Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adyen


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. North America1000 01:24, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Adyen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG, references are company annoucements or partner announcements or rely on extensive quotations and/or material facts/data/information from PRIMARY sources, references fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. -- HighKing ++ 17:32, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:07, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:08, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:08, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "Adyen, the start-up that processes payments for the likes of Netflix, Uber and Facebook, saw a 99 percent surge in revenues in 2016, the company announced on Wednesday. The Dutch firm, which is valued at $2.3 billion, posted revenues of $727 million last year, up from $365 million in 2015. Adyen also recently announced that it processed $90 billion worth of transactions in 2016, an 80 percent year-on-year rise."  The article is by a Forbes staff writer. Here is the writer's biography: "I cover the Forbes Under 30 franchise, technology, entrepreneurs, billionaires and VC's. When I get the chance I write about food and booze too. Previously I edited Forbes's front-of-the-book section 'Leaderboard,' and was a proud member of the Forbes 400 Wealth Team. Before that I worked on Wall Street. Feel free to follow me on Twitter: stevenbertoni and subscribe to me on Facebook." The article notes: "That complexity is Pieter Van der Does' margin. The CEO of Adyen runs one of the fastest-growing firms in the $1.6 trillion e-commerce industry. Not many people have heard about Adyen, but it has carved out a powerful place by laying down smooth payment rails all over the world for the biggest names in tech: Facebook FB -0.85%, Netflix, Spotify, Airbnb, Uber. Van der Does started the privately held Dutch company in 2006 with fellow payments vet Arnout Schuijff, spotting the need well in advance. 'We are building the most horrible thing to compete with,' he says. Adyen can handle 250 payment methods and 187 currencies, more than some of the big incumbents such as Chase Paymentech, WorldPay and GlobalCollect. Competitor Stripe, a fast grower in mobile, is in only 23 countries and 139 currencies. Breadth matters in global commerce. Americans may be addicted to credit cards, but Asians like to pay with their phone bill. Germans and the Dutch use bank debit cards. In underbanked regions like the Philippines and Brazil people exchange cash for bar-coded cards to make purchases online. 'Adyen isn't burdened by legacy infrastructure,' says Aaron Goldman, a partner at venture firm General Atlantic, which led a $250 million investment in Adyen in 2014. 'It's a straight tube--like the autobahn.' Adyen doubled its transaction volume last year to $50 billion, while net revenue grew a 'mere' 89% to $350 million, due to conversion from a weak euro. While Adyen's fees fall with volume, the company grosses less than 1% of every dollar processed, far below the 2% to 3% that Square, PayPal and Stripe make. This is why Adyen has lower revenue than Stripe does (an estimated $450 million last year) on twice the payment volume. It's not a knock against Adyen: The company made a profit of $45 million in 2015 and has been in the black for five years straight--a rare thing among unicorns. The companies are in different segments of the market. Adyen caters to big, international operations while Stripe targets the startup app developer community, making up for lower volume by charging a slightly higher margin."  The article notes: "Adyen is not a household name in U.S. business circles, even with a $2 billion-plus valuation. It hopes that opening up about its financial performance will help change that. The privately held payments company, which has its headquarters in Amsterdam, Netherlands, announced Thursday that its revenue doubled to $350 million last year, as the company crossed $50 billion in the amount of payments it processed. The company says it has been profitable on an Ebitda basis — a measure of a company’s operating profit — since 2011. ... Adyen is 10 years old and was built to help online businesses in Europe accept a variety of payment methods, including credit cards. A few years ago, it started pitching European retailers and fashion brands on using its software to accept payments in their brick-and-mortar stores, too. Now, today’s financial disclosures come as the company begins courting U.S. retailers to also use its in-store payment tools. ... These attributes have led to some big-name investors buying in. General Atlantic led a $250 million investment in Adyen at a $1.5 billion valuation a little over a year ago. And last year, Iconiq Capital, which manages the fortunes of wealthy tech titans including Mark Zuckerberg, invested an undisclosed sum that valued Adyen at $2.3 billion."  The article notes: "But, if there is a company that could fill some of PayPal’s needs, a possibility could lie over in the Netherlands, in the form of a payments processor called Adyen. Condra said that Adyen might be an attractive acquisition option for PayPal. Adyen provides payment processing technology and services for a lot of big-name international companies. Its customers include the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Uber and Spotify. “This is a segment PayPal does not serve and it would be a good complement to PayPal’s small-to-mid size online business focus,” [Credit Suisse analyst Paul] Condra said. Condra made it clear that he has no inside scoop about whether PayPal has even had any kinds of acquisition talks with Adyen. “To my knowledge,” Condra said. “(PayPal) management has made no indication they are looking specifically at this company. We just view it as an attractive property.”"  