# Credit card transaction fees



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

If merchants start charging transaction fees for credit card purchases, will you stop using your “premium” credit cards for travel points or cash back?



https://www.cbc.ca/radio/costofliving/credit-card-user-you-could-soon-pay-more-for-every-purchase-1.6600469











Canadian businesses can charge credit card fees starting Oct. 6


Starting Thursday, businesses in Canada will soon be able to pass credit card fees on to their customers, thanks to a multimillion-dollar class-action settlement involving Visa and Mastercard.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ YES. Either move/use a competitor, pay via debit or pay by cash depending on type and frequency of payment plus the "merchant" itself. I ain't paying a surcharge to a LARGE corp, period.

*Add:* I hope the merchants be "upfront" about the "surcharge" that they'll be charging on the credit cards. Example: Telus will be surcharging credit card PAC. Thank Lord I don't use any of Telus services.

*Add2:* On further thought, for Telus (a large corporation) to surcharge their customers is just spilling out the message of "plain greed" of this "merchant".


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Europe already did that

When you pull out a flashy Visa for the local mechanic they look in horror and explain that will cost an extra $50 to the american credit card company and encourage you to use debit or cash

Apple cash can easily replace premium credit cards. Ideally we move to a decentralized protocol because a centralized one will just add the same fees back


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I don't think this is going to have the pro-consumer impact people are hoping for.

If they go and add a fee at the last second without disclosing it previously, I'll be angry. As long as they disclose it, sure.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I don't think this is going to have the pro-consumer impact people are hoping for.
> 
> If they go and add a fee at the last second without disclosing it previously, I'll be angry. As long as they disclose it, sure.


You'd rather it's just hidden into the price for everybody? Out of sight out of mind?

Basically poor people are subsidizing those travel perks that a mostly exploited by people who have time to game the system

Airlines make more money from the convoluted rewards system they control


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Our experience in countries where the fee can be charged is that vendors are very upfront about it. Never hidden. As soon as we present our credit card or ask it if is accepted we have always been advised of an add on fee of 3 percent. 

I expect the same will occur in Canada with those vendors who charge. It is hardly hidden...all you have to do is compare your invoice price to the card amount on the credit card terminal.. Something that we always do as a matter of course.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> You'd rather it's just hidden into the price for everybody? Out of sight out of mind?


So keep on operating like it's always been, a hidden cost.

It will be interesting to see if cash discounts gain acceptance. Depends on the numbers it could even create a divide between retailers and credit card companies.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> So keep on operating like it's always been, a hidden cost.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if cash discounts gain acceptance. Depends on the numbers it could even create a divide between retailers and credit card companies.


 ... cash discounts? From whom? I know no merchants would offer a discount for using cash other than maybe those in the renovations business who don't give a bill of laden for services rendered.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Those fees should be already imbedded in items - I doubt a merchant doesn't consider ALL costs prior to pricing their items. Like everything else, the merchant eventually forgets they already priced it in and find excuses to extract even more from the consumer. Its a vicious cycle.

As far as I know, most merchants already charge extra for such fees - Anyone who has a Home or Auto Insurance with TD knows that they charge an extra 3% if you choose to pay monthly. Its charged regardless your choice of payment, but its clearly imposed to offset their cc charges. 

If I were a merchant, I would just increase all my items 3%. This way, consumers will not be conscious of the extra fees and will be free to pay any method they wish. I can't be the only one thinking this.

I hope this blows up and forces banks and merchants to find new ways to accept payment.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Those fees should be already imbedded in items - I doubt a merchant doesn't consider ALL costs prior to pricing their items. Like everything else, the merchant eventually forgets they already priced it in and find excuses to extract even more from the consumer. Its a vicious cycle.
> 
> As far as I know, most merchants already charge extra for such fees - Anyone who has a Home or Auto Insurance with TD knows that they charge an extra 3% if you choose to pay monthly. Its charged regardless your choice of payment, but its clearly imposed to offset their cc charges.
> 
> ...


They already do increase the prices by 3%

3% is not insignificant for many retailers especially small businesses. Some watch as Visa gets half their revenue for doing none of the work

People are just ignorant and like their pts which will be devalued before they find something to spend them on


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Those fees should be already imbedded in items - I doubt a merchant doesn't consider ALL costs prior to pricing their items. Like everything else, the merchant eventually forgets they already priced it in and find excuses to extract even more from the consumer. Its a vicious cycle.
> 
> As far as I know, most merchants already charge extra for such fees - Anyone who has a Home or Auto Insurance with TD knows that they charge an extra 3% if you choose to pay monthly. Its charged regardless your choice of payment, but its clearly imposed to offset their cc charges.
> 
> ...


 ... this surcharge "impacts" small businesses moreso than the large corps. For large corps to tack on another surcharge mounts to EXCEPTIONAL GREED which includes both the banks and their credit cards' divisions.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> ... cash discounts? From whom? I know no merchants would offer a discount for using cash other than maybe those in the renovations business who don't give a bill of laden for services rendered.


Not to common but we have a few local restaurants that offer cash discounts, if fact there is one that only accepts cash. A small computer store in the city also gives a cash discount. And yes, you do get receipts.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> They already do increase the prices by 3%


Exactly, the cost is aleady built in.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

cainvest said:


> Exactly, the cost is aleady built in.


Retail is being squeezed

So they have the choice to increase the price or point out to clueless Canadians that those crap pts aren't free

How high do you think margins are? 3% is not insignificant


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> ... this surcharge "impacts" small businesses moreso than the large corps. For large corps to tack on another surcharge mounts to EXCEPTIONAL GREED which includes both the banks and their credit cards' divisions.


Its greed from all sides, for sure. We will probably start seeing merchants drop credit card payments altogether - most already do, accepting debit only. Not so long ago, Tim Hortons only accepted debit. Cinema Guzzo only accepted cash. A lot of small business I know accept cash only as well - the problem with cash is it opens the door to tax evasion.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Its greed from all sides, for sure.


 ... no, it's PRIMARILY greed from the LARGE corps, particularly the banks and their credit (cards) division because 1. they can charge astronomical interest rates for providing that credit and 2. refusing to drop aka reduce the merchant fees for small businesses. Large corps are charged a MUCH LOWER merchant fee (at least 50% less) than small businesses.



> We will probably start seeing merchants drop credit card payments altogether - most already do, accepting debit only.


 ... I hope they do and then the credit cards department can be shuttered down.



> Not so long ago, Tim Hortons only accepted debit. Cinema Guzzo only accepted cash. A lot of small business I know accept cash only as well - the problem with cash is it opens the door to tax evasion.


 ... I'm sure the CRA has an eye on these "only cash" businesses, if that's a concern.

And then there's a time when preference is that customers use only credit cards - and tap ones only, no PIN either. - eg. as recent as during the pandemic.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

The fees will have to exceed my cashback rewards for me to stop using my credit card.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Not to common but we have a few local restaurants that offer cash discounts, if fact there is one that only accepts cash.


 ... am aware of a few like that in Toronto but no discount for using cash. It's cash - take it or leave it. And no their prices ain't attractive either nor the food(s). 



> A small computer store in the city also gives a cash discount. And yes, you do get receipts.


 ... don't know any computer store that accepts "cash only", never mind about a discount. I would want a receipt for anything that I purchase o/w there's no after-purchase guarantee of any sorts.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I would be very surprised if merchants dropped credit card acceptance. Much, much easier to charge a fee and let the customer make the choice.

Some of our favourite travel locations are Greece and Italy in the fall and Thailand in the winter. We often pay cash. Indeed, on our most recent stay on Zakynthos we selected a waterfront furnished condo stay. The cost was 500e on a booking site. We were able to make contact with the owner on line (we were already staying on the island). The bottom line price for going direct AND paying cash was 250e. 

In other B&B's and small hotels in Italy and Greece it was not unusual to secure a ten percent discount for cash and/or a room upgrade. Our habit is to bring out our credit card and then ask what is the discount for cash. Makes a difference when we are traveling for 7-8 weeks at a time.

On our pre covid Thai trip we took 2K in cash. We get a much better exchange rate in Bangkok than we do in Canada. Our ATM withdrawals are usually in the $500-600CAD range because so many of the small places we stay or eat only take cash.

Cash will foster tax evasion. It is already pervasive in the home improvement business.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> The fees will have to exceed my cashback rewards for me to stop using my credit card.


 ... surcharge is 1.5%, cashback is 1.5%. And so?

And then there're those points/travel rewards ... 1.5% surcharge, 1 airmiles or say even 100 airmiles - which ain't worth beans. Even their T&C says so - no cash value. And so why am I paying a 1.5% surcharge that I have to pay for something that they (credit card company) has deemed of having no cash value? Seems like highway robbery if not outright fraud themselves.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

Beaver101 said:


> ... surcharge is 1.5%, cashback is 1.5%. And so?


Depends on what, I get 3% on groceries, gas and automated bills, that's nothing to sneeze at. I have trouble finding a definite answer on how much CC fees are.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> Retail is being squeezed


Don't see how, retail just raises their prices due to inflation and shortages.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Wonder what the retail companies will do with their own "branded" credit cards.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> Depends on what, I get 3% on groceries, gas and automated bills, that's nothing to sneeze at. I have trouble finding a definite answer on how much CC fees are.


 ... by CC fees, you mean the surcharge? I have read 1.4% and this is the low end.

And then there's the understanding from earlier posts if you want to use your cc to pay monthly for (eg) TD auto/home insurance, there's a 2.5% fee. So in effect, you may be swearing (not sneezing) that you're out by .5% for that automated bill. [Now if the cc company designate this TD auto/home insurance as falling into another category, most likely the lower one of 1% (if not .5%), you're out by 1.5%. Should I go on?]

Want to pay your property tax with your cc? 2.5% fee please.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Wonder what the retail companies will do with their own "branded" credit cards.


 ... like those that don't use Amex, VISA or Mastercard? Likely to follow the footsteps of Amex, VISA and/or Mastercard.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Keep in Mind their are costs to managing cash. Unless you’re keeping it all at home. Cost of keeping it safe at the business. Robbery Risk cost.
Cost of going to the bank to make the deposit and if I’m not mistaken, most banks charge to make cash deposits to business accounts. There will often be a level of free deposit, but as an example TD charges $2.50 for every $1,000 of cash deposited.

Only reason I use a credit card is for cash back. Although some of the other perks (extended warranty, roadside assistance - which I used for the first time this week) Are nice.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> I don't think this is going to have the pro-consumer impact people are hoping for.
> 
> If they go and add a fee at the last second without disclosing it previously, I'll be angry. As long as they disclose it, sure.





m3s said:


> You'd rather it's just hidden into the price for everybody? Out of sight out of mind?


Actually I LITERALLY just said that the fees should be clearly disclosed.

I've been pretty consistent that I'm against hidden fees on many things, how can you even suggest I prefer hidden fees?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Keep in Mind their are costs to managing cash. Unless you’re keeping it all at home. Cost of keeping it safe at the business. Robbery Risk cost.
> Cost of going to the bank to make the deposit and if I’m not mistaken, most banks charge to make cash deposits to business accounts. There will often be a level of free deposit, but as an example TD charges $2.50 for every $1,000 of cash deposited.
> 
> Only reason I use a credit card is for cash back. Although some of the other perks (extended warranty, roadside assistance - which I used for the first time this week) Are nice.


I use credit cards for
1. Convenience
2. Fraud protection.
3. Cashback, which is really quite a stupid program, but I'm happy to benefit from it.


----------



## Covariance (Oct 20, 2020)

If asked to pay a surcharge at time of payment I will ask if they lowered their prices to reflect their new savings.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Covariance said:


> If asked to pay a surcharge at time of payment I will ask if they lowered their prices to reflect their new savings.


Ok Karen  

You'll have to ask for the manager who probably won't have any more power over corporate pricing than the cashier does


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Thal81 said:


> Depends on what, I get 3% on groceries, gas and automated bills, that's nothing to sneeze at. I have trouble finding a definite answer on how much CC fees are.


It's a business to business model

They probably have different rates for different businesses and different rates for different reward schemes etc. I believe premium cards come with higher merchant fees

3% cash back you are probably golden. People will less credit or income who can't get those premium cards or afford the annual fee subsidize you


----------



## Covariance (Oct 20, 2020)

m3s said:


> Ok Karen
> 
> You'll have to ask for the manager who probably won't have any more power over corporate pricing than the cashier does


I see your point. But most of the places I go are more owner, operator scenarios. In various ways I've already had the discussion when they started tacking on minimums and fees for debit.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

CNBC link for sags 😅

The most popular finance app in the US is cash app (from Jack Dorsey) I was selling some stuff before moving p2p and most americans want to use cash app or venmo etc. Most small business in the US from mechanics to coffee shops also accept these apps to bypass legacy Visa/MC oligopoly

Maybe someday Canada will get with the program






swift is also integrating with crypto now btw


----------



## AlwaysMissingTheBoat (8 mo ago)

From the Canadian Press:

_Merchants who want to add a fee for credit cards have to display signage that they have a surcharge, as well as have the fee explicitly shown on the receipt._


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Looks like credit card surcharges will start any moment. Some retailers will charge up to 2.4% for the premium cards with the highest interchange fees.

If those really start to appear, it might almost eliminate any point of using the credit card (even with perks and cash back).

So I'm thinking that I'll go back to using cash. Why pay an extra 1% to 2% for everything when I don't have to?

And I'm not going to use debit cards at point of sale. When there's fraud (like card skimming and stolen PIN) the damage is far worse with debit because you can't dispute and reverse the charges, or it's much more involved. A friend of mine once had some debit card fraud and she had to fight CIBC for months to get any resolution. But mistaken or fraudulent charges on credit cards are easily resolved, happens all the time.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/ask-cbc/credit-card-surcharge-faq-1.6610356



I think another option is to figure out which credit cards will have the lowest of these fees, and use those ones. So this might be the death of high-rewards cards.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

Ouch I totally misinterpreted the topic at first, thought you meant selling stocks to go back to cash.

But no, I would prefer not to go back to using cash. I like the convenience of tracking my spending with the credit card reports, it's really useful. If you go all cash, you'll know how much you spend (through your withdrawals) but it's a lot more work to tally up your spending in different categories.

I would be okay with cutting rewards on cards, and cut surcharges accordingly. Credit card companies have to make money though for the service they provide, so I suppose there will always be some surcharge...

As for debit cards, they're a last resort and I wouldn't use them unless I'm in a bind. IMHO they're very unsecure and you have much less protection when fraud happens. No bueno.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Thal81 said:


> Ouch I totally misinterpreted the topic at first, thought you meant selling stocks to go back to cash.


