7 ms·

It has always costed money to to spend money and there are pros and cons to each method. All that stuff isn't free even if it isn't directly measurable most of

It has always costed money to to spend money and there are pros and cons to each method. All that stuff isn't free even if it isn't directly measurable most of the time. Cash costs money too--you have to count it, handle it, deposit it, protect it from theft, verify it's authenticity, make sure you have enough change, spend time counting change, etc. As a consumer, if a merchant fucks you over you have little recourse besides suing. Cash takes no time to clear so you can spend it right after getting it, it is anonymous, it is hard to trace so you can skip on taxes, etc. Checks can bounce, you have to deposit them, they take time to clear, they take forever to write, they can be fake, etc. However, it is hard for your cashiers to skim off the top, it uses exact amounts so no change to keep, it is a single slip of paper to carry around instead of a pocket of paper currency, as a consumer you can stop payment on a check if the merchant fucks you over, etc... Credit cards are super quick to use at the register. They don't require any change (unless handing cash back). As a consumer, if a merchant fucks you over you can issue a chargeback. It is easy to track your spending as a consumer because all transactions are recorded electronically. As a merchant you don't have to handle change or cash, your cashiers can't easily skim off the top, etc... It's all trade offs and I'll bet if you did an NPV on all the different methods taking into consideration all their pros and cons, they'd all wind up "costing" similar amounts.