The article notes: "Adyen was formed in 2006 by Pieter van der Does and Arnout Schuijff, a pair of Dutch entrepreneurs who previously worked together on Bibit, which later was rolled into WorldPay. The idea was to create a fully-integrated payment technology solution that would work regardless of merchant type, payment type or geography. Not just putting a slick user interface on someone else's infrastructure, or featuring separate systems for online, mobile and physical payments. Today, Adyen says that it has over 3,500 merchants using its platform, which supports more than 250 payment types in 187 countries. Among its customers are Airbnb, Burberry, Facebook, Spotify, Vodafone and Yelp. It also was an early adopter of Apple Pay, and works with such payment solutions as Alipay in China, Boletos in Brazil and Qiwi in Russia."</li> <li> The article notes: "Founded in 2006, Adyen handles payments for many international ecommerce companies and has been extending its technology to allow merchants to take payments in physical stores too, via internet-connected devices. ... The company allows merchants to plug in to a single global platform that accepts multiple currencies and more than 250 different payment methods, including credit cards, Apple Pay and Alipay. This enables Adyen to capture data about shoppers as they buy across multiple devices and in-store, allowing the company to provide fraud detection, loyalty schemes and even services such as accepting returned items in a different country to where they were purchased. The company’s rivals include Chase Paymentech and Worldpay, which is preparing for an initial public offering in London next month at a valuation of as much as £3.5bn."</li> <li> The article notes: "This is the headquarters of Adyen, a payment processor whose 4,500 customers include many of the world’s best-known tech companies and largest retailers. Though virtually unknown to consumers, the 10-year-old company has quietly grown to handle $50 billion in transactions a year, twice the estimated volume of rival Stripe and 40 percent more than Square. And unlike those companies, Adyen turned a profit last year (€40 million, or $45 million). The company works with 150 currencies and 250 forms of payment, more than larger processors, including Worldpay and Chase Paymentech. Businesses like those and First Data dominate the global market, each handling billions of transactions a year. Adyen is tiny by comparison but has a big advantage: It handles every step of a credit card payment, from the checkout counter or website taking your order to the bank authorizing the payment. Most processors have to use one or more intermediaries to handle fraud detection, request approval for payments from card issuers, or transfer funds to merchants. Adyen’s greater control has helped reduce failed payments to its clients, says co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Pieter van der Does."</li> <li> The article notes: "Online payments processor Adyen doubled its transaction volume to $50bn (£34.8bn) in 2015, the year it signed a trove of high-profile clients including Easyjet, Netflix and Burton. The Dutch company, one of the highest valued start-ups in Europe, generated revenues of $350m, more than twice as much as in 2014, making $43.6m of profit. ... Adyen, whose clients include Uber, Facebook and Spotify, has been profitable since 2011 and its revenues are on track to break through $500m in 2016. The Amsterdam-based business was recently valued at $2.3bn – making it the sixth most valuable European start-up – following funding from Iconiq, the investment vehicle of some of Silicon Valley's most prominent executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Reid Hoffman."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Adyen to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 03:54, 28 August 2017 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * Comment this type of post is becoming a problem for two reasons. The first is that the format and length of the post is totally unnecessary. You can post links without extracting quotations which significantly increases the length of the post. The second is you can increase the quality of the links you suggest by reading WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and *not* posting links to obvious company announcements, press releases, interviews, etc. Of the links you've posted above, the CNBC article is an interview and fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. The Forbes reference is the same - an interview with the CEO. The recode article relies on a company announcement and quotations from the CEO. The mercury news article is a mention-in-passing and is not "substantial" coverage as the article is mainly about PayPal. The fortune reference is based on a Press Release and quotations from the company. The Financial Times article is based on a Press Release and quotations from the CEO. The Bloomberg article is based on an interview that took place in their HQ with the CEO. Finally, Telegraph article is based on an interview with the CEO. In other words, they *all* fail the criteria for establishing notability.  -- HighKing ++ 12:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per HighKing's excellent analysis of the sourcing, which I concur in, but I'll add additional reasons: the interview based sources are primary sourcing, which does not count towards the requirements of WP:N, also, this is actually one of the worst non-G11 eligible spam articles I've seen. It might as well be a case statement they provide to investors or a brochure for clients. It is excluded by WP:NOTSPAM from inclusion in Wikipedia (see WP:DEL4, which means that even if it did meet the general notability guideline, it would not pass WP:N. In this case, it both fails the GNG and is spam. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep meets GNG and NCORP. When I read that it is in the Forbes Cloud 100, I was doubtful. Yet another company that made it somewhere down some lists. Well -- NO. It is number 5 on Forbes Cloud 100! We have articles on #1 through #26 (except a biography on the founder of #19; #27 we have taken out a few times; a few have warnings that the articles read as ads). It would be really silly to take out the #5. With so many good sources and the company/platform as significant as it is, there is no way this article is going to be deleted. gidonb (talk) 23:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * BTW #27 is Veeam, no activity on WP since 2013 and an excellent subject for an article. I created a redirect for the #19. We do have #28 through #30 and that's enough checking for today. I'll do one more. We do have the #100, Canva! gidonb (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , I reviewed the coverage of the Forbes Cloud 100 that you provided: I didn't find anything substantial in that article (it was a directory listing followed by a quote from a company executive.) I am open to switching my !vote if you could show the sourcing that you say exists. Cunard's above has already been demonstrated to not meet our guidelines in my book, but if other sourcing exists and the article can be cleaned up to comply with NOTSPAM before the end of the AfD, I'd switch my !vote. Otherwise its just a corporate brochure at this point, and we don't tend to keep those. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * TonyBallioni, above sources are just the tip of the iceberg. This is a silly nomination and a waste of time for the community. gidonb (talk) 20:41, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * gidonb could you provide the other sourcing? I searched and couldn't find any that weren't near exact duplicates of the sourcing above, which HighKing has accurately analyzed. This is a close call for me because it does seem to have made a significant impact in their field, the question is whether they have been noticed by enough people independently of their promotional efforts. If that could be demonstrated and the article cleaned up to be neutral, I'd be open to switching. Also, if someone does find more sources (and, I welcome more from you as well), please don't paste them into the AfD: its distracting and makes it more difficult to actually read the discussion and more difficult to find the links to the full sources because they get lost in the text. Just standard links will work. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, Veeam exists as Veeam Software. I'm going to create a redirect. gidonb (talk) 21:04, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Done! I also moved the whole thing further to consensus on the talk page. I'm not going to answer Tony's inquiry at length. These were the outcomes of my invested independent research. Judging by his statements he will be hard to please and I do have more things to do. I'm a big believer in writing and think no good will come out of nominating leading companies for deletion. No good for Wikipedia that is. gidonb (talk) 01:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 14:07, 3 September 2017 (UTC) Keep : Passes GNG Elokammanoharam (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC) Keep : Passes GNG JillyJab (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Closing admin please note Sockpuppet investigations/Jillyjab, which suggests one of the accounts above is a likely sock to a random sock farm, and the other is possilikely to people who claim to be employees of the company. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- A "unicorn startup" could (possibly) be notable, but the promotional intent here is quite clear. The copy is 100% advertorial and such content is excluded per WP:NOTSPAM. In the present case, without article improvements in the course of this AfD, my vote is for deletion. No objection to recreation if a non-affiliated editor wants to take a stab at it. There's no hurry to get to such a state, however. The article is about a company engaged in merchant services (non consumer), so it's not likely that Wiki readers are dying to learn about this company. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:57, 8 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep, covered in reliable sources. And, outside view: as a processor of $90 billion in payments per year understanding this company is going to be important for understanding a lot of stuff, so it is useful to have an article on it. Antrocent (&#9835;&#9836;) 07:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Keep: I work for the company and have been making edits to the page, which I feel now meets GNG. I have removed most descriptions of Adyen's products and have edited the tone to be much more neutral. Using similar companies for reference... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stripe_(company) Please let me know what further modifications I can make to keep the page. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessdujour2 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.