Me as well. I don't like cash and will be watching the new surcharge situation carefully. There was some discussion on the surcharges on another thread. I was sure most retailers already accounted for credit card fees imposed by passing that on to customers. Now they have been allowed to charge again but with transparency. Others will raise prices but claim they are not passing the cost along to customers. I haven't been to a store where I have been told I will be charged a credit card fee and been given alternative options. I would imagine this charge will also be imposed before we are given a tip option on point of sale.

I will likely still use my CC for fraud protection and purchase warranty. I only use my debit card for deposits for the once or twice a year I get a cheque.

If the fees are too high, retailers will find alternative solutions. I know very little about point of sale but almost every new business I have been to is using Lightspeed, Square or Apple Pay. My understanding this is only a cheaper option for the electronic transaction but not the credit card fees. Maybe someone with knowledge of retail transactions will clarify.

Perhaps, we will see a transition similar to when debit cards eclipsed payment by cheque and credit cards will be seldom used in favour of more economic options. If people, try to go back to cash banks will be quick to jump on service fees as well.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> Looks like credit card surcharges will start any moment. Some retailers will charge up to 2.4% for the premium cards with the highest interchange fees.


I'll just wait and see. Most large retailers likely won't charge anything so the bulk of my spending will still be on a credit card.



james4beach said:


> And I'm not going to use debit cards at point of sale. When there's fraud (like card skimming and stolen PIN) the damage is far worse with debit because you can't dispute and reverse the charges, or it's much more involved.


I have never used a debit card, haven't looked up how they actually work. I gather they are linked to a bank account for withdrawals? What if you have no money in the account, do they still operate or do you get declined?


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

When they try to pull that just say cancel the sale and go somewhere else.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

cainvest said:


> I'll just wait and see. Most large retailers likely won't charge anything so the bulk of my spending will still be on a credit card.
> 
> I have never used a debit card, haven't looked up how they actually work. I gather they are linked to a bank account for withdrawals? What if you have no money in the account, do they still operate or do you get declined?


TD offers overdraft protection of $5k for $4/mo. Because I charge my rent, I figure it is worth it. If it is overdrawn by a penny, the bank charges and the landlord charges, total charge $35 right now.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

kcowan said:


> TD offers overdraft protection of $5k for $4/mo. Because I charge my rent, I figure it is worth it. If it is overdrawn by a penny, the bank charges and the landlord charges, total charge $35 right now.


Ouch, that sucks. Is there a way to make it so you just get declined without any overdraft (or other) charges?


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

someone posted somewhere that Tim Hortons has already started. something like 28cents on approx. $13 order? I dunno....


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

kcowan said:


> TD offers overdraft protection of $5k for $4/mo. Because I charge my rent, I figure it is worth it. If it is overdrawn by a penny, the bank charges and the landlord charges, total charge $35 right now.


You would benefit from switching to the "pay as you go" overdraft protection, most likely. $5 per time you use it instead of a monthly charge. 






What is Overdraft Protection & How does it work? | TD Canada


Overdraft protection is your financial safety net. If you run short of funds, it will cover you up to your approved limit, up to $5,000. Learn more today at TD!




www.td.com


----------



## Fisherman30 (Dec 5, 2018)

I think the credit surcharge thing is silly to be honest. I will be avoiding any retailers who apply this surcharge. I would think their business would dry up quite a bit if they start charging this surcharge.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Fisherman30 said:


> I think the credit surcharge thing is silly to be honest. I will be avoiding any retailers who apply this surcharge. I would think their business would dry up quite a bit if they start charging this surcharge.


It's already common in other countries

Canadians and Americans just aren't very savvy financially and prefer hidden fees over disclosed fees

You pay it already by the way


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

All business will pass the cost along to consumers. It will either be hidden in price increases for all payment methods or transparent as an additional fee. I am not sure which will garner better results. even on this forum we have posters saying they will not buy from businesses that charge this fee. I do expect the CC companies to change up their game but not to help out businesses or cardholders. They are in the business of making money and that will remain their priority. I am not sure if the legislation will result in any positives for consumers. Perhaps all it will do is delay a digital currency as we resume using cash. Doesn't seem to be cost effective or convenient in any way. 

As to Tim Horton's can anyone confirm if there is an additional cost to using a credit card over cash? I don't frequent Tim's often but am curious.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Thal81 said:


> Ouch I totally misinterpreted the topic at first, thought you meant selling stocks to go back to cash.


Good point! I changed the title to: New credit card fees


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

londoncalling said:


> As to Tim Horton's can anyone confirm if there is an additional cost to using a credit card over cash?


Nope, haven't seen anything at Timmies yet.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Interesting, I just got a promotion from Scotiabank that says, if I spend at least $50 at a grocery store and pay using my debit card, they'll give me $10.

Must be in anticipation of this change, perhaps trying to get people used to the debit card. Wow this is shaping up to be quite a month. $150 reward on the Simplii card and now $10 from Scotia.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

We could all start writing cheques at the grocery store. Wouldn't that cause the grocers to need more cashiers to keep the sales going?

If only we had a payment system that didn't gouge us with 3% merchant fees. Elon Musk wants to make a "wechat" for the US. Maybe he will team up with Jack Dorsey for the cash app. Twitter is already integrated with Strike app with about 0.1%-0.3% fees (for americans)

PayPal is collapsing after they put in the T&C they will fine you $2500 for misinformation


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

m3s said:


> We could all start writing cheques at the grocery store.


That's a good idea. Think of all the new jobs we can create.

Do grocery stores accept cheques?


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

londoncalling said:


> All business will pass the cost along to consumers. It will either be hidden in price increases for all payment methods or transparent as an additional fee.


+1. Current prices are in theory factoring in the credit card fees already.
Where it will get interesting is where eventually competing businesses charge the fee or don't and what the pricing is.
--
I'm kind of torn though because I hate carrying and paying with cash but I'm interested in saving 1-2%. 
It might be situation dependent because of the extras of some cards like the extra insurances.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

milhouse said:


> I'm kind of torn though because I hate carrying and paying with cash but I'm interested in saving 1-2%.
> It might be situation dependent because of the extras of some cards like the extra insurances.


They just need to call it a cash discount instead of a credit card processing fee

That's what some family restaurants and small businesses such as mechanics already do

Often not advertised because the majority loved their sh!tcoin rewards


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

milhouse said:


> +1. Current prices are in theory factoring in the credit card fees already.
> Where it will get interesting is where eventually competing businesses charge the fee or don't and what the pricing is.
> --
> I'm kind of torn though because I hate carrying and paying with cash but I'm interested in saving 1-2%.
> It might be situation dependent because of the extras of some cards like the extra insurances.


Very good points.

And because the fees are baked into current prices, it's likely they will start charging this fee AND keep those existing prices. I don't imagine they would reduce the price on the shelf... when a price goes up, it's permanent. So this just becomes an extra for the retailer.

Grocery retailers already have healthy margins, they certainly aren't hurting and in fact are exploiting the inflation situation, raising prices more than was warranted. If they had only raised prices to match their expenses they wouldn't have these good profit margins. Same goes for places like large chains, who are doing great with high inflation (it's an excuse to raise their prices).

So I don't trust grocery chains to do fair and honest price increases. They exploited inflation to their benefit, and will just grab this extra fee as well (it's a freebie).

I'm still not sure what the best strategy is on our part.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

james4beach said:


> So I don't trust grocery chains to do fair and honest price increases. They exploited inflation to their benefit, and will just grab this extra fee as well (it's a freebie).
> 
> I'm still not sure what the best strategy is on our part.


This is just how capitalism works. Retailers are taking risks and can charge for those risks. Many retailers are now stuck with too much stuff

The alternative is to have the government stock the grocery shelves then we end up like Russia


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

milhouse said:


> Where it will get interesting is where eventually competing businesses charge the fee or don't and what the pricing is.


Or maybe they'll waive the fee if you use their branded credit card.

Edit: fixed typo


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

m3s said:


> They just need to call it a cash discount instead of a credit card processing fee
> 
> That's what some family restaurants and small businesses such as mechanics already do


Oh, very familiar with the cash discount. 
The cash discount is more practical for some businesses than others IMO. Kind of situational too. 
How much cash is one willing to carry or how large is one willing to have to debit purchase limit?



james4beach said:


> So I don't trust grocery chains to do fair and honest price increases. They exploited inflation to their benefit, and will just grab this extra fee as well (it's a freebie).





m3s said:


> This is just how capitalism works. Retailers are taking risks and can charge for those risks. Many retailers are now stuck with too much stuff


When there is fair competition. Remember the bread price fixing scandal? I think grocers lost a some trust there.



cainvest said:


> Or maybe they'll waive the fee if you use their banded credit card.


Not sure what you mean by banded credit card. Do you mean branded?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

milhouse said:


> Not sure what you mean by banded credit card. Do you mean branded?


Typo ... yes, branded. Like Costco (CIBC) Mastercard, etc.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Presumably the PC Mastercards won't have fees at the Loblaws/Superstore/Shoppers chains then?

It's their own card, and I don't see why they'd pay processing fees for it.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Mods - can we merge this with the previous thread on this topic?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

cainvest said:


> Typo ... yes, branded. Like Costco (CIBC) Mastercard, etc.


I have it but it gives the same cashback at Costco as Tangerine MC does

So I suppose they could convince me to use it that way.

Otherwsie it's only good for gas and it's not worth driving to the next Costco for gas


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

milhouse said:


> How much cash is one willing to carry or how large is one willing to have to debit purchase limit?


I actually carry a fair bit of cash with me at all times. I have always made it a habit to have at least one cab fare home from my furthest point so now it's about $100. The problem is that now so stores will not take $100 or even $50 bills. This weekend, we were at a chain store, I wanted to buy something for $26, and tried to give them $100, and they ended up rejecting it. I didn't think stores could refuse legal tender.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> That's a good idea. Think of all the new jobs we can create.
> 
> Do grocery stores accept cheques?


I hope you're joking.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

cainvest said:


> Ouch, that sucks. Is there a way to make it so you just get declined without any overdraft (or other) charges?


Oh yes the TX is declined but the fees are still charged.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Spudd said:


> You would benefit from switching to the "pay as you go" overdraft protection, most likely. $5 per time you use it instead of a monthly charge.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks. I had not noticed that. I used to run a zero balance checking account until the fees got stupid.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

kcowan said:


> Oh yes the TX is declined but the fees are still charged.


And we wonder how banks make money.


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

Plugging Along said:


> I have always made it a habit to have at least one cab fare home from my furthest point so now it's about $100. The problem is that now so stores will not take $100 or even $50 bills.


That's a good case for some cash. I've read about others doing the same. You also made me think of the Rogers outage which impacted so many electronic payments. That said, I likely still normally won't carry a lot cash day to day unless I know I need it.  I've had similar experiences in the past where places won't take $50 and $100 bills!


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

milhouse said:


> That's a good case for some cash. I've read about others doing the same. You also made me think of the Rogers outage which impacted so many electronic payments. That said, I likely still normally won't carry a lot cash day to day unless I know I need it.  I've had similar experiences in the past where places won't take $50 and $100 bills!


It was something my parents always had me do when I was younger, 4- quarters for the pay phone (so I could call my mom, my dad, or one of my brothers) in case I got stuck. I always had enough for a cab ride home or when I travel a bus ticket or plane ticket. I still have travel with enough cash to buy a plane ticket home from my further destination. I have had to use my emergency cash while travelling at least 3 times in my life. 

Ironically, I went to a bachelor's party, and one of the guys I was with ended up calling me from another city. Apparently when left the rest of the guys stuck him on a Greyhound to the next town (1.5 hours away) and he didn't have any money on him, I had to go and get him. So I also got into habit of carrying enough cash for a bus ticket home from Edmonton (I'm Calgary), and I used to hide the money in places where my friends wouldn't search if it was a night of debauchery planned. I hid a $100 under each of the insoles in his shoes on his bachelor party. I knew wasn't going to get him as I was going out with my friends who are less of pranksters. So when his buddies took his phone and wallet and left him trying to freak him out a little, knowing I couldn't save him. When he called, I told him to check his shoe, and he took a cab home. The best part was his buddies were planning to come back in a short period of time to get him. They freaked out looking for him the rest of the night. They were afraid to call me the next morning to explain they lost my fiancée, and they stayed out all night looking for him. I never know what may happen, but I always feel better knowing I can usually buy my way to safety.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I hope you're joking.


I was joking. I wouldn't hand a cheque to a cashier even if they accepted them (the cheque has all my account numbers on it and this can be a path to cheque fraud).

But I am serious about paying with cash.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

cainvest said:


> And we wonder how banks make money.


I don’t think a NSF is levied if a store purchase is rejected……..I only remember it happening for pre-authorized debits or cheques.

there are fairly cost effective overdraft protection plans. Anyone getting dinged for more than 1 or 2 NSFs would greatly benedit from ODP.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Has anyone seen one of these fees yet?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Has anyone seen one of these fees yet?


The only ones I’ve seen existed before this new legislation. Univerisry wanted 3% IIRC for my son‘s payment. And I believe my municipality charges 2% to pay your utility or property tax bill with a CC.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Regulated utilities and most government charges such as taxes and municipal utilities, to my knowledge, have always added a surcharge for credit card payments....if they accepted credit cards at all. Most of those vendors require payment by cheque or Bill Payment. There is nothing odd about it. I just changed my Telus Mobility account from pre-authorized credit card to pre-authorized bank debit to avoid their 1.5% surcharge but I see no need to stop using my credit card for everything else.The benefits far outweigh the cost. What I would like to see is the demise of premium cards. They are the ones that have burdened merchants unnecessarily.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I was joking. I wouldn't hand a cheque to a cashier even if they accepted them (the cheque has all my account numbers on it and this can be a path to cheque fraud).
> 
> But I am serious about paying with cash.


Celebrating switching to cheques to increase jobs is like celebrating if cashiers had to dig a ditch and fill it in between every transaction.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Money172375 said:


> The only ones I’ve seen existed before this new legislation. Univerisry wanted 3% IIRC for my son‘s payment. And I believe my municipality charges 2% to pay your utility or property tax bill with a CC.


Feels like this will be devastating to the CC industry. I guess they will still have all the delinquents that spend money they don't have.


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

Bring back pennies!


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> The only ones I’ve seen existed before this new legislation. Univerisry wanted 3% IIRC for my son‘s payment. And I believe my municipality charges 2% to pay your utility or property tax bill with a CC.


 ... which uni is coming up with that? I thought the maximum "surcharge" is 2.4% on ccs.


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

m3s said:


> 3% cash back you are probably golden. People will less credit or income who can't get those premium cards or afford the annual fee subsidize you


Since my tax dollars support low income people I don't mind them subsidizing me on occasion.

It's all a game and I use the rules to my advantage.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... which uni is coming up with that? I thought the maximum "surcharge" is 2.4% on ccs.


That's according to the settlement with the CC companies.

If you weren't a party to that settlement, you're not bound by it.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Feels like this will be devastating to the CC industry. I guess they will still have all the delinquents that spend money they don't have.


