 2003, 2004, about 10 years before I joined the magazine by two veterans. I’m sure a lot of people know Bob Jenni, our publisher, lead ad sales guy, and John Stewart, our editor in chief. I came on, like I said, about 10 years ago, and one thing that they told me about is that our coverage is consumer facing electronic payments in North America. So there’s a big gamut there that’s a lot to cover, and we break it down. We typically think of our three audience segments as the banking industry, acquirers and merchants. So whenever we write something, that’s who we’re writing for. And our goal, my goal is to answer the question, how does this help our reader make money? Whatever it is we’re writing about. If it’s ai, which is all over the place today, or if it’s back in the days, the free terminals, how does that help our reader make money? I’ve been covering this space, so I’ve been here about C 13, so almost coming up on 12 years with digital transactions, but prior to that I worked with a publication called ISO, an Agent.

Christopher Dryden (05:29):

It

Kevin Woodward (05:29):

Was a newsletter that came out once a week

Christopher Dryden (05:31):

Published

Kevin Woodward (05:32):

By the company that owns the American Banker. And I see, I started on that in 2006, not knowing anything about the acquiring industry sounds like me. I didn’t even, didn’t

Christopher Dryden (05:45):

Even know I read that too.

Kevin Woodward (05:48):

Yeah, I didn’t even know it existed. I didn’t know what it was purpose. How did it work? What do you mean cards? How does it as a consumer, I never gave any thought on how a merchant gets a terminal on their countertop. I never gave any thought about how an e-commerce transaction would be processed and who that would flow through. I remember just getting thrown into it and it’s like, okay, you got to go to this show and talk to all these people, and it’s like, okay, let’s see what’s going on. Well, I think that’s still the case.

Christopher Dryden (06:22):

I think that’s still the case. I mean, I do training for the attorneys and the support staff here on payments because we have great attorneys, but what makes us different is the subject matter, and I tell ’em, look, it’s a six to 12 month learning curve, even getting continuous training from us. There’s a lot of information. We’ve just acquired it over the years, but I’ve actually changed the way that I do the training. I used to do it top down and I would start with Visa, master the card brands, and then kind of draw out the architecture of the ecosystem. I do it now top up, I mean bottom up, because everybody participates in the ecosystem. They just don’t realize that they’re participating in how, and so I’ve actually started to talk when I started the training about cards, and I take cards out of my wallet and I’ll start to show ‘EM cards, and I start to talk about, I actually started issuing now so that I could really give people an idea of how their participation in this system, they understand one side because they’re engaged in it as a consumer, but they don’t see the other side.

Christopher Dryden (07:39):

They just take it for granted, like you were just saying.

Kevin Woodward (07:43):

Right. It was fascinating because before then I was on a smart card magazine, which was international focused, and that was exciting, and that was at a time when the industry, we thought then early two thousands that the US was going to convert to chip, and it only took 10 more years for the liability shift to actually be have a day attached to it. But it went through, it was heady days for the acquiring industry back in the mid two thousands and that period that I was really very intimate with it, and there’s a lot of stuff going on. I always like to think that maybe things are a little quiet and payments now, it’s kind of a lull. There’s really not a lot of new things coming around. But I hate to be cliche as a writer, I hate cliches, but it’s like the weather. Just wait.

Christopher Dryden (08:39):

Yeah, wait, change. Yeah,

Kevin Woodward (08:41):

Something will come along.

Christopher Dryden (08:43):

Yeah, I see the same thing, just when I feel like I’ve got it. Oh, it’s gone. And the reason is, and I attribute it to technology more than anything else. I’m a tech, I’m not on social media. I don’t have the latest device. If I showed you my phone, you’d laugh. And to be honest, I don’t have enough time necessarily, and I’m not engaged. I have other hobbies. So when it comes to tech, what I know about tech is really been driven by what I’m required to know within my job, and I think that’s been the real driver of change. Do you see that or do you see something else like other market forces that are taking place as well?