jimmaswell 9y ago
>Credit cards are super quick to use at the register. At least they used to be. Chips ruined that. Now I have to stand there staring at the screen for half a minute waiting to respond to prompts and to pull the card out at the end. For most transactions, cash is probably faster than using a chip.
- jarrettch 9y ago
  It's even worse when your chip starts to fail, as one of my has started to do very recently. You have to put the card in three times(and wait for it to fail 3 times) before you're allowed to use the swipe function. Took longer than cash.
  - jimmaswell 9y ago
    Recently I tried the chip and it failed, then I tried the swipe and it said to use the chip, then I used the chip and it said I had to use the swipe, and finally the swipe worked. First time I ever had a chip fail, and it's a pretty much brand new card, so it was most likely the machine's fault.
    - jjuhl 9y ago
      I don't see the problem. If waiting a little is such a big deal then you are in too much of a hurry already and/or too stressed out. Relax. Take it easy.
- bbarn 9y ago
  Where are you, out of curiousity? I find most of the chips are no slower than using a swipe card was before.
  - jimmaswell 9y ago
    The US
  - btilly 9y ago
    I have the same experience in Orange County. Everyone hates the chip.
  - Miredly 9y ago
    I lived in Spain for a year, and everyone had chips there. My US card always drew eyerolls as they had to find the /old/ machine and dust it off and find someone who remembered how to use it. I was excited that we were getting chips here in the US, but of course they fucked it up and for whatever reason it takes ages for your chip to be read, and there are frequent chip read errors.
  - labster 9y ago
    Chip cards work super-slow in the US. I often pay in cash because it's so much faster. I take the same chip card to the Netherlands and it works in a few seconds.
  - chipotle_coyote 9y ago
    In the US, it depends entirely on the point-of-sale system. Some are just as fast; some are a lot slower. My guess is that the slow ones are using the same old CPUs that the previous "stripe-only" ones did, which just aren't powerful enough to handle the added cryptography requirements in a reasonable amount of time.
- Oletros 9y ago
  I have been used cards with chips for years and now contactless payments and they are a lot quicker than swipping the card. In less than 5 seconds is done At least in Spain
  - aidenn0 9y ago
    I assume spain is chip and pin? In the US it's chip and signature, and you can't sign until after the chip verification (either signing a paper receipt, or with a stylus on the terminal screen). In addition chips are new and some terminals are painfully slow (30 seconds) to verify. I'm not sure I've ever seen one finish in under 5 seconds, though a few merchants have terminals that come close to that.
    - kmonsen 9y ago
      Why can't you though? I feel that is an implementation detail that is leaking out. The machine can do two things at once and only use the signature if the transaction is successful.
    - bobalob_wtf 9y ago
      Chip & signature sounds awful (and pointless!) Why would they not use PIN? We now have contactless payments for under £30 in the UK, similar to Apple pay but you just place your card on the reader.
    - WorldMaker 9y ago
      The sad fact is the terminals are painfully slow because US banks don't think US customers want or are capable of using PINs. When you use a PIN you get a nice two factor signature from the card chip: it signs the current timestamp and the PIN you knew, and can do both as quickly as chip's processing capability and the bandwidth between the chip and terminal allows. US banks came up with a dumb compromise just like most of their websites use Wish-It-Were-Two-Factor auth and secondary "Security Question" passwords, the chip cards in the US are doing their own Wish-It-Were-Two-Factor: sign a timestamp, wait some amount of wall clock time, sign a different timestamp. Most of the wait in a chip purchase in the US is artificial just to make sure that two timestamps are "sufficiently" different. US banks should just give people PINs and stop this silliness.
- maroonblazer 9y ago
  This used to be the case for me until very recently. I've noticed that the two grocery stores I frequent most are suddenly significantly faster. Like almost instant (less than 2 secs). This is in Seattle. So, it'll probably be that way everywhere eventually.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- russjr08 9y ago
  This is why I’m a big fan of NFC payments when available. I find it to be pretty much instant, instead of having to wait what feels like 30 seconds for the chip transaction to process. Though I’m in the US. I hear chip transactions are way faster in other countries where they’ve been using that system for a while.
- Natanael_L 9y ago
  In Sweden, in most stores, you insert the chip and enter the PIN just after the transaction starts, and then once everything is scanned you just confirm the total price (which is very quick).
  - LeonidasXIV 9y ago
    In Denmark you just use NFC/Contactless. Hardly anyone ever types in PIN numbers and it is also very quick. When I was visiting Sweden the terminals did not support NFC or I was just doing something wrong.
    - Natanael_L 9y ago
      NFC support is getting more common in Sweden now. Retail stores has been slow with it until now, though.
- xfkechyk 9y ago
  that's because of shitty software. chip should get faster: https://paymentweek.com/2017-5-2-wait-no-more-quick-chip-technology-speeds-up-emv-transactions/ https://paymentweek.com/2017-5-2-wait-no-more-quick-chip-tec...
nojvek 9y ago
Yeah but a >1% fee is ridiculous. We all know visa, Mastercard, PayPal are drowning in cash. I had high hopes for bitcoin like currency having a flat fee in cents and an optional percentage few for insurance if you do want a charge back and other nice credit card like features. But bitcoin is riddled with its own charge mania nowadays.
Retric 9y ago
With the new chip system I swapped to cash for many transactions because it's faster.
- aquadrop 9y ago
  I use contactless chipped card everywhere and it literally takes less than a second for most payments.
  - Retric 9y ago
    I am not going to use such an insecure payment method.
    - aquadrop 9y ago
      What's insecure about it? Heard of a lot of cases where money were stolen from people banks accounts/cards using scamming, viruses etc (and witnessed one right when it was happening), never heard of problems because of card being contactless. It also lets you not to flash your pin in front of the whole store for many of the payments. I think on the convenience/security scale it's very high.
      - Retric 9y ago
        They limit it to low value transactions specifically because it's not as secure. Feel free to dig into it if you don't trust the industry's assessment.
        aquadrop 9y ago
        They limit it to make it secure and make it pointless for the thieves to try exploit it, at the same time covering many quick payment needs - convinience/security balance I mentioned and you ignored. And feel free to think about industry's assessment - they make more and more cards with contactless payment capabilities and it's used very extensively in some countries of the world already.
FireBeyond 9y ago
And in the meantime, banks are making money on investing, lending out funds deposited. And not doing too badly: http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/03/investing/bank-profits-record-high-dodd-frank/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/03/investing/bank-profits-recor... Major US banks made $171B _profit_ last year. Lets not pretend that they're already bending over backwards to lower costs on transaction processing.
- spookthesunset 9y ago
  > Lets not pretend that they're already bending over backwards to lower costs on transaction processing. It's a free market and you as a merchant are free to pick your vendor. In addition, you don't even have to accept credit cards if you want--you can just take cash or check, or even just cash. Of course people entering your store might not buy anything from you because who the hell carries around cash or checks anymore, but no jackbooted thugs will force you at gunpoint to accept credit cards. The credit card industry is a huge, highly competitive industry with little barriers to entry. Massive market forces are at work squeezing the margins for transaction processing fees to as little as possible. My bet is that transaction fees are priced at what they are because: - its cheaper than handling cash or checks - it results in more revenue, even with the "cash back" discount given to CC users. - it is more traceable and easier for your bookkeepers to manage And to be honest, I believe many small business who take cash only do so because they aren't reporting all their income. When it is off the books cash-only, you can pocket the sales tax, underreport income tax, pay your vendors cash under the table, etc. I also believe that if their margins are so thin they can't afford a 2% transaction fee they probably have no business staying in business anyway. Whatever they are doing is more likely than not a value-destroying NPV-negative project to begin with. (see also: just about every business shown on those "save my bar / save my restaurant / save my hotel" TV shows)
musage 9y ago
> Cash costs money too--you have to count it, handle it, deposit it, protect it from theft, verify it's authenticity, make sure you have enough change, spend time counting change, etc. Holy God. I might as well say it's all equally free, since when the heat death of the universe is done with, there will be no difference between something having existed or taken place or not.