CC industry is like 3 companies

Why should they get 3% on the entire retail economy? Margins are so thin this hurts small businesses. There's a lot of potential solutions coming. A public solution would be ideal

Money is a public good but then we're paying a private company to transact


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

m3s said:


> CC industry is like 3 companies
> 
> Why should they get 3% on the entire retail economy? Margins are so thin this hurts small businesses. There's a lot of potential solutions coming. A public solution would be ideal
> 
> Money is a public good but then we're paying a private company to transact


Prices are increased to cover the costs. A government solution would only make things worse, just like every other government solution.

Why don't you open a credit card company and offer a transaction free card?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

HappilyRetired said:


> Prices are increased to cover the costs. A government solution would only make things worse, just like every other government solution.
> 
> Why don't you open a credit card company and offer a transaction free card?


Because of red tape

Strike app for example can transact/exchange in USD or any currency at a tenth of the cost of credit cards. You can't get Strike app in Canada because it doesn't have a banking license or something. There are many similar apps such as Cash app and it's all based on a protocol that anyone could use

Most of the trouble is getting people to change their behaviour. The legacy financial system spends a fortune to vilify anything new and it's clear it works on the elderly folks


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

m3s said:


> CC industry is like 3 companies
> 
> Why should they get 3% on the entire retail economy? Margins are so thin this hurts small businesses. There's a lot of potential solutions coming. A public solution would be ideal
> 
> Money is a public good but then we're paying a private company to transact


Perhaps my tone was unclear. I am fine with the CC industry being devastated. Just thinking that this will be very disruptive to their business model.

Lots of companies get a piece of the action with their own branded cards, like banks, retailers, airlines, etc.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> Perhaps my tone was unclear. I am fine with the CC industry being devastated. Just thinking that this will be very disruptive to their business model.
> 
> Lots of companies get a piece of the action with their own branded cards, like banks, retailers, airlines, etc.


Airlines make more money from "points" than they do flying people around. Imagine controlling your own currency and getting to devalue it as you see fit  

Europeans seemed to be more conscious of the merchant fees or maybe they just didn't like the idea of giving 3% of all their retail to a few american companies

Most of the time I used Maestro in europe. Just looked it up apparently it will be replaced by Debit Mastercard now 😅 Probably got bought out


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Unless there is mass public adoption of these "new" payment apps and businesses, retailers aren't interested.

When these new concepts have to operate within the same regulatory framework as the traditional services they wish to replace.......they fail.

For some reason, many of the developers of these new concepts think the laws shouldn't apply to them......or they don't think of them at all.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

sags said:


> Unless there is mass public adoption of these "new" payment apps and businesses, retailers aren't interested.
> 
> When these new concepts have to operate within the same regulatory framework as the traditional services they wish to replace.......they fail.
> 
> For some reason, many of the developers of these new concepts think the laws shouldn't apply to them......or they don't think of them at all.


That's because boomers are not interested in keeping the regulatory framework relevant so it prevents innovation

Same thing for many industries. Which is why we will eventually end up with someone like Pierre Poilievre who want to remove red tape

It won't happen until that huge chunk of boomer voters are unable to vote anymore. I'll wait


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The next generation of business leaders will operate pretty much the same as past generations.

Most of these new "ideas" are created and developed by people with computer skills but no business experience or skills.

What sounds great when sitting around the coffee shop hobnobbing with computer pals.......often doesn't work in real life.

If only there was an app that could......yea, ..as if nobody else ever thought of it before now.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> It won't happen until that huge chunk of boomer voters are unable to vote anymore. I'll wait


I thought boomers weren't even close to the voting majority anymore?


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

m3s said:


> That's because boomers are not interested in keeping the regulatory framework relevant so it prevents innovation
> 
> Same thing for many industries. Which is why we will eventually end up with someone like Pierre Poilievre who want to remove red tape
> 
> It won't happen until that huge chunk of boomer voters are unable to vote anymore. I'll wait


Okay boomer


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

sags said:


> The next generation of business leaders will operate pretty much the same as past generations.
> 
> Most of these new "ideas" are created and developed by people with computer skills but no business experience or skills.
> 
> ...


What do you know about business sags?

According to you "In reality, wages are a small % cost for most businesses" The reality is innovation is happening at an exponential pace.

I know many computer kids from poor countries that made more by mid-twenties than you did in your lifetime


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

cainvest said:


> I thought boomers weren't even close to the voting majority anymore?


I thought so

Someone posted they still control most of the vote.

Reality is their influence will decline fast.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> Someone posted they still control most of the vote.


lol, not sure how they'd do that.

Soooo let's do a quick check ... 60% of the vote is controlled by Millennial and Gen X.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

cainvest said:


> lol, not sure how they'd do that.
> 
> Soooo let's do a quick check ... 60% of the vote is controlled by Millennial and Gen X.


For whatever reason boomers have the most influence today

A large cohort with strong voter turnout, strong networks with lobbyists, lots of powerful positions in legacy companies etc This will change rapidly in coming years with declining health

We are on a path to exponential innovation.. unless the boomers start firing nuclear weapons at each other as their final act


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

Tack Gen Z onto that 60% and that is an overwhelming majority.

No more excuses. The youngsters need to get off the couch and put words into action.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... which uni is coming up with that? I thought the maximum "surcharge" is 2.4% on ccs.


I took uni classes in 2021-22 from two seperate institutes. One (Athabasca) only took payment by credit card and had a mandatory CC service fee. I don't recall the amount but 3% sounded correct. Another had a similar payment surcharge or you could go down to the registration office and pay by cash or debit.


----------



## smihaila (Apr 6, 2009)

m3s said:


> This is just how capitalism works. Retailers are taking risks and can charge for those risks. Many retailers are now stuck with too much stuff
> 
> The alternative is to have the government stock the grocery shelves then we end up like Russia


Hey, it's no longer planned/centralized economy like before the 1989, you know? ;-)


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> Unless there is mass public adoption of these "new" payment apps and businesses, retailers aren't interested.
> 
> When these new concepts have to operate within the same regulatory framework as the traditional services they wish to replace.......they fail.
> 
> For some reason, many of the developers of these new concepts think the laws shouldn't apply to them......or they don't think of them at all.


In honour of sags' PhD, I think we should rename the Dunning Kruger effect the sags effect.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> For whatever reason boomers have the most influence today


lmao ... for the ones that are still alive half of them are likely already in retirement homes. Actually, with over 60% voting from millennial and gen x I can see why JT got back in.

Back on to the CC issue, things are not likely to change much IMO. Even if new payment methods get adopted it'll just mean someone else is getting their cut.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

cainvest said:


> Back on to the CC issue, things are not likely to change much IMO. Even if new payment methods get adopted it'll just mean someone else is getting their cut.


Unless you go p2p where stores run their own nodes of a payment network. Then the cost is 0.1% or 0.3% with an exchange (cost to run a node is no more than a POS)

Even centralized WeChat and AliPay are 0.1% fees. Visa/MC fees are 30x more at 3%. Lots of room for disruption. The banks are too big to fail though.

I think Elon wants to make Twitter into a WeChat. I'd rather have a public p2p solution that any app can use


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

andrewf said:


> In honour of sags' PhD, I think we should rename the Dunning Kruger effect the sags effect.


Most often an affliction of the young and inexperienced, but boomers won’t hold it against them.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

aa


m3s said:


> Unless you go p2p where stores run their own nodes of a payment network.


That's possible but we already have interac. Of course direct payment transfers will not be the same as using a credit card.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Don't forget that much of the CC monthly fee is to cover credit losses and no other party can avoid that without more restrictions. This is especially true with online transactions. I have had our credit cards replaced in the last year because of fraudulent online TX. There were no losses but they incurred costs.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

kcowan said:


> Don't forget that much of the CC monthly fee is to cover credit losses and no other party can avoid that without more restrictions. This is especially true with online transactions. I have had our credit cards replaced in the last year because of fraudulent online TX. There were no losses but they incurred costs.


People (perhaps me included) will continue to use CC for this fraud protection. I have had my bank cover losses due to debit card skimming, but I have since stopped using my debit card except at my bank's debit machines.


----------



## OneSeat (Apr 15, 2020)

The aspect that concerns me is whether the added CC charge will eat up the CashBack Rewards we have been getting every year. These varied quite a bit when we were still travelling a lot but the $2000 or so we got most years easily paid for the $100 extra per card.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> I took uni classes in 2021-22 from two seperate institutes. One (Athabasca) only took payment by credit card and had a mandatory CC service fee. I don't recall the amount but 3% sounded correct. Another had a similar payment surcharge or you could go down to the registration office and pay by cash or debit.


 ...no wonder the youngsters are screaming about not being able to pay off their student loans these days. Surcharges on top of debts. I wonder what OSAP(?) has to say about this, if anything. But then I'm sure the salaries of graduates these days will make up for it. Everything is relative.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

kcowan said:


> Don't forget that much of the CC monthly fee is to cover credit losses and no other party can avoid that without more restrictions. This is especially true with online transactions. I have had our credit cards replaced in the last year because of fraudulent online TX. There were no losses but they incurred costs.


I think they dump the costs of fraud on the vendor in a lot of cases.

I think that's why cryptocurrency is so appealing, once the vendor has the money, they have it.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I think they dump the costs of fraud on the vendor in a lot of cases.
> 
> I think that's why cryptocurrency is so appealing, once the vendor has the money, they have it.


There's already been a lot of cases where for example somebody double pays or doesn't receive what they expected. The vendor still has to keep their customers happy even more so when they can warn others much easier nowadays with the internet

As far as fraud you are responsible to protect your own keys. Most people are probably not smart enough to do that so there will have to be multi-sig wallets. I imagine most people will use a 3rd party vendor as one of the backup signature in case they lose one of their own. If you lose multiple keys

Card skimming is far weaker than a crypto payment because you can't simple copy the card to key the private keys. Seems like people like credit cards for fraud protection mostly because of how susceptible they are in the first place. If 3rd party insurance is what you want I'm sure it will exist


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

OneSeat said:


> The aspect that concerns me is whether the added CC charge will eat up the CashBack Rewards we have been getting every year. These varied quite a bit when we were still travelling a lot but the $2000 or so we got most years easily paid for the $100 extra per card.


Issuers and users of premium cards are the real problem. Issuers of premium cards charge higher transaction fees to the merchant than for vanilla cards. That is nothing more than the better off feeding off the masses. If the regulator capped merchant fees to 1.5% or less, perhaps 1% even, those premium cards would disappear really quickly, FWIW, it has never been about the annual fee for those premium cards. It is the exorbitant fees charged to the merchants. 

I would have banned anything beyond fraud protection on credit cards decades ago.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Issuers and users of premium cards are the real problem. Issuers of premium cards charge higher transaction fees to the merchant than for vanilla cards. That is nothing more than the better off feeding off the masses. If the regulator capped merchant fees to 1.5% or less, perhaps 1% even, those premium cards would disappear really quickly, FWIW, it has never been about the annual fee for those premium cards. It is the exorbitant fees charged to the merchants.
> 
> I would have banned anything beyond fraud protection on credit cards decades ago.


It's also the card churners and heavy travelers who benefit most

Many people who rack up pts never end up using them in any optimal way because there is so much gaming involved

It is designed to be inconvenient and complicated to profit on those who let them expire etc


----------



## OneSeat (Apr 15, 2020)

AltaRed said:


> I would have banned anything beyond fraud protection on credit cards decades ago.


Interesting comment - the reason I liked them in the past was that one tended to get better service - and never had to wait several minutes for the card to be checked. Sort of like Business Class - although I do admit that now no one seems to notice the different cards.

Why would you have banned them? Would you also ban Business Class, upscale restaurants, Cadillac cars etc etc.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

If the user pays the full burden of Business Class, luxury cars, etc, there is no problem at all, Indeed, users actually overpay for those things and if they want to do so, I don't care what they do with their pocketbooks.

What I dislike is users getting benefits (of premium cards) that they don't pay for, i.e. expect the masses to pay it instead. How about if credit card merchant fees were fixed at a low level commensurate with plain vanilla credit cards and users pay a $500, or $1000 annual fee for the use of their premium cards? The point is about fairness, i.e. user pay.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> If the regulator capped merchant fees to 1.5% or less, perhaps 1% even, those premium cards would disappear really quickly,


Capped fees would be a good idea. Maybe give merchants the power to decline cards over a set % amount and/or anything over would be added back on to the consumer at the POS system?

Many mechants dropped Amex due to their high fees years ago.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

cainvest said:


> Capped fees would be a good idea. Maybe give merchants the power to decline cards over a set % amount and/or anything over would be added back on to the consumer at the POS system?
> 
> Many mechants dropped Amex due to their high fees years ago.


I like that idea except I don't know if POS terminals could identify the merchant fee of a particular credit card in real time at time of transaction and tack on the difference to the transaction. It would be asking too much of employees to know the identity of the category of some 500? different credit cards in existence.

I agree Amex pretty much killed their own business model everywhere except in much of the USA itself. I have never used my "Simply Cash" Amex card for anything other than 'Front of the Line' tickets which is the only reason I still hold it. They keep pushing goodies like 3% back on groceries from select independent grocers. Can you imagine what that does for the margins of those stores? I would dump Amex in a heartbeat if I was a store owner.

Added: Here are a few links to credit card processing fees. Interchange Rates in Canada for Credit Card Processing and creditcardGenius Note how egregious the fees for anything other than base card are, and especially for Ultra Premium cards? Why does the average consumer and merchant bear the burden?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

FWIW, I like using credit cards for travel especially. I like the fraud protection (overall for all purchases) and I like the card issuer having my back if something goes off the rails during travel. I also like the modest travel insurance/interruption/cancellation protections. Nothing else matters, including points and cashback, if it avoids paying a surcharge.

Credit cards are about the convenience and safety of transactions. They are not supposed to deliver 'gifts' at Christmas time.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> I like that idea except I don't know if POS terminals could identify the merchant fee of a particular credit card in real time at time of transaction and tack on the difference to the transaction. It would be asking too much of employees to know the identity of the category of some 500? different credit cards in existence.


Yes, it would have to be identified by the POS systems terminal at time of purchase. I don't know what information is exactly exchanged (other then the obvious) when a card transaction takes place. The "valid/reject" response would need to send back the fee % attached to the card then the POS system could take whatever actions its programmed for.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

AltaRed said:


> FWIW, I like using credit cards for travel especially. I like the fraud protection (overall for all purchases) and I like the card issuer having my back if something goes off the rails during travel. I also like the modest travel insurance/interruption/cancellation protections. Nothing else matters, including points and cashback, if it avoids paying a surcharge.
> 
> Credit cards are about the convenience and safety of transactions. They are not supposed to deliver 'gifts' at Christmas time.