Kevin Woodward (09:24):

Well, that’s definitely a big part of it. I remember when I was in grad school, I had a seminar on the whole myth and technology, how those are the two big drivers within the society. So it’s interesting you bring up the technology that can be a big driver, but I also think the myth, which is more the ideas, the concepts that flow through a society, I think that’s also another big factor. If we will look at the younger generation, maybe two or three generations past me now, younger than me now, but how they’re coming up with, I have a 7-year-old great nephew who’s completely attuned to everything digital. He’s not going to know what it would mean to bring a card through a knuckle buster. He’s going to be constantly, when he becomes of age and he starts paying for things on his own, it’s going to be all digital. Maybe he’ll have a card that’ll stash away the secure, everything is tethered to the pan and all that information, but it’s all going to be digital for him. So there’s the concept of it. He’s used to this idea already of using technology, but also technology is a driver.

Kevin Woodward (10:50):

I mentioned the EMV transition here in the states, and tokenization was a big part of that. That had to happen, and that had to happen for Apple Pay and the mobile wallets to come along as well. And now look at tokenization. It’s everywhere. Cars are getting tokenized as a payment device in some instances, watches everything, and it’s just fascinating.

Christopher Dryden (11:16):

What’s interesting though is I agree with you, the technology is there, the willingness of the parties that are employing that technology. Here’s a problem that I recently saw, and maybe this is a good segue into our discussion. We were going to talk about vamp. I do think that that’s something that we, I’d love to get your perspective on, but I’m seeing with Vamp, if there is the acting of a merchant for whatever risk reason, if they’ve been working with a processor and they’ve employing tokenization with their customers for recurring billing, there’s a total drop off for servicing related to that tokenization to migrate them to a new provider. That’ll take on the risk of the merchant. And the crazy part is, as I understand that the processors is creating and storing the tokens, but there should be some sort of lever that allows for the migration of those tokens to keep business going. And I feel like they do certain things really well, but then when it comes time to actually take the collateral that they’ve built for a customer that they don’t want to do business with anymore, and then allow ease for the customer, even if they’re getting paid, there’s all this resistance associated with it. And so I see technology being employed, but it’s maybe not transferable. And so this just recently happened with a merchant that I believe was terminated in vamp due to vamp because the risk profile was different after Vamp was put into

Kevin Woodward (13:00):

Place.

Christopher Dryden (13:01):

It’ll increasingly be different. And so the processor didn’t want to deal with them any longer. However, their entire business is recurring billings, and so they can’t get any migration of the tokens. Imagine if you’ve got thousands of tokens that you’re relying on to continue to get your revenue, and you’ve got an unwilling partner based on market forces. I don’t know what your, and I think it’s due to vamp, not necessarily the unwillingness or resistance to deal with data migration, but to the fact that they were cut off, I think was a product of vamp that hasn’t been said to us. I just kind of see one leading to the other. What’s your thoughts on vamp, what it’s going to do in the marketplace?

Kevin Woodward (13:46):

Well, that’s a topic that I just recently jumped into that’s going to have a huge impact. I mean, there’s no way that it can’t. Visa just published a video where they’re talking about it, and of course it’s from Visa’s viewpoint, but one of the components they were talking about was this whole enumeration aspect, which I think could be interesting if people go to test cards online, especially if say, in this case of this merchant where they have a lot of tokens. I dunno, it could be interesting. I frankly will tell you that probably not a huge expert on vamp at this point. But I see, it’s interesting because it draws in the acquirer, I think more directly than the previous. Well, they had five or six programs before Visa did. I think it makes this much more of a discreet acquirer tie in into this new program. Yeah, I think we’re still in the early stages for it, Chris, and it’s just very unknown because what it went into effect October one, correct?

Christopher Dryden (15:12):

Yeah. Yeah. And that’s the thing we don’t know. I mean, it’s going to take six months till we really see through a couple quarters of what’s going to happen. I’ve gotten some perspectives from different people on it. One of the things, as I listen to people talk about it and it just kind of jogs things in my head, I almost feel like kind of like EMV with a liability shift. I almost think this is a oversight shift. I mean, as you’re saying, it’s drawing in the acquirer. I kind of felt like it was this idea that now there needs to be more robust monitoring about who is underwritten and brought into the ecosystem because there’s going to be, it can’t be looked good, at least optically for somebody in the marketplace to be consistently onboarding and offboarding merchants because they don’t hit thresholds. I mean, I would imagine that’s going to shine a spotlight that wouldn’t necessarily be favorable to anybody who is downstream from Visa or a member bank or whoever it would be. And I think that that’s kind of pushing this oversight, not necessarily operation choke point, but it’s the market holding some of the gatekeepers more responsible for who they’re allowing to come in and transact.