jimmaswell 9y ago

>Credit cards are super quick to use at the register. At least they used to be. Chips ruined that. Now I have to stand there staring at the screen for half a minute waiting to respond to prompts and to pull the card out at the end. For most transactions, cash is probably faster than using a chip.

jarrettch 9y ago
It's even worse when your chip starts to fail, as one of my has started to do very recently. You have to put the card in three times(and wait for it to fail 3 times) before you're allowed to use the swipe function. Took longer than cash.
- jimmaswell 9y ago
  Recently I tried the chip and it failed, then I tried the swipe and it said to use the chip, then I used the chip and it said I had to use the swipe, and finally the swipe worked. First time I ever had a chip fail, and it's a pretty much brand new card, so it was most likely the machine's fault.
  - jjuhl 9y ago
    I don't see the problem. If waiting a little is such a big deal then you are in too much of a hurry already and/or too stressed out. Relax. Take it easy.
bbarn 9y ago
Where are you, out of curiousity? I find most of the chips are no slower than using a swipe card was before.
- jimmaswell 9y ago
  The US
- btilly 9y ago
  I have the same experience in Orange County. Everyone hates the chip.
- Miredly 9y ago
  I lived in Spain for a year, and everyone had chips there. My US card always drew eyerolls as they had to find the /old/ machine and dust it off and find someone who remembered how to use it. I was excited that we were getting chips here in the US, but of course they fucked it up and for whatever reason it takes ages for your chip to be read, and there are frequent chip read errors.
- labster 9y ago
  Chip cards work super-slow in the US. I often pay in cash because it's so much faster. I take the same chip card to the Netherlands and it works in a few seconds.
- chipotle_coyote 9y ago
  In the US, it depends entirely on the point-of-sale system. Some are just as fast; some are a lot slower. My guess is that the slow ones are using the same old CPUs that the previous "stripe-only" ones did, which just aren't powerful enough to handle the added cryptography requirements in a reasonable amount of time.
Oletros 9y ago
I have been used cards with chips for years and now contactless payments and they are a lot quicker than swipping the card. In less than 5 seconds is done At least in Spain
- aidenn0 9y ago
  I assume spain is chip and pin? In the US it's chip and signature, and you can't sign until after the chip verification (either signing a paper receipt, or with a stylus on the terminal screen). In addition chips are new and some terminals are painfully slow (30 seconds) to verify. I'm not sure I've ever seen one finish in under 5 seconds, though a few merchants have terminals that come close to that.
  - kmonsen 9y ago
    Why can't you though? I feel that is an implementation detail that is leaking out. The machine can do two things at once and only use the signature if the transaction is successful.
  - bobalob_wtf 9y ago
    Chip & signature sounds awful (and pointless!) Why would they not use PIN? We now have contactless payments for under £30 in the UK, similar to Apple pay but you just place your card on the reader.
  - WorldMaker 9y ago
    The sad fact is the terminals are painfully slow because US banks don't think US customers want or are capable of using PINs. When you use a PIN you get a nice two factor signature from the card chip: it signs the current timestamp and the PIN you knew, and can do both as quickly as chip's processing capability and the bandwidth between the chip and terminal allows. US banks came up with a dumb compromise just like most of their websites use Wish-It-Were-Two-Factor auth and secondary "Security Question" passwords, the chip cards in the US are doing their own Wish-It-Were-Two-Factor: sign a timestamp, wait some amount of wall clock time, sign a different timestamp. Most of the wait in a chip purchase in the US is artificial just to make sure that two timestamps are "sufficiently" different. US banks should just give people PINs and stop this silliness.
maroonblazer 9y ago
This used to be the case for me until very recently. I've noticed that the two grocery stores I frequent most are suddenly significantly faster. Like almost instant (less than 2 secs). This is in Seattle. So, it'll probably be that way everywhere eventually.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
russjr08 9y ago
This is why I’m a big fan of NFC payments when available. I find it to be pretty much instant, instead of having to wait what feels like 30 seconds for the chip transaction to process. Though I’m in the US. I hear chip transactions are way faster in other countries where they’ve been using that system for a while.
Natanael_L 9y ago
In Sweden, in most stores, you insert the chip and enter the PIN just after the transaction starts, and then once everything is scanned you just confirm the total price (which is very quick).
- LeonidasXIV 9y ago
  In Denmark you just use NFC/Contactless. Hardly anyone ever types in PIN numbers and it is also very quick. When I was visiting Sweden the terminals did not support NFC or I was just doing something wrong.
  - Natanael_L 9y ago
    NFC support is getting more common in Sweden now. Retail stores has been slow with it until now, though.
xfkechyk 9y ago
that's because of shitty software. chip should get faster: https://paymentweek.com/2017-5-2-wait-no-more-quick-chip-technology-speeds-up-emv-transactions/ https://paymentweek.com/2017-5-2-wait-no-more-quick-chip-tec...