What if there were no benefits such as insurance/interruption/cancellation? Seems you‘re cherry picking the benefits you want yet critiquing the ones you don’t like. In my mind, it’s either status auto or eliminating ALL benefits.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Sure, I did say what I like from credit cards, but I have not said I need any of those things. If you had paid attention to my second paragraph.....


> Credit card are about the convenience and safety of transactions.


 you would know the basic purpose of credit card transactions. That is how they began life.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> I like that idea except I don't know if POS terminals could identify the merchant fee of a particular credit card in real time at time of transaction and tack on the difference to the transaction. It would be asking too much of employees to know the identity of the category of some 500? different credit cards in existence.


I think it should be easy.
The terminal asks what the available credit is on the account, they could also inquire to the interchange fee.

One of the craziest things I think is how they validate gift cards these days.
You scan it, and ones the transaction goes through the gift card is activated.
Buying and activating a gift card is no different than buying a pack of gum (unless you have the variable fill cards)


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> One of the craziest things I think is how they validate gift cards these days.
> You scan it, and ones the transaction goes through the gift card is activated.
> Buying and activating a gift card is no different than buying a pack of gum (unless you have the variable fill cards)


A lot of scams and money laundering involve gift cards

I was looking at new credit cards for Canada and the churners love to use gift cards to game the reward rates. Just load up on Costco cards at the grocery store etc

Lots of scams asking for payments or refunds in the form of gift cards. Should just get rid of em


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Issuers and users of premium cards are the real problem. Issuers of premium cards charge higher transaction fees to the merchant than for vanilla cards. That is nothing more than the better off feeding off the masses. If the regulator capped merchant fees to 1.5% or less, perhaps 1% even, those premium cards would disappear really quickly, FWIW, it has never been about the annual fee for those premium cards. It is the exorbitant fees charged to the merchants.
> 
> I would have banned anything beyond fraud protection on credit cards decades ago.


Competition Bureau really should be regulating pricing for CC interchange fees. The structure currently is opaque and designed to maximize bad incentives. CC is a monopsony and it is very difficult for merchants to accept some cards and not others without completely baffling consumers.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I agree but the big issuers obviously carry a big stick or are intimidating to the regulator. The whole surcharge issue didn't have to happen if issuers were restricted to 1% or so.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> I agree Amex pretty much killed their own business model everywhere except in much of the USA itself. I have never used my "Simply Cash" Amex card for anything other than 'Front of the Line' tickets which is the only reason I still hold it.


We got Amex for the same reason


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

I didn't realize that Canada pays some of the highest merchant fees

Are Canadians just complacent or financially inept?






The Cost of Accepting Credit Card Payments: NA vs EU


We analyzed the interchange rates paid by merchants in countries throughout North America and Europe. The data reveals how countries compare to one another, in relation to how much their merchants must give up to accept credit card payments.




www.valuepenguin.com


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The US is as bad as Canada. It is that North American regulators and lawmakers don't have the backbone to 'challenge' the financial industry. The industry "owns" them in one form or another and/or populates the regulatory and political bodies with their own kind.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The US is as bad as Canada. It is that North American regulators and lawmakers don't have the backbone to 'challenge' the financial industry. The industry "owns" them in one form or another and/or populates the regulatory and political bodies with their own kind.


It's a very comfortable mutually beneficial relationship.

The minister of finance can call the bank, ask them to do sketchy things to their customers, and the banks are more than happy to comply, as they know they get certain benefits from their oligopoly.
It's much easier to fight opponents if you take away their ability to fight back.

Cutting off them funds is a key strategy.
Look at the trucker protest, the banks could freeze accounts, with no chance of retribution, and no oversight, recourse or compensation. I'll take a "friend" like that.


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

MrMatt said:


> Cutting off them funds is a key strategy.
> Look at the trucker protest, the banks could freeze accounts, with no chance of retribution, and no oversight, recourse or compensation. I'll take a "friend" like that.


And the banks did it willingly with no pushback and no request for a court order. Instant compliance.

What would have happened if Harper had asked banks to freeze the accounts of native bands illegally blocking highways and rail lines?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Just wait until we get Central Bank Digital Currency

Maybe if they cut out the private banks and automated taxes there would be a lot of capital efficiency gained

But we all know that's not how government works


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

HappilyRetired said:


> And the banks did it willingly with no pushback and no request for a court order. Instant compliance.


No court order, no police direction, and no penalties for their negligence.



> What would have happened if Harper had asked banks to freeze the accounts of native bands illegally blocking highways and rail lines?


Those terrorists should have not only had their accounts frozen, they should have had their government funding cut.


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

MrMatt said:


> No court order, no police direction, and no penalties for their negligence.
> 
> Those terrorists should have not only had their accounts frozen, they should have had their government funding cut.


Different rules for different folks. Sadly, some people hear openly applauded that.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> don't know any computer store that accepts "cash only", never mind about a discount. I would want a receipt for anything that I purchase o/w there's no after-purchase guarantee of any sorts.


Nevertheless they exist and have done for yonks. A surprising number of businesses will give a cash discount if you ask. The "cash" is not cash, of course -- cheque, debit interac payment -- anything that lets them escape the chargeback fees of the credit card. The receipt reflects the cash discount as a line item and is totally legit.

For many years the credit cards have held a knife to the throats of vendors by forbidding them to discriminate amongst cards or to charge any fee/surcharge for the use of cards. They've used this leverage to force vendors to accept ever increasing chargeback fees to pay for the ever increasing points, cash-back and other bonus schemes. Cash discount has been the way some business made it possible to bypass this without running afoul of their agreements with payment processors.

In civilized countries -- EU, Australia, this whole practice of fiddling the chargeback rates to stiff vendors has been regulated and is the subject to periodic evaluation and investigation. The present situation in Canada is nothing like this, being only a settlement between Visa, MC and the vendors that one little term in the vendor agreement will be not enforced, probably at the pleasure of the credit cards. Actual regulatory oversight and rules in this area have been overdue for 20 years or more.

As a bank shareholder the current situation is not so bad because I've enjoyed having the big banks quietly feeding off the retail economy and siphoning off money to pay my dividends, but I believe the system has gotten way too greedy. It is definitely time for regulation.

Holders of 2% cash back cards, where the f--k did you think this money was coming from? Why SHOULDN'T a doughnut store or restaurant or whatever just charge it right back in your face?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> Nevertheless they exist and have done for yonks. A surprising number of businesses will give a cash discount if you ask. The "cash" is not cash, of course -- cheque, debit interac payment -- anything that lets them escape the chargeback fees of the credit card. The receipt reflects the cash discount as a line item and is totally legit.
> 
> For many years the credit cards have held a knife to the throats of vendors by forbidding them to discriminate amongst cards or to charge any fee/surcharge for the use of cards. They've used this leverage to force vendors to accept ever increasing chargeback fees to pay for the ever increasing points, cash-back and other bonus schemes. Cash discount has been the way some business made it possible to bypass this without running afoul of their agreements with payment processors.
> 
> ...


 ... why do you think it's time now for regulations? Especially as a bank shareholder who thinks it ain't so bad as you're still enjoying their dividends - paid mostly by customers of donut shops and restaurants which btw unlikely include THI or MCD. 

Simple question for ya, if THI and/or MCD starts placing a surcharge on your timbits or big mac, will you stop going there? I know you won't be going to your local mama and papa eateries.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The problem with the surcharge is it makes all credit card holders guilty even if the vanilla card holders are only responsible for 1% interchange fees while it is the premium card holders who are responsible for 2+% interchange fees. Either throw the book at the premium card holders only or regulate interchange fees low enough that premium cards cease to exist.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The problem with the surcharge is it makes all credit card holders guilty even if the vanilla card holders are only responsible for 1% interchange fees while it is the premium card holders who are responsible for 2+% interchange fees. Either throw the book at the premium card holders only or regulate interchange fees low enough that premium cards cease to exist.


 ... and who's fault is that? The consumers, including the vanilla ones? That's hardly the 'root' of the problem(s).


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... and who's fault is that? The consumers, including the vanilla ones? That's hardly the 'root' of the problem(s).


It is the root cause

Fees are lower in the rest of the world but so are all these amazing cards perks that go to the card churners and wealthy in NA. The credit score system is also archaic and needs to be regulated better, especially after all the data breaches

At the end of the day it's the poor who are being screwed. So yes it makes sense to regulate it


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> The problem with the surcharge is it makes all credit card holders guilty even if the vanilla card holders are only responsible for 1% interchange fees


Yes. There used to be some small vendors that would recognize the type of premium card that would rip them off and refuse to accept them. This caused a good deal of angst with the consumers who had no idea what was going on, and the credit card companies beat the vendor with their non-discrimination clause until they fell in line. I think this was in the early 2000s -- maybe 2009 or so -- it may have been around the time the Australians started cracking down on that s--t. It's been a while. I think the banks should have gotten a spanking then, but nothing really happened.

EDIT: here is 2012, but I don't think it was a new thing then:








Retail groups want right to refuse premium credit cards


CFIB asks Ottawa to let them decline high-fee cards or charge customers more for using them




www.theglobeandmail.com





EDIT: from 2011


https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/battle-lines-drawn-in-credit-card-war-1.1060382


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> *It is the root cause*
> 
> Fees are lower in the rest of the world but so are all these amazing cards perks that go to the card churners and wealthy in NA. The credit score system is also archaic and needs to be regulated better, especially after all the data breaches
> 
> At the end of the day it's the poor who are being screwed. So yes it makes sense to regulate it


 ... what or who is the root cause????


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... what or who is the root cause????


"Always look for the fool in the deal. If you don't find one, it's you" - Mark Cuban


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

m3s said:


> At the end of the day it's the poor who are being screwed. So yes it makes sense to regulate it


I'd ask you to explain your logic but it would be a waste of time.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> what or who is the root cause?


Joe blogs consumers fall for the lie that they can get great benefits, points, cash back or whatever. The bank takes the money off the vendors and gives a portion to the consumers. The vendors ratchet up their prices to compensate. The losers are the consumers that pay 4% more for added 2% value -- or many get no extra value at all. The winners are the banks that skim 2% vs the 50bps they used to get. The whole thing escalates in a viscous circle until someone quits -- the small businesses have basically had it, but have done for > 10 years and it's not clear they're making much progress.

Peter Pepper always says he is looking out for the little guy and the small business folks. Maybe he will start making hay with Liberal inaction -- he doesn't have to wear Harper inaction though -- that was before. No-one can remember that far back for sure.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

gardner said:


> In civilized countries -- EU, Australia, this whole practice of fiddling the chargeback rates to stiff vendors has been regulated and is the subject to periodic evaluation and investigation.


In Nanny states where the government controls everything.
Fixed that for you.



> As a bank shareholder the current situation is not so bad because I've enjoyed having the big banks quietly feeding off the retail economy and siphoning off money to pay my dividends, but I believe the system has gotten way too greedy. It is definitely time for regulation.


Which is why the government should allow or at least not actively attack alternatives.

Canada is the worst mix where the government forces you to use the status quo, while doing nothing to control the monopolies.
Either regulate them (fairly), or let alternatives develop. This worst of both worlds approach is bad.



> Holders of 2% cash back cards, where the f--k did you think this money was coming from? Why SHOULDN'T a doughnut store or restaurant or whatever just charge it right back in your face?


I thought it was pretty obvious they were charging you this "free money"

Also it's pretty reasonable, considering the banks charge for cash deposits as well. 
Canada is actively anti small business, and has been for years.

Go ahead try to ship a book across the country, make sure to include the 30% fuel surcharge that shows up at the END of the process.
When you realize it's $25-30 to ship a book, you'll understand why Amazon will dominate Canadian retail. (Amazon shipping is an order of magnitude lower than Canada Post)


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

MrMatt said:


> I thought it was pretty obvious they were charging you this "free money"


It's always been obvious to me, I'm not sure how people can't be aware how it works.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> "Always look for the fool in the deal. If you don't find one, it's you" - Mark Cuban





gardner said:


> Joe blogs consumers fall for the lie that they can get great benefits, points, cash back or whatever. The bank takes the money off the vendors and gives a portion to the consumers. The vendors ratchet up their prices to compensate. The losers are the consumers that pay 4% more for added 2% value -- or many get no extra value at all. The winners are the banks that skim 2% vs the 50bps they used to get. The whole thing escalates in a viscous circle until someone quits -- the small businesses have basically had it, but have done for > 10 years and it's not clear they're making much progress.
> 
> Peter Pepper always says he is looking out for the little guy and the small business folks. Maybe he will start making hay with Liberal inaction -- he doesn't have to wear Harper inaction though -- that was before. No-one can remember that far back for sure.


 ... partly true but wouldn't that include "you" too as 100% of the cause? Don't tell me you only pay by cash and/or crypto, like 99.99% of the times? Duh.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

HappilyRetired said:


> It's always been obvious to me, I'm not sure how people can't be aware how it works.


Oh trust me, they can be VERY unaware.

There are a LOT of people who have "bro-knowledge" of finance. 
They were told something long ago, and they believe it without question.



Beaver101 said:


> ... partly true but wouldn't that include "you" too as 100% of the cause? Don't tell me you only pay by cash and/or crypto, like 99.99% of the times? Duh.


Well yeah, I am part of the cause because I use a convenient payment method.
Guess what, I'm also part of the reason they have extended store hours, not just 9-5 M-F, because I never shop during those hours.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Oh trust me, they can be VERY unaware.
> 
> There are a LOT of people who have "bro-knowledge" of finance.
> They were told something long ago, and they believe it without question.
> ...


 ... you're more than "part" of the reason for 'extended' hours beyond those. In fact, 24/7 due to the lockdowns. So based on m3s, gardner and your reasons, the customers are ALWAYS WRONG, correct? Which means why bother having credit cards even, let alone "premium" ones?


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

MrMatt said:


> Oh trust me, they can be VERY unaware.
> 
> There are a LOT of people who have "bro-knowledge" of finance.
> They were told something long ago, and they believe it without question.
> ...


I use credit cards for the convenience and the points. But we never carry a balance so it's a net gain of several hundred/a thousand every year. By net gain I really mean that we're just getting back some of the built-in premium businesses charge the consumer.

But if/when it becomes more prudent to use a different payment method other than a credit card we can switch without a problem.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... you're more than "part" of the reason for 'extended' hours beyond those. In fact, 24/7 due to the lockdowns. So based on m3s, gardner and your reasons, the customers are ALWAYS WRONG, correct? Which means why bother having credit cards even, let alone "premium" ones?