Kevin Woodward (16:36):

And

Christopher Dryden (16:37):

That’s kind of a perspective that I saw based on a conversation that I had with one person.

Kevin Woodward (16:42):

Yeah, that is very interesting. It reminds me of the early days when people were trying to onboard CBD merchants and others who were maybe high risk, but maybe a new kind of high risk, and then they would find merchants were adding on products, wouldn’t tell the acquirer they’re now selling much higher risk products than they initially said they would. So I wonder if that’s part of the issue here too, that the card brand is trying to go after is to bring in, like you said, more oversight and maybe eventually it will actually help the acquirer maintain a cleaner portfolio. I think that that’s part of the goal is a cleaner portfolio, one with less risk, one that maybe isn’t subject to as much attrition that because of risky actions taken by the merchant or whoever may have the merchant account. I dunno, it’s just such early days in it. Can

Jeremy Stock  (17:54):

I ask a question, Chris, on this?

Kevin Woodward (17:55):

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Jeremy Stock  (17:57):

What I’m hearing you say is it sounds like maybe there’s a net good in there potentially, but my sense is that it’s going to be kind of messy till we get there.

Christopher Dryden (18:05):

Yeah. I’ve beaten up on the card brands. I’ve beaten up on Visa specifically and their fine regimes, and I think the fine regimes, the fines themselves, the amount don’t always make sense to the violations. And there’s kind of a grave impact, and it’s one size fits all for every merchant, and not every merchant’s the same. I feel like the way that the enforcement is taking place has been in a way that it makes me believe that part of the motivation is profit driven, but then when I see something like vamp come out, now I’m looking at the fine regime going, well, maybe it’s just trying to push forward to better commerce, better more compliant commerce within an ecosystem that overall reduces the amount of risk associated with it, period. I mean, Visa’s got a brand, it wants to protect the brand, I get it. But if I look at the fine regime in a silo, it doesn’t look very fair when I see it coupled with vamp. Maybe I see a little bit bigger perspective that Visa has related to some of the enforcement that leads to the fines. I don’t know, have you gotten into any of that where, I mean, we get so many calls from so many different people that operate related to dual pricing violations, and that’s been such a hot button for us. Have you guys touched on that at all?

Kevin Woodward (19:43):

We write about it from a product standpoint. As you may know, not a lot of people will want to call us and say they’re getting penalized for something. And so don’t often the penalties that you mentioned, we don’t typically hear about those or know how much they are or anything unless we talk to people at conferences such as yourself or others. I think it is interesting. Maybe there is a driver here for making a more efficient in driving down the fraud and commerce overall. The question I have too, I was just trying to find out, is vamp us only at this time?

Christopher Dryden (20:32):

I don’t know, but I think so that would be my thought is that this is geared towards our ecosystem here in North America. I dunno about us, but I think North America, like the North America region, whatever that covered.

Christopher Dryden (20:46):

But I think that if you were to look at each either region or you were to look at the United States against other countries, the amount of e-commerce that we have going on is just insane. I mean, it’s got a dwarf everything. So I believe as things have moved online, they’re looking to find a way to stop or plug some of the holes maybe as to how people are abusing the system and blasting things through. And I think I always say this, anytime I get some sort of default, whether it’s from a financing obligation or it’s from merchant processing, which is either led to fines or some sort of merchant loss, all of it’s poor underwriting in my opinion, or selective underwriting, looking at dollars versus potential loss. And I see that as, again, when I had this conversation with this other person about vamp, I almost thought maybe it was pushing down risk of loss and then oversight and heightening the oversight obligations of other market players below the card brands and the acquirer or the bank to say, look, you guys need to do a better job, and if you don’t, then there’s going to be problems.

Christopher Dryden (22:12):

We’re going to make you responsible. Because ultimately, look, a merchant goes out of business, the iso, the agent, whoever else below, they’re responsible. I mean, the bank’s not taking any risk of loss. Visa and MasterCard aren’t taking any risk of loss, so who knows?

Kevin Woodward (22:30):

Yeah. Yeah. It’s interesting.

