Today I’m talking about something that almost everyone in this industry has felt, even if they have never said it out loud. There are two big groups inside the online fraud ecosystem, the people fighting fraud every day for merchants, fintechs, and marketplaces, and the people building, supporting, and selling anti-fraud technology to them. We are supposed to be on the same side. And technically, we are. But that does not mean we always understand each other very well.
That is what this episode is about.
This is a replay of an episode that first aired on Online FraudCast, and I wanted to bring it back because the core issue has not gone away. If anything, it is still one of the most common friction points I see. Fraud practitioners and fraud tech vendors often have very different incentives, very different communication styles, and very different definitions of what a successful partnership looks like. That usually creates tension. Sometimes a lot of it.
And that matters.
Because when merchant vendor communication breaks down, everyone loses time. Buyers waste energy. Sellers miss the real problem. Good solutions get overlooked. Bad fits take too long to unravel. And the actual fraud problem does not pause while all of this is happening. So I wanted to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, what merchants need, what vendors miss, and what both sides could do better.
Here is what that means in practice:
- Fraud tech vendors and merchant teams often want the same outcome, but approach it from very different angles
- Buyer seller friction usually comes from misaligned expectations, not bad intent
- Merchant buyer perspective matters because fraud tools only work if they fit operational reality
- Better fraud tech partnerships start with clearer communication and more honest context
What you’ll hear in this episode:
- Why fraud tech vendors and merchant fraud operations often see the same problem very differently
- What drives the biggest friction points in fraud solution sales and the fraud sales process
- How merchant vendor communication can improve when both sides understand the other better
- Why vendor merchant expectations often break down before a partnership even begins
- What trust and safety vendors and fraud practitioners can do to create stronger long-term relationships
You should listen to this episode if you:
- Work for a merchant, fintech, or marketplace and feel frustrated by fraud vendor conversations
- Work for one of the fraud tech vendors and want a clearer merchant buyer perspective
- Care about fraud sales dynamics, anti-fraud technology, and the bigger online fraud ecosystem
- Want to reduce buyer seller friction and improve fraud industry relationships
- Are trying to build better fraud tech partnerships that actually solve problems
If you liked this episode, be sure to subscribe and review the podcast on iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts. It really helps with getting the word out.
Episode notes & key takeaways
This episode is really about translation. Not translation between technical and non-technical teams, but translation between two groups inside the fraud industry that often talk past each other. I’ve worked with both, and honestly, a lot of the friction is predictable once you understand where each side is coming from.
Why fraud tech vendors and merchants often misread each other
Let’s break this down.
One of the biggest reasons this tension exists is that merchants and vendors are usually operating under very different kinds of pressure. Merchants are trying to stop losses, protect the customer experience, justify budgets, manage internal politics, and keep the business moving. Vendors are trying to understand the problem, prove value, win trust, differentiate their solution, and close business in a competitive market.
Those are not the same pressures.
So even when both sides are acting in good faith, they can still frustrate each other pretty quickly. A merchant may hear a polished pitch and think, you do not understand my actual problem. A vendor may hear a cautious buyer and think, you are not being clear enough about what you need. And in a lot of cases, both are at least partly right.
- Fraud tech vendors often underestimate the internal complexity merchants are dealing with
- Merchant buyer perspective is shaped by operational pain, not just feature interest
- Buyer seller friction often starts when each side assumes the other shares the same priorities
- Fraud industry relationships improve when both sides understand the pressure the other is under
Why the merchant buyer perspective matters so much
Here’s what’s actually happening.
Merchants do not buy anti-fraud technology just because it sounds smart. They buy because they are trying to solve a business problem that has already become expensive, visible, or politically painful internally. That context matters a lot, and it changes how they evaluate everything.
This is where things get interesting.
From the merchant buyer perspective, a tool is not just a tool. It is more manual work or less. It is more false positives or fewer. It is another vendor to manage. Another integration to support. Another executive conversation to prepare for. Another promise that may or may not hold up once real traffic hits it.
That usually makes buyers more cautious than vendors want them to be.
- Merchant buyer perspective is driven by implementation reality, not just product appeal
- Merchant fraud operations need solutions that fit existing workflows and internal constraints
- Anti-fraud technology gets evaluated through cost, friction, trust, and operational burden
- Fraud tech partnerships are stronger when vendors understand the business case merchants must defend
Why fraud sales dynamics create so much friction
A lot of the friction in this space has less to do with product quality and more to do with fraud sales dynamics.
Because selling to fraud teams is different. It just is.
Fraud practitioners are usually skeptical for good reason. They have heard a lot of promises. They have seen tools underperform. They know the difference between a strong demo and a messy real-world rollout. So when fraud solution sales lean too hard on polished messaging and not enough on actual fit, the trust starts eroding early.
That is a problem.
And on the vendor side, teams are often trying to move fast, hit targets, and translate a complex solution into a clear story. That pressure can lead to oversimplifying. Or to pushing too soon. Or to treating merchant hesitation like a sales objection instead of what it often is, a sign that the buyer is trying to avoid making an expensive mistake.
- Fraud sales dynamics are harder when skepticism is treated like resistance instead of due diligence
- Fraud solution sales work better when the pitch reflects operational truth, not just positioning
- Vendor merchant expectations break down fast when timelines and realities are not aligned
- The fraud sales process improves when trust is earned before pressure is applied
What better merchant vendor communication looks like
This is the part I wish more people would focus on.
Better merchant vendor communication is not about everyone being nicer. It is about being clearer. Merchants need to be more direct about the real problem they are trying to solve, the constraints they are dealing with, and what success would actually look like inside their business. Vendors need to be more honest about what their product does well, where it needs support, how long results take, and what kind of customer is actually a good fit.
Right.
That kind of clarity saves everyone time.
It also makes the partnership much more likely to succeed. Because once both sides stop performing and start communicating more honestly, the signal gets better. The fit gets clearer. And the chances of a useful partnership go up a lot.
- Merchant vendor communication improves when both sides are specific about goals and constraints
- Fraud tech vendors build more trust when they are honest about fit, timing, and limitations
- Fraud practitioner perspective deserves to shape the conversation, not just react to it
- Better communication is often the difference between a strong partnership and a short-lived contract
What both sides should do differently
So what should both groups take from this?
If you are on the merchant side, remember that not every vendor misunderstanding is bad intent. Sometimes it is just lack of context. Be clear about the real problem, the internal pressures, and what you actually need. If you are on the vendor side, remember that your buyer is not just evaluating your product. They are evaluating the risk of being wrong about your product.
That is a very different kind of sale.
And honestly, once you understand that, a lot of the weird friction starts to make more sense. This is not really a story about merchants versus vendors. It is a story about what happens when two groups inside the same industry forget that they are both reacting to different versions of the same pressure.
The big takeaway from this episode is pretty straightforward. Fraud tech vendors and merchant teams are on the same side, but that does not automatically make them aligned. Stronger fraud tech partnerships come from understanding the merchant buyer perspective, improving communication, and being more honest about what each side actually needs to succeed.