I have good credit and enough awareness to game the system enough that it's about neutral to me. Even pre-pandemic when I travelled a lot I found the travel rewards especially in Canada had far too many hoops and restrictions and the rare time I wanted to use premium credit card "insurance" they could always get out of it with some fine print

But it's not about me. It's just a bad system for Canada when 2 or 3 companies can command a 3% margin from our small business that doesn't benefit the vast majority of Canadians and rather benefits largely executives in the USA. I'm saying Europe and other countries recognize this and regulate it whereas Canadians are just complacent


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

m3s said:


> But it's not about me. It's just a bad system for Canada when 2 or 3 companies can command a 3% margin from our small business that doesn't benefit the vast majority of Canadians and rather benefits largely executives in the USA. I'm saying Europe and other countries recognize this and regulate it whereas Canadians are just complacent


This is the crux of the problem and yet Canada bungles the solution by NOT limiting interchange fees. It could have been so much easier too.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> wouldn't that include "you" too as 100% of the cause?


Like anyone using credit, I am part of the problem, yes. Personally, I use debit a lot more than most people but the credit card I use is an Amex which will be one of the longstanding worst offenders. OTOH it is one the vendors can most easily opt out of at their own discretion with no blowback from the payment providers. I also have a completely no-frills very basic Visa that I use when I need to use credit and Amex is no good.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> When you realize it's $25-30 to ship a book, you'll understand why Amazon will dominate Canadian retail. (Amazon shipping is an order of magnitude lower than Canada Post)


If you're a business that ships orders on a regular basis, you can get discounted pricing from Canada Post (and all couriers). Other retailers are not paying Canada Post consumer parcel prices. To be sure, Amazon still does have a cost advantage due to their scale and vertical integration. It's just not an order of magnitude or anything approaching it.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

my premium card offers road side assistance. First time I used it was a few weeks ago. Pretty seamless service So far. The benefit provides towing to the closest service centre. There was a small rural mechanic about 16 kms away. I got it towed to the dealer which was 20km away. When I called, they said I would pay the difference, but I’ve yet to see a charge.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

m3s said:


> I have good credit and enough awareness to game the system enough that it's about neutral to me. Even pre-pandemic when I travelled a lot I found the travel rewards especially in Canada had far too many hoops and restrictions and the rare time I wanted to use premium credit card "insurance" they could always get out of it with some fine print
> 
> *But it's not about me. It's just a bad system for Canada when 2 or 3 companies can command a 3% margin from our small business that doesn't benefit the vast majority of Canadians and rather benefits largely executives in the USA. I'm saying Europe and other countries recognize this and regulate it whereas Canadians are just complacent*


 ... you're getting close. But then it's about "you=the customer (not the personal "you)" because the customers are recognized as 1. unaware, 2. complacent, and 3. always wrong of which the first 2 points you included. Why's that?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> This is the crux of the problem and yet Canada bungles the solution by NOT limiting interchange fees. It could have been so much easier too.


 ... what do you mean by "interchange fees" and how do "Canadians" (if not Canada) limit those fees?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... you're getting close. But then it's about "you=the customer (not the personal "you)" because the customers are recognized as 1. unaware, 2. complacent, and 3. always wrong of which the first 2 points you included. Why's that?


Because the government had blocked all innovation and alternatives in the space while allowing their American buddies to reap the rewards

Government should either regulate the Visa/MC/Amex oligopoly or let the free market (the customer) decide. Customer really has no choice as it stands


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We use a mixture of debit cards, online banking payments, email transfers, and credit cards. We rarely use cash.

As seniors we get "extra" cash back points all the time, and sometimes there are a lot more points on specific items.....extra 10,000 points or something.

For most people though......credit cards aren't a form of payment to grab cash back or some kind of reward.

They use their credit cards to spend money they don't have. The rise in consumer credit card debt is testament to that.

US consumers spent their covid stimulus, spent their savings, and are now racking up credit card debt to buy groceries, pay rent and utility bills.

If credit card companies didn't have the "lending" side of their business making them money from interest, late payment fees etc. and only operated as a form of cash payment, the transaction fees may be higher than they are.

Nobody is going to create and administer a large scale network like Visa because they are nice guys.

VisaNet can process 65,000 transactions globally every second, including FX fee conversions.

It requires a lot of money to keep the network maintained and functioning.






VisaNet: Global Electronic Payment Network


VisaNet is Visa’s global network. It’s how we process reliable and secure digital payments for people around the world. Learn about the power of VisaNet now.




www.visa.ca













2022 Credit Card Debt Statistics | LendingTree


Americans’ total credit card balance is $925 billion in the third quarter of 2022, according to the latest data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.



www.lendingtree.com


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... what do you mean by "interchange fees" and how do "Canadians" (if not Canada) limit those fees?


The essence of this entire thread is about the burden merchants bear due to the fees charged to the merchants from credit card issuers for each transaction. These are 'interchange' fees. Canadians, as individuals, cannot limit interchange fees credit card issuers charge to the vendors but consumers can reduce the burden by carrying only vanilla cards (no premium cards) that charge only the lowest interchange fees. 

Consumers have created much of the problem by continuing to be sucked in my credit card issuers for cards with higher and higher benefits. They seem to think they get something for nothing (or at very little cost). Credit card issuers are not charities. All consumers pay for those benefits and it seems the Canadian consumer does not understand that.

The most equitable solution is for the government to actually limit the interchange fees to minimum levels like they do ex-North America. Premium cards would either then either disappear or have annual fees so high consumers would balk at paying them.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> The essence of this entire thread is about the burden merchants bear due to the fees charged to the merchants from credit card issuers for each transaction. These are 'interchange' fees. Canadians, as individuals, cannot limit interchange fees credit card issuers charge to the vendors but consumers can reduce the burden by carrying only vanilla cards (no premium cards) that charge only the lowest interchange fees.


 ... now we're talking. I had wanted to make sure we're talking about the "same thing" aka "root" of the problem. Interchange fees = merchant fees imposed on merchants for providing their customers the convenience of using credit cards that were established by the credit card companies aka "creditor" or lendors which are normally an arm of the banks. First question - who came up with the "premium" cards?



> Consumers have created much of the problem by continuing to be sucked in my credit card issuers for cards with higher and higher benefits. They seem to think they get something for nothing (or at very little cost). Credit card issuers are not charities. All consumers pay for those benefits and it seems the Canadian consumer does not understand that.


 ... so are you saying consumers are all that dumb? Particularly to be "sucked" in by credit card issuers aka the marketers?



> The most equitable solution is for the government to actually limit the interchange fees to minimum levels like they do ex-North America.


 ... once regulations come into effect, the credit cards providers will be screaming about the lack of a free market, no competition, or simply TOO MUCH REGULATIONs, no?



> Premium cards would either then either disappear or have annual fees so high consumers would balk at paying them.


 ... consumers are paying an annual fees for some of these premium cards. Now they have to pay some more for the burdensome interchange fees that have already been in place for the merchants, no?

My solution is that they* GREEDY credit cards providers* *aka the banks* go and "reduce" (note: I didn't say eliminate) the small business merchants "interchange fees" to an equal playing field as the big boys for a PROBLEM that THEY (credit cards providers or banks marketers) CREATED!!!! instead of pitting consumers against consumers, consumers against small businesses so that they *GREEDY BANKS* can maintain the status quo of GREED or elevate that to *SUPER-GREED.*


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Credit card issuers did develop and market premium cards to the consumers over the years but consumers were also the ones who wanted them and the ones who would switch to a card with even more benefits if they were available. Consumers never thought about the consequences of their actions either. It will be the consumers who would scream 'bloody murder' if those premium cards began to disappear due to regulated interchange fees. 

There is enough blame to go around to both credit card issuers AND the consumer. I thus don't accept the singular focus of your last paragraph. That sounds something like the Red Star or commie CBC Marketplace would spin to their audiences.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> Credit card issuers did develop and market premium cards to the consumers over the years but consumers were also the ones who wanted them and the ones who would switch to a card with even more benefits if they were available. Consumers never thought about the consequences of their actions either. It will be the consumers who would scream 'bloody murder' if those premium cards began to disappear due to regulated interchange fees.


 ... how can the consumers "wanted" them premium cards when they're considered stupid enough to be sucked in the first place? Yeah, I would agree the consumers would be screaming "bloody murder" now when these cards are being taken away BY THE CREDIT CARDS ISSUERS WHO SCHEMED, MARKETED AND CREATED these cards. Just like pulling off a pacifier off a toddler.



> There is enough blame to go around to both credit card issuers AND the consumer. I thus don't accept the singular focus of your last paragraph. That sounds something like the Red Star or commie CBC Marketplace would spin to their audiences.


 ... of course, you can't accept my focus (singular at that) last paragraph when you (or someone you know) has a stake there. Also, not sure why you would want to read Red Star commie CBC Marketplace if that's not your thing. I don't.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Is there a list of specific cards and their individual interchange fees?

I’m curios as to which cards are deemed premium and which aren’t.

I have a Cash back card with a bunch of other benefits. Annual fees is $120 (which is waived based on my chequing account balance). I assume this is deemed premium.

my son has a no fee cash back card. I assume this not premium even though he collects cash back.

I also have the PC World Elite with no Fee. Some premium benefits but no annual cost.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Money172375 said:


> I have a Cash back card with a bunch of other benefits. Annual fees is $120 (which is waived based on my chequing account balance). I assume this is deemed premium.


Chances are any card that has a fee (waived or not) is premium with a higher transaction fee.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Is there a list of specific cards and their individual interchange fees?
> 
> I’m curios as to which cards are deemed premium and which aren’t.
> 
> ...


 .. all those cards with a cashback and/or reward points are considered "premium", IMO.

I would like to see a publication of ALL interchange fees for ALL cards but that would be considered a FAT CHANCE. That's like telling the credit cards issuer/banks to be transparent on behalf of the merchants.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Here are a couple of sources for interchange fees for ''types' of cards It is not too hard to guess where one's particular cards most likely fit








Interchange Rates in Canada for Credit Card Processing


Interchange rates in Canada for all types of credit cards: Visa, MasterCard, AMEX. Interchange rates by credit card type and payment processing method.




www.clearlypayments.com









creditcardGenius







creditcardgenius.ca


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> They use their credit cards to spend money they don't have. The rise in consumer credit card debt is testament to that.


I wonder about that, myself. Personally I use credit cards mostly due to convenience and fraud protection. Many places I deal with can ONLY accept credit or possibly debit and can't accept EFT, cheque or interac. But I never don't pay my card off in full all the time. Nevertheless my blended mean credit card debt is something like $400-$700. I suspect that this figure and figures like it for millions of others with no actual debt get blended into the "consumer debt" quoted in the media.

While I know that many people do in fact use cards to carry debt, I wonder what the figures would be if you could eliminate the effect of the transitory "debt" that is going to be paid off immediately. The transitory debt is more a function of the economic throughput of the economy and will go up as greater share of transactions flow through credit, prices go up and more people spend more on more stuff. It isn't necessarily all bad news.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... of course, you can't accept my focus (singular at that) last paragraph when you (or someone you know) has a stake there. Also, not sure why you would want to read Red Star commie CBC Marketplace if that's not your thing. I don't.


I don't watch/read those sources as they would give me heartburn but I see enough anecdotes in various forum postings to know they have singular focus on greedy companies. The consumer rarely ever is assumed to carry some blame.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> Here are a couple of sources for interchange fees for ''types' of cards It is not too hard to guess where one's particular cards most likely fit
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 ... that's great info ... standard. Aren't the fees negotiated amongst the merchants. I can't see how Telus would be even charged the lowest fee of .92% (MC) there if used by their customers. Not even TekSavvy.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You really can't blame consumers for selecting high interchange fee cards. This is classic free rider problem. Your options are a) be a sucker or b) free ride. This is a market failure, and that is what calls for government intervention.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> If you're a business that ships orders on a regular basis, you can get discounted pricing from Canada Post (and all couriers). Other retailers are not paying Canada Post consumer parcel prices. To be sure, Amazon still does have a cost advantage due to their scale and vertical integration. It's just not an order of magnitude or anything approaching it.


I have a small business account, the discounts are pathetic.
Also it's a bit of a circular problem.

It's hard to sell $20-30 items if shipping is $20-30




andrewf said:


> If you're a business that ships orders on a regular basis, you can get discounted pricing from Canada Post (and all couriers). Other retailers are not paying Canada Post consumer parcel prices. To be sure, Amazon still does have a cost advantage due to their scale and vertical integration. It's just not an order of magnitude or anything approaching it.


Apparently there was a significant increase, but the shipping/fulfilment costs are still huge.






Sell on Amazon | How pricing works on Amazon.ca


Selling on Amazon involves choosing a plan, signing up for an account, and adding your products. Learn how to sell on Amazon here.




sell.amazon.ca




Take my example of a 1/4lb book, Amazon charges $4.04 to pick, box, address and ship.
Canada Post charges $20 + 30% fuel surcharge, so about $26, and you have to do the packaging.

$26 vs $4, excluding your payment fees.
Note last year when the fees were lower, it was much closer to a full 10x aka order of magnitude.

Now there are other payment processing fees etc. But if you have a lower cost product, that moves quickly, Amazon is WAY cheaper for the shipping portion.
This is a big part of why I think Amazon will "win retail", you simply can't compete.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... that's great info ... standard. Aren't the fees negotiated amongst the merchants. I can't see how Telus would be even charged the lowest fee of .92% (MC) there if used by their customers. Not even TekSavvy.


Telus should be on the low end of interchange fees, though maybe not as low as the mega-corps like Home Depot, Costco, Walmart, etc who have far more clout than companies like Telus. The Telus grab for 1.5% however seems well over the top unless the bulk of their customers are on premium cards. CRTC may well 'constrain' that amount when they finally decide by circa December (latest info on that matter). Regardless, I just switched to pre-authorized debit for my Telus mobile account.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> *Telus should be on the low end of interchange fees, though maybe not as low as the mega-corps like Home Depot, Costco, Walmart, etc who have far more clout than companies like Telus. *The Telus grab for 1.5% however seems well over the top unless the bulk of their customers are on premium cards. CRTC may well 'constrain' that amount when they finally decide by circa December (latest info on that matter). Regardless, I just switched to pre-authorized debit for my Telus mobile account.


 ... well, there you go.

Just say hypothetically, Telus' merchant fee is .92% but now they want to 'surcharge' their cc users 1.5%, aren't they making EXTRA money then? If that's not greed, then I don't know what it is.

The impact is greatest on the smaller merchants/businesses and it wouldn't surprise me that these merchants are dinged 2.4% as the lowest charge, if not gouged mored so they need to pass it onto the customers. And why are merchants being dinged 2.4% by the credit card issuers so the customers can give the credit cards issuers the business (and not just supporting the small business), just for the privilege of a 21 days grace period with a potential 25% penalty that compounds monthly aka interest on top of interest? Now if that's not SUPER-GREED, then what is it?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> Just say hypothetically, Telus' merchant fee is .92% but now they want to 'surcharge' their cc users 1.5%, aren't they making EXTRA money then? If that's not greed, then I don't know what it is.