nojvek 9y ago

Yeah but a >1% fee is ridiculous. We all know visa, Mastercard, PayPal are drowning in cash. I had high hopes for bitcoin like currency having a flat fee in cents and an optional percentage few for insurance if you do want a charge back and other nice credit card like features. But bitcoin is riddled with its own charge mania nowadays.

Retric 9y ago

With the new chip system I swapped to cash for many transactions because it's faster.

aquadrop 9y ago
I use contactless chipped card everywhere and it literally takes less than a second for most payments.
- Retric 9y ago
  I am not going to use such an insecure payment method.
  - aquadrop 9y ago
    What's insecure about it? Heard of a lot of cases where money were stolen from people banks accounts/cards using scamming, viruses etc (and witnessed one right when it was happening), never heard of problems because of card being contactless. It also lets you not to flash your pin in front of the whole store for many of the payments. I think on the convenience/security scale it's very high.
    - Retric 9y ago
      They limit it to low value transactions specifically because it's not as secure. Feel free to dig into it if you don't trust the industry's assessment.
      - aquadrop 9y ago
        They limit it to make it secure and make it pointless for the thieves to try exploit it, at the same time covering many quick payment needs - convinience/security balance I mentioned and you ignored. And feel free to think about industry's assessment - they make more and more cards with contactless payment capabilities and it's used very extensively in some countries of the world already.

FireBeyond 9y ago

And in the meantime, banks are making money on investing, lending out funds deposited. And not doing too badly: http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/03/investing/bank-profits-record-high-dodd-frank/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/03/investing/bank-profits-recor... Major US banks made $171B _profit_ last year. Lets not pretend that they're already bending over backwards to lower costs on transaction processing.

spookthesunset 9y ago
> Lets not pretend that they're already bending over backwards to lower costs on transaction processing. It's a free market and you as a merchant are free to pick your vendor. In addition, you don't even have to accept credit cards if you want--you can just take cash or check, or even just cash. Of course people entering your store might not buy anything from you because who the hell carries around cash or checks anymore, but no jackbooted thugs will force you at gunpoint to accept credit cards. The credit card industry is a huge, highly competitive industry with little barriers to entry. Massive market forces are at work squeezing the margins for transaction processing fees to as little as possible. My bet is that transaction fees are priced at what they are because: - its cheaper than handling cash or checks - it results in more revenue, even with the "cash back" discount given to CC users. - it is more traceable and easier for your bookkeepers to manage And to be honest, I believe many small business who take cash only do so because they aren't reporting all their income. When it is off the books cash-only, you can pocket the sales tax, underreport income tax, pay your vendors cash under the table, etc. I also believe that if their margins are so thin they can't afford a 2% transaction fee they probably have no business staying in business anyway. Whatever they are doing is more likely than not a value-destroying NPV-negative project to begin with. (see also: just about every business shown on those "save my bar / save my restaurant / save my hotel" TV shows)

musage 9y ago

> Cash costs money too--you have to count it, handle it, deposit it, protect it from theft, verify it's authenticity, make sure you have enough change, spend time counting change, etc. Holy God. I might as well say it's all equally free, since when the heat death of the universe is done with, there will be no difference between something having existed or taken place or not.