The Reality PandaPay Doesn’t Show You

While I cannot speak for anyone else, my observations and experiences with PandaPay reveal a pattern of behavior important for others to understand. If you are considering PandaPay, it is important to know that behind their polished slogans, reality is far more complex. From the beginning, PandaPay claimed to be built on honesty and transparency, prominently displaying the slogan “We Care.” Yet behind the scenes, few of these values were consistently upheld. None of the original employees remain, as most quickly realized the culture was not “the dream they were promised.” Those who remain today appear willing to accept or support behaviors that undermine trust and well-being. Some employees carried significant responsibilities, while executives appeared focused on personal luxuries. The company depended heavily on its staff to sustain operations, even as executives had minimal involvement in daily management of their own company. Working within PandaPay often felt like Orwell’s Animal Farm: promises of fairness rewritten to favor those at the top, while the rest bore the consequences. The company became known for pay disputes. Despite written confirmations and measurable performance, compensation and promised incentives were repeatedly delayed. Requests for fulfillment were often met with excuses or postponement. Incentives were promised and then withdrawn after completion of work, citing lack of funding. Cases included merchant accounts duplicated or extra terminals added without consent. Promises to merchants such as assurances that profit margins would not increase were not consistently delivered. PandaPay is now linked to some of the highest rate increases despite earlier commitments. Inconsistent leadership, chronic understaffing, and operational mismanagement were recurring challenges. Offices were at times unprofessional and unsanitary. Employees delivering results could be overlooked, demoted, or dismissed, while others were promoted without clear reason. Staff were frequently treated as expendable once no longer immediately useful. The publicly released interview “ASKMAX - PANDA PAY - ÉPISODE 004.” further demonstrates how the company’s messaging diverges from employees’ and merchants’ reality. In truth, the leadership reminded me less of builders and more of what Machiavelli described in The Prince: masters of appearance, curating a facade of virtue while acting in ways that served only themselves. The harm is quiet but steady, echoing Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil”: policies and polite excuses masking the erosion of livelihoods. Even merchants faced shifting terms and broken assurances. Employees performed the work while executives remained detached, invested in maintaining image rather than supporting their people, resembling Robert Hare’s Snakes in Suits, where charm masks manipulation and loyalty is rewarded with indifference. Those who gave the most were often discarded once their usefulness ended. This is a culture of exploitation. As Plato’s Thrasymachus argued in The Republic, “justice is nothing but the advantage of the stronger.” PandaPay reflects this philosophy: appearances and power trump fairness, responsibility, and the well-being of staff or merchants. Breaking promises, neglecting employees, and creating hardships for merchants and staff reveal a culture built on instability and mismanagement. True leadership honors those who contribute to success, not just in words. From my view, PandaPay replaced loyalty with broken trust and lack of accountability, and without oversight, this cycle may continue. For anyone considering joining or partnering with PandaPay, this is a cautionary tale: repeated opportunities to do right were missed, commitments ignored, and promises broken.