And don't forget the consumers that get 3% cash back ... talk about greedy!


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Whether Telus qualifies for lowest rate or not only applies at the vanilla card level. They would not get away with the low rates on premium cards. Think about it. Why would a premium Capital One card charge Telus only 0.92% on that premium card transaction and give the consumer 2% cashback on the premium card? Credit card issuers are not going to be 'cash in red'.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> And don't forget the consumers that get 3% cash back ... talk about greedy!


 ... are you saying all their customers 1. paid by cc, especially premiums ones, and 2. Telus is losing money over that 3% cashback, spread amongst their customers? WOEFUL me crxp. 

I would believe you 110% if you say the 3% cashback will now put a dent on their executives' annual bonus INCREASE. Economists have stated (predicted that) wages are going up by about 5% on average for 2023 with or without a recession.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

None of us know what range of interchange rates Telus pays, and in what proportion between vanilla, premium and ultra-premium cards. A hint might be their request to CRTC for 1.5% as a weighted average of their historical interchange rate burden. Obviously CRTC would not let Telus make a profit out of a 1.5% interchange rate applied across all of their credit card paying customers. 

The bigger risk for Telus is vanilla card credit card holders who might get very little in the way of credit card rewards switch to debit and the premium card holders continue with Telus at 1.5% if they are getting 2-3% back in cash rewards. That increases the aggregated interchange rate burden per transaction to Telus.

Regardless, as some of us have said, if the regulator had the gonads to simply regulate interchange rates like are done in Europe and elsewhere, it would reduce the burden on merchants and perhaps send all those premium cards to the dust bin. That would have been the proper solution.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I have a small business account, the discounts are pathetic.
> Also it's a bit of a circular problem.
> 
> It's hard to sell $20-30 items if shipping is $20-30


At scale, for smaller items, Canada Post is ~$5 for local deliveries and 10-15 for cross-country. And as you get bigger you can utilize zone skipping to use local shipping rates across the board.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Take my example of a 1/4lb book, Amazon charges $4.04 to pick, box, address and ship.
> Canada Post charges $20 + 30% fuel surcharge, so about $26, and you have to do the packaging.
> 
> $26 vs $4, excluding your payment fees.


You can't really compare that way. The pricing you are looking at is if you also sell on Amazon's marketplace and pay them a referral fee. Customers may bundle that item with other items to spread Amazon's delivery cost. They have multichannel fulfillment rate card which is more comparable.

Amazon is still cheaper, but the difference is that that dramatic vs other major retailer's cost.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> ... are you saying all their customers 1. paid by cc, especially premiums ones, and 2. Telus is losing money over that 3% cashback, spread amongst their customers?


Hypothetically, yes. 



Beaver101 said:


> I would believe you 110% if you say the 3% cashback will now put a dent on their executives' annual bonus INCREASE.


As a shareholder I don't mind them cutting expenses, even as silly as this one is.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> You can't really compare that way.


I just did.



> The pricing you are looking at is if you also sell on Amazon's marketplace and pay them a referral fee. Customers may bundle that item with other items to spread Amazon's delivery cost. They have multichannel fulfillment rate card which is more comparable.


Sure there is a referral fee, which still doesn't cover the difference.



> Amazon is still cheaper, but the difference is that that dramatic vs other major retailer's cost.


Amazon is cheaper, and it is that dramatic vs small business.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Hypothetically, yes.
> 
> 
> *As a shareholder* I don't mind them cutting expenses, even as silly as this one is.


 ... figures.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> None of us know what range of interchange rates Telus pays, and in what proportion between vanilla, premium and ultra-premium cards. A hint might be their request to CRTC for 1.5% as a weighted average of their historical interchange rate burden. Obviously CRTC would not let Telus make a profit out of a 1.5% interchange rate applied across all of their credit card paying customers.
> 
> The bigger risk for Telus is vanilla card credit card holders who might get very little in the way of credit card rewards switch to debit and the premium card holders continue with Telus at 1.5% if they are getting 2-3% back in cash rewards. That increases the aggregated interchange rate burden per transaction to Telus.
> 
> *Regardless, as some of us have said, if the regulator had the gonads to simply regulate interchange rates like are done in Europe and elsewhere,* it would reduce the burden on merchants and perhaps send all those premium cards to the dust bin. That would have been the proper solution.


 ... but the shareholders are gonna to be screaming "bloody murder!!!!" with the "extra unnecessary" regulations on the freemarket!!!! Plus a reduction, if not a cut on their dividends (never mind about the share price)!!!!


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

I got an email from Wealthsimple yesterday telling me that their Visa, because it is a prepaid card, won't be subject to these processing fees, and will still give 1% cash back. Not bad!


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... but the shareholders are gonna to be screaming "bloody murder!!!!" with the "extra unnecessary" regulations on the freemarket!!!! Plus a reduction, if not a cut on their dividends (never mind about the share price)!!!!


That, of course, is mostly a US ideology, copied by Canada....which is the appendix to US capital market behaviour. Most of the world sees fit to put some limits on such behaviour, especially on duopolies and the like (Visa, MasterCard, Amex). Applying regulatory limits should actually improve the bottom lines (and share prices) of most retail businesses, e.g. Walmart, Starbucks et al that suffer the burden of interchange fees.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Applying regulatory limits? Says who? 

It'll be interesting (or likely not surprised with a "yes, go ahead") to see what the "CRTC " says on Telus' request:

CRTC still weighing Telus’ request to introduce credit card fee


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

What I said up thread is CRTC is unlikely to let Telus make a profit on credit card processing fees. Either Telus can demonstrate their historical track record is 1.5% or higher interchange fees and get the CRTC to agree, or CRTC will push that number down so that Telus makes no profit off the 1.5% (or more likely at 1.4% or lower) per the proposed standard. It is also possible CRTC may deny the request altogether except CRTC has little in the way of gonads.

FWIW, the 1.4% most likely didn't come out of thin air. Ottawa would have gathered information to determine the weighted average of all interchange fees is 1.4% or higher on Canadian business and will thus permit businesses to impose up to 1.4% surcharge on customers. Some businesses may slightly win with their own average being slightly lower, and some will slightly not cover their interchange costs at 1.4%.

The methodology is still dysfunctional though. It may p*ss off customers enough that they will turn in their vanilla cards for premium cards, i.e. if I am going to pay a 1.4% surcharge at the cash register, then I want 2% cash back.I just might do that myself. Trust the powers to be to really muck it all up. It would have been much better to do what I suggested in post #181. Apply regulatory limits as per Europe, etc.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ WHO apply regulatory limits - to the credit card issuers (the banks mostly)?


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> Just say hypothetically, Telus' merchant fee is .92%


I don't think that can be right at all. I am looking at a comparison of cash-back cards on offer and they offer 2% to 4% refund on recurring payments.









15 Best Cash Back Credit Cards in Canada for 2023 - NerdWallet


The best cash-back credit cards in Canada deliver high earn rates, multiple rewards catefories and premium perks.




www.nerdwallet.com





These are all just being passed through to the payee, plus a markup from the issuer.


BMO CashBack World Elite Mastercard -- 2% on recurring bills 
Scotia Momentum Visa Infinite Card -- 4% for recurring bill payments
CIBC Dividend Visa Infinite Card -- 4% on recurring payments
Simplii Financial Cash Back Visa Card -- 1.5% on pre-authorized payments
Tangerine Money-Back Credit Card -- 2% on recurring bill payments
Meridian Visa Infinite Cash Back Card -- 2% on utility bill payments


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ WHO apply regulatory limits - to the credit card issuers (the banks mostly)?


Try google for the answers? To save you time, the name on the front of the card, e.g. BMO, Capital One, etc are the ones receiving most of the interchange fees (net of whatever Visa, MC et al receive in this contractual relationship). Government would need to step in to impose a ceiling on such fees and they would do it through Visa, MC, Amex et al where interchange fees are actually set. I have previously provided links to what these tiers of interchange fees are for each of Visa and MC.

Interchange fees are not all profit, net of administrative costs to administer customer accounts and pay out customer benefits. They need to cover the 'float' between between payments to merchants and customers paying their credit card bills plus the costs of fraud. OTOH, credit card issuers also make good money off those not paying off their balances each month. It is obviously still a lucrative business, at least as long as Visa, MC and Amex et al can set the tiers of interchange fees.

Add: @gardner It is these tiers of cash back that are responsible for outrageous interchange fees in Canada. Remember there are plenty of limitations on these advertised cashback percentages. Up to a certain annual dollar volume, depending on whether the sun rises in the west or east, etc. Still, I would fully support the demise of all these premium cards, or at least severely constrain them.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> I don't think that can be right at all. I am looking at a comparison of cash-back cards on offer and they offer 2% to 4% refund on recurring payments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 ... then what do you think is the right percentage charged/skimmed off Telus' profits when their customers uses their cashback cards? 2%, 4%? 

AltaRed has told us Telus has informed their customers a 1.5% will be surcharged on the bills of their customers who uses their cc as payment. 

Do you seriously believe Telus' interchange fees is 1.5%? I don't. That's like saying Telus has never negotiated as a dummied corp. aka BS in short.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> Try google for the answers? To save you time, the name on the front of the card, e.g. BMO, Capital One, etc are the ones receiving most of the interchange fees (net of whatever Visa, MC et al receive in this contractual relationship). Government would need to step in to impose a ceiling on such fees and they would do it through Visa, MC, Amex et al where interchange fees are actually set. I have previously provided links to what these tiers of interchange fees are for each of Visa and MC.
> 
> Interchange fees are not all profit, net of administrative costs to administer customer accounts and pay out customer benefits. They need to cover the 'float' between between payments to merchants and customers paying their credit card bills plus the costs of fraud. OTOH, credit card issuers also make good money off those not paying off their balances each month. It is obviously still a lucrative business, at least as long as Visa, MC and Amex et al can set the tiers of interchange fees.


 ... it's going to be profitable for the business when the surcharge on the customers exceed the interchange fees for the business. And Telus is one fine example of that. Surcharge of 1.5% (as announced). What's their interchange fee? 1.5% would be considered neutral and fair. And I don't think their interchange fee is anywhere close to 1.5%. I took .92% as the lowest and I can bet it's even lower than that.



> Add: @gardner It is these tiers of cash back that are responsible for outrageous interchange fees in Canada. Remember there are plenty of limitations on these advertised cashback percentages. Up to a certain annual dollar volume, depending on whether the sun rises in the west or east, etc. Still, I would fully support the demise of all these premium cards, or at least severely constrain them.


 ... how? and by whom? The government ... on what basis? Screaming consumers? Can't be screaming card issuers out to make a buck or millions of those.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

^You appear to not have read the links I have previously provided on interchange fee rates (tiers).

Telus average interchange fee is almost certainly over 1% and most likely right in the range of 1.5%, i.e. the rate they are seeking approval from CRTC for. The PR would be exceptionally bad if they were found out trying to profit from this.

I have no more time to provide more information to you. Try to google for easily found links for yourself.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> ^You appear to not have read the links I have previously provided on interchange fee rates (tiers).
> 
> Telus average interchange fee is almost certainly over 1% and most likely right in the range of 1.5%, i.e. the rate they are seeking approval from CRTC for. The PR would be exceptionally bad if they were found out trying to profit from this.
> 
> I have no more time to provide more information to you. Try to google for easily found links for yourself.


 ... yes, I have "read" aka quickly glanced at the link of interchange fees rates. And took the lowest number there as .92%. 

If you really to believe Telus is paying a 1.5% interchange fee, then Walmart, Home Depot, etc. must be paying at least .92%. And do you believe that?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> ... it's going to be profitable for the business when the surcharge on the customers exceed the interchange fees for the business. And Telus is one fine example of that. Surcharge of 1.5% (as announced). What's their interchange fee? 1.5% would be considered neutral and fair. And I don't think their interchange fee is anywhere close to 1.5%. I took .92% as the lowest and I can bet it's even lower than that.


You'd better send a letter to the CRTC right away so they don't get suckered into this scheme! Don't forget to include your hypothetical numbers as the reason.

Of course if you think the CRTC is in on it (like getting a kickback) ... then nevermind.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> on what basis? Screaming consumers?


For the past dozen years or more, it has been screaming small businesses. I expect the Visa/MC settlement to lead to some government review and for the initial regulatory framework to simply ensure transparency about fees, surcharges and whatever other costs and fiddles are in the system. Daylight can then take on its disinfecting effect.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

gardner said:


> For the past dozen years or more, it has been screaming small businesses. I expect the Visa/MC settlement to lead to some government review and for the initial regulatory framework to simply ensure transparency about fees, surcharges and whatever other costs and fiddles are in the system. Daylight can then take on its disinfecting effect.


Should be transparency on exchange fees as well

US banks have been penalized for this many times however the penalties are much less than the profits anyways

Consumers are complacent sheep


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

cainvest said:


> You'd better send a letter to the CRTC right away so they don't get suckered into this scheme! Don't forget to include your hypothetical numbers as the reason.


 ... why? Only you would think those at CRTC would work for free like you do.



> Of course if you think the CRTC is in on it (like getting a kickback) ... then nevermind.


 ... again, why? Why would they need a kickback that "you" "think" or came up with? Ever heard of bed partners? Just like being a Telus shareholder in favour of a surcharge. I mean if you feel your dividends are too low as the surcharge, then suggest you make a recommendation to them to increase it more than 1.5%. For sure your annual dividends will increase an additional 5% comes next year. better yet, tell them to increase it to 30% and you can get back your dividends with a 25% yield. I'm neither a Telus shareholder nor a customer. Never have been one, and never will be one.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> For the past dozen years or more, it has been screaming small businesses. I expect the Visa/MC settlement to lead to some government review and for the initial regulatory framework to simply ensure transparency about fees, surcharges and whatever other costs and fiddles are in the system. Daylight can then take on its disinfecting effect.


 ... you can expect all you want in regulation of the cc issuers since the screaming small businesses has lost their court case. And what's wrong with small businesses screaming, if you were one?


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> I'm neither a Telus shareholder nor a customer. Never have been one, and never will be one.


Why not?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> I'm neither a Telus shareholder nor a customer. Never have been one, and never will be one.


Why wouldn't you be a Telus shareholder? The only reason I'm not is lack of funds.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> Why not?


 ... why should I be? Got no other places to invest my monies? And no other places to give my business to?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Toronto restaurant getting bombed with one-star reviews for credit card surcharges


A Toronto sweets shop and restaurant has come under fire for something lots of businesses are doing right now: passing on credit card surcharge fee...




www.blogto.com


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Toronto restaurant getting bombed with one-star reviews for credit card surcharges
> 
> 
> A Toronto sweets shop and restaurant has come under fire for something lots of businesses are doing right now: passing on credit card surcharge fee...
> ...