Jeremy Stock  (22:35):

I find it interesting that Chris, you’re in this industry. You’ve been doing this for almost 20 years now, Kevin, you’ve been writing about this industry for, you mentioned almost two decades going on. To me, it speaks a lot about how Visa communicates or rather doesn’t communicate well because the fact that there’s so many questions, it’s already been implemented. We have two experts on this podcast right now, and there’s still so many open questions,

Christopher Dryden (23:07):

But again, I don’t know if the lack of clarity is not that they haven’t communicated. It’s that when you do something, I mean, look, this is a huge, huge marketplace When you make a shift, the amount of unintended consequences that they couldn’t foresee, who knows? I mean, maybe all of this stuff are just things that they really didn’t contemplate because they’re not at the level. I mean, again, they’re here. They have one perspective. They’re not necessarily going to see all the perspectives of the people down here. So some of these things where there aren’t concrete answers, I think there just needs to be a process to get concrete answers, which that’s lacking in my opinion. I don’t know, Kevin, how much interaction do you guys have with the card brands as media and as far as maybe when something like this does come out to be able to get at least a one-on-one for further information and clarity where it may not be clear on its face to you?

Kevin Woodward (24:20):

Well, it depends because each company in the payment system has their own strategies for dealing with media. As you might imagine. There are companies when they think it’s in their best interest, there’s a willingness. And visa’s been pretty good about my inquiries of it, of late of sharing some information. But the other thing too is I’m an observer. I don’t know what it’s like to have to implement or to monitor merchants with vamp. That’s not what I do day to day. You were talking about there’s different levels of interaction and how this is going to, well, any rule change or any policy change will affect those who actually have to implement it. I don’t have that. I’m an observer. No, that makes sense

Christopher Dryden (25:24):

Too. I am too, right.

Kevin Woodward (25:25):

Yeah. We’re both kind of on the outside of it.

Christopher Dryden (25:27):

Yeah. I’ve always said this, when I go to the industry shows, it’s like the biggest horror fest around it’s sales guys selling the sales guys, and we’re, there’s a few of us that just sit on the outskirts and just sort of watch the whole thing happen because we’re really not super engaged in the day to day, and we’re looking at things from a much bigger context than an individual sale. But let me transition. I really do want to pick your brain on ai. Look, I was at breakfast this morning with my family. We do Friday morning breakfast, and one of my kids said, well, isn’t like AI just going to basically take over the world? And I said, well, look, I think AI is, at least at its inception, it is like any software system. It’s garbage in, garbage out. It’s not going to do it for you.

Christopher Dryden (26:21):

You have to teach it and what you teach, it has to be specific. And I said, will it replace certain aspects of humanity in the workplace? But the lady that’s serving us food right now, it can’t replace her. And there’s a lot of things that it just can’t replace your plumber. It’s not going to replace him. So you have to look and see what AI really is and how it applies to whatever it is that you’re doing, whether it’s school work, I don’t care. I said they’ve tried to apply this in the legal world, and recently there was appellate decision that came down in California and attorney had used ai, which included fake cases that were just, I

Kevin Woodward (27:02):

Think I heard about that.

Christopher Dryden (27:04):

And then they find the appellate attorney 10 grand, and then they find the opposing counsel because they didn’t catch it either in their opposition brief. So I thought that was really interesting. And we’ve seen this sort of stuff, I guess they call it hallucinations within the ai, where it just sort of creates stuff. But because I don’t do what you do and I’m not observing on the front end, I’m kind of observing when the problems arise. So I’m not seeing some of the problems necessarily. What are you seeing in the marketplace where AI is being not just used, but used? Well,

Kevin Woodward (27:41):

I think there are a number of companies that are looking at AI for merchant onboarding and evaluation. I think that’s an opportunity to really expedite the process. But like you said, you still have to somewhat have to have someone in charge of that program to decide, okay, what’s a valid level of risk? What’s acceptable and what criteria is put into the AI engine to evaluate how is the AI engine going to know if a particular type of merchant is riskier than another type? I mean, it’s still, like you said, garbage in, garbage out. So you got to put quality data in to get quality data out of it. I think AI from onboarding and underwriting has got a role. It’s not going to replace the people who know that particular part of the payments industry, because in the end, you’re still dealing with a human on the other side, and there’s your risk factor more than anything.