 ... that's just the tip of the ice-berg. The small businesses are just gonna to kill themselves by doing that. But for large corporations like Telus, it's just plain SUPER-GREED.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Not sure exactly where to put this - it could go into the Inflation thread as Europe businesses supposedly do not surcharge their credit cards users. 

But then now it's different kind of surcharge:

Belgian restaurant chain asks customers to pay one euro per head to help pay energy bills

Article is behind a paywall but title tells what it is about. 

Anyone heading out there (Belgium first) for a vacation? Be warned or pack your own lunch.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Ottawa to regulate credit-card fees if financial industry refuses to lower costs for small businesses

I guess the banks and financial industry can't handle (or more like don't want to damper its lucrative cc business), then the government has to step in... clearly in the right step if it can't self-govern, then intervention is needed ... LMAO.

Above article is behind a paywall, however, within it states


> _By Hannay, Chris, The Globe and Mail. Nov 3, 2022
> 
> ...
> Reducing credit-card transaction fees has been a long-standing demand from business groups. Successive negotiations from Conservative and Liberal governments have pushed the credit-card companies to lower their charges in such a way that the* average interchange fee is now 1.4 per* cent of each transaction.* Small businesses tend to pay a rate above the average, while large merchants pay less.*
> ...


 ... now if that .1% extra (on the assumption its interchange fee is an "average" which I believe is much lower than that!) is not evidence of *greed (or profiting)* by Telus, then I don't know what it is.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

In other news Telus raised its dividend 7% today.  
One thing that has puzzled me about fees in general as a %. Why does it cost more to process a $1000 transaction in comparison to a $10 transaction?


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

londoncalling said:


> In other news Telus raised its dividend 7% today.
> One thing that has puzzled me about fees in general as a %. Why does it cost more to process a $1000 transaction in comparison to a $10 transaction?


Same reason RE agents do

Meanwhile the lawyer is a fixed fee


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

londoncalling said:


> In other news Telus raised its dividend 7% today.
> One thing that has puzzled me about fees in general as a %. Why does it cost more to process a $1000 transaction in comparison to a $10 transaction?


Some of the costs/perks are proportional to transaction size, such as fraud protection, extended warranty, etc.

I'd rather the fed govt swung the hammer down hard and just declared that CC interchange fees be capped at 0.25%. CC issuers would then have to rethink their business models, largely scrapping dubious points and frills and adding annual fees for most cards.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

I have CCs that issue rewards and cash back every year. I use those CCs for all my purchases which generates 25-30x the annual fee in cashback rewards. That doesn't even include the fraud protection and extended warranty bonuses which I have used both in the past. I would gladly trade those perks for lower prices at the cash register with capped interchange fees.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

londoncalling said:


> In other news Telus raised its dividend 7% today.


Remember though, these dividends are very destructive to the share price when stocks are so low. It's like a forced selling event and takes a huge chunk.

In the case of T for example, at a share price of $28.70, the dividend will knock the share price down to $28.35 immediately, eroding the holding.

They're just as destructive as selling shares when a stock is depressed. If you don't need the cash from the dividend, it's best to reinvest it by immediately buying shares (either Telus or something else like XIC).


----------



## Gator13 (Jan 5, 2020)

james4beach said:


> Remember though, these dividends are very destructive to the share price when stocks are so low. It's like a forced selling event and takes a huge chunk.
> 
> In the case of T for example, at a share price of $28.70, the dividend will knock the share price down to $28.35 immediately, eroding the holding.
> 
> They're just as destructive as selling shares when a stock is depressed. If you don't need the cash from the dividend, it's best to reinvest it by immediately buying shares (either Telus or something else like XIC).


Yes, dividend payments reduce the book value of the company, but a stable dividend can actually increase the demand for the shares and henceforth increase the share price. Cash from dividends can be used to rebalance or for income to live on.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

I am not disputing that dividend payments decrease the share price temporarily. However, it has been proven that dividend payers (especially dividend growers) outperform non dividend payers. The link below is a bit dated 2017 but does a great job in explaining how dividend stocks help improve total return. 

Long Term Performance of Dividend-Paying Stocks - Dividend.com


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Deja-vu?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

*CRTC rejects Telus application to charge credit card fee on some customer bills*





__





Loading…






www.cbc.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ From within that article, it stated:




> * ... Regulator not happy with fees *





> _... The telecom regulator sought input from the public on the plan,* and more than 4,000 Canadians wrote in to share their views. The vast majority were against the plan.*
> 
> So the CRTC rejected the fee request, but Telus still has carte blanche to levy the surcharge on bills for other services.
> 
> ...


 ... hear that Bell and Rogers!!!! Don't be like an idiot like Telus - being the first greedy bastardd. Glad I'm not a Telus shareholder, nor BCE nor Rogers.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

That is a good thing but what we really need is a Canadian law that prohibits credit card interchange fees exceeding some more reasonable value such as 0.5% or so like a number of countries already impose. It will cause platinum and premium cards to either disappear or reduce benefit levels drastically but that is a good thing too. The privileged do not need a gravy train on the backs of the average Canadian.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> That is a good thing but what we really need is a Canadian law that prohibits credit card interchange fees exceeding some more reasonable value such as 0.5% or so like a number of countries already impose. It will cause platinum and premium cards to either disappear or reduce benefit levels drastically but that is a good thing too. The privileged do not need a gravy train on the backs of the average Canadian.


I think prohibiting anticompetitive clauses like "equal pricing for all methods" would be good.
Though I imagine a flood of retailer specific cards.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> That is a good thing but what we really need is a Canadian law that prohibits credit card interchange fees exceeding some more reasonable value such as 0.5% or so like a number of countries already impose.


I agree very much, despite that I obtain a good share of my income from bank dividends. The credit card fees are getting out of hand and I think they could be one of the drivers of inflation as retailers are forced to recover the spiralling cost of payment systems.



MrMatt said:


> I think prohibiting anticompetitive clauses like "equal pricing for all methods" would be good.
> Though I imagine a flood of retailer specific cards.


Yes. The win that gave Telus the ability to charge back fees also is a good one. Basically the issue has to become a friction point for average consumers such that they can see what the credit card fees actually cost them. If more businesses gave cash discounts, I think that would help a lot.

With such large and powerful lobbies as the big banks in the game, there will be no incentive to regulate until the issue starts to become a visible chafing point for the average consumer. You can see signs of stress when Walmart and Costco go to battle with the credit card companies, but that is all too quiet and behind the scenes. Maybe Telus, and if a few others join in, average folks will take notice of the issue.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

Returning to cash is not a realistic goal. There is no appetite to return to carrying a bunch of cash around. Bank fees although less intense are still an unnecessary fee. However, removing the ridiculous fees merchants have to carry and pass along to customers need to be corrected. Unfortunately the masses are too financially illiterate to understand the concept. Gamification of spending (points) rules the economy!


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

londoncalling said:


> Returning to cash is not a realistic goal. There is no appetite to return to carrying a bunch of cash around.


 ... we are already living in a "plastic" society though comes next year, most retailers (particularly supermarkets) will not be supplying its customers with plastic bags for the convenience. And I can't wait for the ban on single-use plastics though. 

Since cash is unrealistic, then how about BTCs and the likes? I think those alternative (if not artificial)-currency pushers would be delighted if this came to fruition.



> Bank fees although less intense are still an unnecessary fee.


 ... I'm not sure forum member Money##### is gonna to be pleased to hear this.



> However, removing the ridiculous fees merchants have to carry and pass along to customers need to be corrected.


 ... isn't this being done by CRTC now?



> Unfortunately the masses are too financially illiterate to understand the concept. Gamification of spending (points) rules the economy!


 ... I think the "understanding" of the masses (including you and I) would depend on where they stand in that game. Regardless the consumers are the customers and they dictate in this game.


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... we are already living in a "plastic" society though comes next year, most retailers (particularly supermarkets) will not be supplying its customers with plastic bags for the convenience. And I can't wait for the ban on single-use plastics though.


The ban in my area seems to have had the opposite effect. People are forgetting their shopping bags in droves. It's cold out. No one wants to go back to their vehicles for a few dollars for more bags in-store. We have at least 30 bags here. I give them away, we have so many. I often hear at the tills as well that so and so forgot their bags, so they buy more. 

Meanwhile, I've always found uses for the 'single use' plastic shopping bags, such as using them for garbage bags in my smaller garbage cans. Now I have to buy boxes of plastic bags to put in there, rather than re-use my 'single use' plastic bags. (I also think it's hilarious that they're called 'single use', when growing up, every household had a giant stack of 'single use' bags in a closet - to be reused).

We find ourselves buying more plastic bags now that they've introduced the 'single use' bag ban. Now groceries cost me more and I have the cost of boxes of plastic garbage bags. I guess I could buy paper bags and contribute to more deforestation. 



Beaver101 said:


> ... I think the "understanding" of the masses (including you and I) would depend on where they stand in that game. Regardless the consumers are the customers and they dictate in this game.


If that were only the case. Sky high interest rates, fees... If consumers dictate the game, I'm questioning why they've set interest rates so high.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I wish more grocery stores would leave the empty cardboard boxes from their goods at the front of the store. I remember one grocer used to do it…can’t remember who it was.

maybe they sell the cardboard to Recyclers?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Jericho said:


> The ban in my area seems to have had the opposite effect. People are forgetting their shopping bags in droves. It's cold out. No one wants to go back to their vehicles for a few dollars for more bags in-store. We have at least 30 bags here. I give them away, we have so many. I often hear at the tills as well that so and so forgot their bags, so they buy more.


 ... if you can save 30 bags or so many that you have to give away, then why can't your fellow shoppers do the same instead of you excusing their 1. short term memory, and 2. the horrible inconvenience of having to go back to their cars as it was so cold having to drive there? Did they not get seat and steering wheels heaters for their autos where their digits and butts were freezing off? How did other (no autos) shoppers get to the store? Fly?



> Meanwhile, I've always found uses for the 'single use' plastic shopping bags, such as using them for garbage bags in my smaller garbage cans. Now I have to buy boxes of plastic bags to put in there, rather than re-use my 'single use' plastic bags. (I also think it's hilarious that they're called 'single use', when growing up, every household had a giant stack of 'single use' bags in a closet - to be reused).
> 
> We find ourselves buying more plastic bags now that they've introduced the 'single use' bag ban. Now groceries cost me more and I have the cost of boxes of plastic garbage bags. I guess I could buy paper bags and contribute to more deforestation.


 ... same goes with your fellow shoppers. Can't they re-use those bags as garbage bags like you do? You're complaining on their behalf now 'cause you have to "buy" them garbage bags. So I'm presuming the stores in your area weren't charging for them single-use plastic bags unlike Toronto where it has been a nickel + tax! each if you want one for the past 5 years (if not more)! And no you don't have to buy paper bags and contribute to "speedy" deforestation. [Deforestation is gonna to happen even you don't use paper bags as you would need "wood" for housing, no?] You buy one of those "reusable" bags (you know those 99c ones) and "re-use" them. Or you make your own cloth bags like I do and use these, time over and over and over and over ... again. Keep them clean and fold them nicely. If you can't keep them by your bed side, you can definitely keep them right next to your shoes or boots at the front door so you definitely won't forget them! Btw, that's a free tip that I normally do not give as I couldn't care what someone else does.



> If that were only the case. Sky high interest rates, fees... If consumers dictate the game, I'm questioning why they've set interest rates so high.


 ... you ask Tiff over at BOC why they set the interest rates so "high" which were loooonnggg/waaaaay over due IMO.

Interest rates set by the BOC has nothing to do with Telus profiting on their interchange fees here. And yes, consumers aka the "customers" dictate the game on how much a business gets. Consumers don't control BOC interest rates. And it's tough that house-flippers are getting the flip with "high" interest rates (but not sky-high enough I say!). Businesses and the economy always work in a cycle.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> I wish more grocery stores would leave the empty cardboard boxes from their goods at the front of the store. I remember one grocer used to do it…can’t remember who it was.
> 
> maybe they sell the cardboard to Recyclers?


 ... noFrills I believe was the first. Could be they're selling them to the recyclers or reusing themselves or maybe it's became an eye-sore or making the supermarkets looking/messy. I never buy their supposedly "sturdy" yellow plastic bags. My response is always a "no bag, I don't need one". And if the cashier insists, how about I sell you some of my bags?


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... if you can save 30 bags or so many that you have to give away, then why can't your fellow shoppers do the same instead of you excusing their 1. short term memory, and 2. the horrible inconvenience of having to go back to their cars as it was so cold having to drive there? Did they not get seat and steering wheels heaters for their autos where their digits and butts were freezing off? How did other (no autos) shoppers get to the store? Fly?
> 
> ... same goes with your fellow shoppers. Can't they re-use those bags as garbage bags like you do? You're complaining on their behalf now 'cause you have to "buy" them garbage bags. So I'm presuming the stores in your area weren't charging for them single-use plastic bags unlike Toronto where it has been a nickel + tax! each if you want one for the past 5 years (if not more)! And no you don't have to buy paper bags and contribute to "speedy" deforestation. [Deforestation is gonna to happen even you don't use paper bags as you would need "wood" for housing, no?] You buy one of those "reusable" bags (you know those 99c ones) and "re-use" them. Or you make your own cloth bags like I do and use these, time over and over and over and over ... again. Keep them clean and fold them nicely. If you can't keep them by your bed side, you can definitely keep them right next to your shoes or boots at the front door so you definitely won't forget them! Btw, that's a free tip that I normally do not give as I couldn't care what someone else does.
> 
> ...


People don't always do as they should. Most won't abandon a cart with 45 mins of time spent picking out items, holding up a line, to run to their car however far it is, when there are bags at the cash for a dollar a piece. Should they remember their bags? Yeah. But humans are humans, people forget. I've brought this up at the till a few times with cashiers and they've told me that they sell tons of 'reusable' bags daily and it isn't slacking. 

As for Toronto, I'm not surprised. I already avoid Toronto like the plague.

With regards to interest, I was referring to credit card interest. I am of the opinion that if these companies can be as profitable as they are, there should be no cost to the merchant for the service, which in turn shouldn't be passed on to the consumer. I wasn't referring to the BOC interest rate. 

Customers have very little control in an oligopoly. For example, we have have among the highest wireless rates in the world and our telcos are profiting quite well. 

I appreciate the tip, but for someone who doesn't care about what others do, I'm confused as to why you also comment on what others should do.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Jericho said:


> People don't always do as they should. Most won't abandon a cart with 45 mins of time spent picking out items, holding up a line, to run to their car however far it is, when there are bags at the cash for a dollar a piece. Should they remember their bags? Yeah. But humans are humans, people forget. I've brought this up at the till a few times with cashiers and they've told me that they sell tons of 'reusable' bags daily and it isn't slacking.