Christopher Dryden (28:50):

I agree with you.

Kevin Woodward (28:51):

Yeah.

Christopher Dryden (28:53):

So do you get the opportunity when you’re talking to people about stuff like this to actually demo? Will they demo what they’re looking to roll out or Sometimes yeah,

Kevin Woodward (29:02):

Sometimes they will. Yeah. I was at the Western State Show last month. I don’t think I saw any demos there, but I’m heading to money 2020 at the end of the month, so I’m hoping maybe there’ll be something I can observe, can watch there and get some more knowledge on. I think there are other places, ai, I’ve talked to a few of the providers in this space and looking at portfolios for attrition potential. I think there’s a good opportunity there for that that can really expedite that process that it might an employee quite a while to go through, especially when you’re talking a few thousand or more merchants and you’re looking for specific criteria that maybe only 50 of ’em it might apply to, but they might be 50 very profitable ones who are at risk for leaving. So I think there’s opportunities there.

Christopher Dryden (30:08):

I think for the agent having, I don’t know if this is in the marketplace, but having something to actually reconcile your residuals versus your schedule A or see where there’s anomalies where things get bundled in a way, but if you have enough data, I’ve recently seen the agent’s been getting smarter, and there’s some really smart agents that aren’t necessarily ISOs. And I’ve seen reporting become condensed recently for agent residuals almost by design, right? I mean, there’s some people that when they give you the residual report, they’ll give you all of the fields of revenue and expense and they’ll let you go ahead and figure it out. Recently, I’ve seen people go away from that and do more of a bundled, here’s your revenue and made it very simplistic. But when you do that, you can shield potentially how you’re getting and arriving at those numbers that represent the revenue share pool. So is there a spread that’s going on? What’s the true assessment? I mean, there’s a lot of smoke and mirrors that happens, I think in residual reporting. I think AI could be really beneficial there.

Kevin Woodward (31:21):

Our instructors used to tell us, show me the math. You could use it as a tool to help you find, to figure out how that’s calculated. And I think there’s other opportunities. There’s more practical considerations for AI within the industry as well. Just vetting your content you post on your website, is this compliant? Does this make grammatical sense? Is there logical flow? Now, this is the writer in me. I see a lot of things that could benefit from that sometimes.

Christopher Dryden (31:56):

No, I think that’s super valid. Actually. I go to websites. If I see a misspelled word, I’m, who the hell did this? Right?

Kevin Woodward (32:02):

Yeah. Because it all adds up to the credibility. And you want any visitor to your content to believe that you have credibility in some sort of position of knowledge that you can impart. And all these, it’s the details. That’s where all that gets can be transmitted or not transmitted.

Christopher Dryden (32:27):

I think I really appreciate you coming on. No, Joe.

Kevin Woodward (32:32):

No, thank you. I really appreciate it as

Christopher Dryden (32:34):

Well. An iso, an agent is really how I educated myself. And I’m going to throw a shot out to Paul rdo when I came into this marketplace.

Kevin Woodward (32:41):

Oh yeah,

Christopher Dryden (32:42):

Paul,

Kevin Woodward (32:42):

Great resource.

Christopher Dryden (32:43):

Great resource, and very generous with his time with me when I had an issue for sure. And I needed somebody to give me some background. Paul’s up the road, I would call Paul, and he has always been cool. I worked on something with him last week. He’s a great guy. He’s always easy to work with. And when I would go online and look for information, he would be the guy that was putting out the most content. And a lot of it today. Even stuff that he wrote 15 years ago is relevant, I will say. And he’s also been a contributor to digital transactions to ISO and agent. But these are the places that I would go to learn to see what was happening, to see what was going on, to see how we could focus. And we weren’t always the greatest. That was just for delivering services to people. But I think that you are a valuable representative in our community, and I think that as things go on, people should reach out to you. And so I want to thank you for being on. It’s really, really big for us.

Jeremy Stock  (33:48):

Thank you for listening to this episode of the Payments Experts podcast, a podcast of global legal law firm. Visit us online today at global legal law firm.com. Matters discussed are all opinions and do not constitute legal advice. All events or likeness to real people and events is a coincidence.