 ... yes, humans are humans and yes they forget. But let's not make it habitual justifying an excuse. The "oops I did it again!" line, only it's waaay past the 3rd time! I hope you get that after a 3rd time, it's a strike-out?



> As for Toronto, I'm not surprised. I already avoid Toronto like the plague.


 ... good! It's already too congested with everything other than the good stuffs like people, traffic, crime, etc. And funny enough, "people" are so "attracted" to this "plague". I don't see population or density of anything declining over the past decades in Toronto. And I have lived here for decades!



> With regards to interest, I was referring to credit card interest. I am of the opinion that if these companies can be as profitable as they are, *there should be no cost to the merchant for the service,* which in turn shouldn't be passed on to the consumer. I wasn't referring to the BOC interest rate.


 ... you're so funny. First, I'm surprised you haven't been verbally whacked with the first sentence, especially by those working or invested in the financial fields (eg. banks, credit unions, etc and shareholders.) And now with the second sentence, especially with the bolding. Are you expected to work for free? I hope you do realize you live in a capitalist society. In fact, the entire world is going that direction. It's now beyond a dog eating dog world.



> Customers have very little control in an oligopoly. For example, we have have among the highest wireless rates in the world and our telcos are profiting quite well.


 ... we all know that (just look at the shareholders) but for Telus to impose a "1.5%" surcharge on its customers using credit cards, don't you think that's being SUPER-GREEDY? If Telus isn't actually "profiting" in this arena, then it should reveal EXACTLY what its interchange/merchant fees are. I bet dollars for donuts it's not even remotely close to 1%, let alone one point five percent.



> I appreciate the tip, but for someone who doesn't care about what others do, I'm confused as to why you also comment on what others should do.


 ... so what is it that I commented that "others should do" other than offer a free tip there? And the fact that you're justifying an excuse of habitual inconvenience to its customers that merchants are not providing its customers with (free) plastic bags. So how long do you think these single-use bags be provided for? Perpetually? Do you realize just how polluted our oceans are already with plastics? Also, it wouldn't surprised me that the merchants are profiting from the sale of these bags (free for you though) and does that not bother you re what you just elaborated above?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I actually recently converted back to using reusable bags. One thing I noticed is that I need far fewer. One reusable bag replaces 3-4 single use bags. I only have a few. It is annoying to put them in my trunk--I wish there were a better way of organizing them there. But overall, I am kind of okay with it.

I find the whole banning of single use items kind of random. There will still be tonnes of single use plastic created, just not the specific list of banned items. I think there are times when single use bags are appropriate, maybe just make the cost steeper (say 25 cents) so that people avoid doing it.


----------



## HappilyRetired (Nov 14, 2021)

Garbage bags are single use.
Cat litter bags are single use.
Clear produce bags are single use.

Grocery bags can be used several times.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I actually recently converted back to using reusable bags. One thing I noticed is that I need far fewer. One reusable bag replaces 3-4 single use bags. I only have a few. It is annoying to put them in my trunk--I wish there were a better way of organizing them there. But overall, I am kind of okay with it.
> 
> I find the whole banning of single use items kind of random. There will still be tonnes of single use plastic created, just not the specific list of banned items. I think there are times when single use bags are appropriate, *maybe just make the cost steeper (say 25 cents) so that people avoid doing it.*


 .. now that's a thought. Cashier asks "wanna bag?", "25c each plus tax please". I would like to see how many people would go for that ... the quarters add up - might was well buy or bring your own bag/box or whatever. I would agree single-use bags was appropriate - when it's free for as garbage bags. 

Anyhow, retailers are getting rid of them in the new year if not earlier so no use crying (or swearing at the cashier) for your attempt to carry out 10 cans of beans with your 2 bare hands ... LMAO.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

We spend 5 minutes bagging our groceries at the powered lid of our SUV where all our reusable bags are. Less aggravation and to us worth the time. A lot less wear and tear on the bags too. And zero guesswork on the number needed.


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... yes, humans are humans and yes they forget. But let's not make it habitual justifying an excuse. The "oops I did it again!" line, only it's waaay past the 3rd time! I hope you get that after a 3rd time, it's a strike-out?
> 
> ... good! It's already too congested with everything other than the good stuffs like people, traffic, crime, etc. And funny enough, "people" are so "attracted" to this "plague". I don't see population or density of anything declining over the past decades in Toronto. And I have lived here for decades!
> 
> ...


Yes, I believe CC companies with enormous profits should not be charging merchant fees. If you don't, then great. 



https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/walmart-reusable-bags-plastic-ban-1.6687315



Maybe there's something to my hunch after all. I believe that some studies on the ban are required before we can ascertain whether the ban had a positive or negative effect on the environment.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Somewhat related….most, if not all, the gas stations I used in the US driving to Florida have a “credit” price and a “cash” price. The cash price was about 10 cents a gallon lower.

wonder why we haven’t seen this in Canada. Not sure I understand the economics of the cash discount. as a former banker, I know handling cash is time consuming and expensive for business owners.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Somewhat related….most, if not all, the gas stations I used in the US driving to Florida have a “credit” price and a “cash” price. The cash price was about 10 cents a gallon lower.
> 
> wonder why we haven’t seen this in Canada. Not sure I understand the economics of the cash discount. as a former banker, I know handling cash is time consuming and expensive for business owners.


Because the credit card processing agreements prohibit such fees/discounts. This is why the settlement happened.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Money172375 said:


> Somewhat related….most, if not all, the gas stations I used in the US driving to Florida have a “credit” price and a “cash” price. The cash price was about 10 cents a gallon lower.
> 
> wonder why we haven’t seen this in Canada. Not sure I understand the economics of the cash discount. as a former banker, I know handling cash is time consuming and expensive for business owners.


Even if CC companies were not making massive profts, the business model of charging businesses high fees to subsidize dubious-value CC perks is overall destructive of value. CCs are useful in the economy for building trust. Ideally, merchant fees would be regulated to be low enough that CC perks essentially disappear and most cards have an annual fee.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Even if CC companies were not making massive profts, the business model of charging businesses high fees to subsidize dubious-value CC perks is overall destructive of value. CCs are useful in the economy for building trust. Ideally, merchant fees would be regulated to be low enough that CC perks essentially disappear and most cards have an annual fee.


Honestly that's what should have happened.
It's quite expensive to actually handle physical cash, if the credit card companies kept their fees low, ie less than the cost of cash, there would be very little impetus to look at other solutions.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Jericho said:


> Yes, I believe CC companies with enormous profits should not be charging merchant fees. If you don't, then great.


 ... how do you define "enormous" profits? The CC companies would be crying foul that they are barely profitable if they weren't owned by the banks. Let's be realistic, you wouldn't be expecting employees of the CC companies (aka the banks too) to be working for free? Would you even though I love your idea that they shouldn't be charging merchant fees. Somebody has to pay for those plastics, the marketing, the administration, the executives' bonuses, etc. which will either be the customers or the merchants or both.



> https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/walmart-reusable-bags-plastic-ban-1.6687315
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe there's something to my hunch after all. I believe that some studies on the ban are required before we can ascertain whether the ban had a positive or negative effect on the environment.


 ... the couple in this story about accumulating 300 re-usuable bags only indicates 1. they are (super) lazy people, and 2. shopping at a store that is just as lazily innovative if not predatory at they are. Walmart wanted to make extra profits on these 2 doozies and they fell for it in the disguise of another problem (reusable bags) replacing single use bags. 

Since the customers are always right - then why can't the executives at Walmart use their heads for once? Can they not follow other merchants (eg. in the latter part of the article) with workable solutions (eg. clean cardboard boxes) instead of being so thick-headed?


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> 1. they are (super) lazy people, and 2. shopping at a store that is just as lazily innovative if not predatory at they are.


<EDITED TO REMOVE> People have various reasons for doing principally on-line delivery grocery shopping. I'm not even sure laziness is one of the main ones.

It is not surprising to me that the main way available to large online vendors to package groceries for delivery is in bags. They may not have enough boxes and fresh/new boxes would likely cost as much as the bags. They certainly can't just load a jumble of items into a van to deliver to 20 different customers. Maybe if they planned a bit better they could have paper bags, but I bet the reusable polypropylene bags are their most economic option. They should probably allow for picking them up again. Maybe if the delivery dude would take a bundle of old ones off you when dropping off the next load or something. But someone would have to look over them before reusing them, else some customer would b**ch about some stinky crap from the bag contaminating their groceries.

EDIT: Happy Christmas.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> Judgemental much? People have various reasons for doing principally on-line delivery grocery shopping. I'm not even sure laziness is one of the main ones.


 ... okay, then tell me which "reason(s)" this couple have for their online grocery delivery other than to prove their principle point of Walmart's sticking to them (aka predatory practice) with the reusable bags? I'm all ears here. Otherwise you take back your judgemental much? comment.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

gardner said:


> Judgemental much? People have various reasons for doing principally on-line delivery grocery shopping. I'm not even sure laziness is one of the main ones.
> 
> It is not surprising to me that the main way available to large online vendors to package groceries for delivery is in bags. They may not have enough boxes and fresh/new boxes would likely cost as much as the bags. They certainly can't just load a jumble of items into a van to deliver to 20 different customers. Maybe if they planned a bit better they could have paper bags, but I bet the reusable polypropylene bags are their most economic option. They should probably allow for picking them up again. Maybe if the delivery dude would take a bundle of old ones off you when dropping off the next load or something. But someone would have to look over them before reusing them, else some customer would b**ch about some stinky crap from the bag contaminating their groceries.


Are they charging for the bags?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

gardner said:


> Judgemental much? People have various reasons for doing principally on-line delivery grocery shopping. I'm not even sure laziness is one of the main ones.
> 
> It is not surprising to me that the main way available to large online vendors to package groceries for delivery is in bags. They may not have enough boxes and fresh/new boxes would likely cost as much as the bags. They certainly can't just load a jumble of items into a van to deliver to 20 different customers. Maybe if they planned a bit better they could have paper bags, but I bet the reusable polypropylene bags are their most economic option. They should probably allow for picking them up again. Maybe if the delivery dude would take a bundle of old ones off you when dropping off the next load or something. But someone would have to look over them before reusing them, else some customer would b**ch about some stinky crap from the bag contaminating their groceries.


The thing is Paper bags are worse for the environment than plastic bags.

I'm finding lots of these "reusable" bags, honestly I see more of them blowing around than the "single use" plastic bags.

The delivery guys don't want to do pickups, and the stores don't want to pay for the return run (I think they outsource to DoorDash here).

Second it's likley a pain to wash and clean the randomly acquired used bags. or they'll risk putting peoples stuff in bags contaminated by previous customers.

A solution could be like the old school milk crates, but I can't imagine the cost of millions of plastic crates in everyones house.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> ... okay, then tell me which "reason(s)" this couple have for their online grocery delivery other than to prove their principle point of Walmart's sticking to them (aka predatory practice) with the reusable bags? I'm all ears here. Otherwise you take back your judgemental much? comment.


Okay, you're off the hook.

But I don't have to know their reasons to extend them the simple decency of allowing that they might have some. All I'm getting at is that it is unfair and possibly inflamatory to ascribe negative or callous intent to these people with no information.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Are they charging for the bags?


 ... it would be EXTREMELY generous of Walmart not to charge those reusable bags that normally cost 99c each (plus tax) when Walmart has been charging a nickel + tax for a plastic bag (at least here in Toronto).

Maybe Walmart has absorbed those costs with the delivery given to this couple where they managed to accumulate 200 to 300(?) of them to "make the point that there's no difference to the environment between single use plastic bags versus multiple use reusable bags" because Walmart uses a "new" reusable bag for each delivery.

And it wouldn't surprised me 6 cans of beans go into 1 resuable bag and another one for a watermelon and another one for 6 apples + 6 bananas and another one for a few pack of steaks and chicken legs and another one for a box of cereal and couple box of cookies and another one ... so they get 10 reusable bag in one delivery x 20 deliveries allow them to accumulate 200 reusable bags. I haven't said yet anything about how "rich" this couple is.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> Okay, you're off the hook.
> 
> But I don't have to know their reasons to extend them the simple decency of allowing that they might have some. All I'm getting at is that it is unfair and possibly inflamatory to ascribe negative or callous intent to these people with no information.


 ... if you don't have to know their reasons to extend them that decency then why are you accusing me of being negative and callous to these people without that information? Moreover, why don't you extend me the decency by not accusing me first? If you have ever read any of previous posts, I have stated that groceries delivery is a god-send for someone that's house-bound. Does it look like this couple was "house-bound" in anyway? And that they needed to "prove their point/principle(?)" other than showing Walmart is predatory in the practice by allowing them to accumulate that many reusable bags 200 to 300. Has it been stated what they are planning to do to stop that insanity? Other than getting their 5 minutes on the front page news?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> The thing is Paper bags are worse for the environment than plastic bags.
> 
> I'm finding lots of these "reusable" bags, honestly I see more of them blowing around than the "single use" plastic bags.


 ... I guess that only happens in your town ... hmmm.... I would love to see 99c bags blown all around in Toronto. Man, some of us could get rich on that.



> The delivery guys don't want to do pickups, and the stores don't want to pay for the return run (I think they outsource to DoorDash here).
> 
> Second it's likley a pain to wash and clean the randomly acquired used bags. or they'll risk putting peoples stuff in bags contaminated by previous customers.
> 
> A solution could be like the old school milk crates, but I can't imagine the cost of millions of plastic crates in everyones house.


... I guess you would know best since 80% of your shopping is done online and delivered to your door, even during non-Covid times.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

Beaver101 said:


> .. if you don't have to know their reasons to extend them that decency then why are you accusing me of being negative and callous to these people without that information?


I questioned whether you might be overly judgmental because you literally said they were very lazy. See:



Beaver101 said:


> ... the couple in this story about accumulating 300 re-usuable bags only indicates 1. they are (super) lazy people


I do not believe I am being unfair to you in this criticism. In my personal JUDGMENT, publicly calling someone lazy without information is being unfair and unnecessarily inflammatory. What the original couple's motivation for delivery shopping at wally-world was is neither here nor there in the story or this sidebar. I hope you can forgive me for perceiving the attribution of laziness to them as somehow a negative interpretation. I will try to do better.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gardner said:


> I questioned whether you might be overly judgmental because you literally said they were very lazy. See:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not believe I am being unfair to you in this criticism. In my personal JUDGMENT, publicly calling someone lazy without information is being unfair and unnecessarily inflammatory. What the original couple's motivation for delivery shopping at wally-world was is neither here nor there in the story or this sidebar. I hope you can forgive me for perceiving the attribution of laziness to them as somehow a negative interpretation. I will try to do better.


 ... I figured being called lazy there (with word "super" for emphasis) is better than being called dumb and stupid only "to prove their point" as if they don't know Walmart is just that. Ie. does nothing to resolve their "concern" for the environment if that was their concern as their point.


----------

