4 ms·

View source tells me this uses Stripe. Stripe charges 2.9% + 30c, which leaves the owner with 66c, basically just 2/3rds. Pretty heavy.

by adtac 8y ago

lathiat 8y ago
Per transaction fees in finance really suck. I struggle a little to understand why more merchants don't get rid of them.. as it still encourages cash for smaller transactions at shops. Really confuses me. I guess they are smarter than me.
- scottostler 8y ago
  I’ve been told the answer is interchange fees: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee
- clintonb 8y ago
  > I struggle a little to understand why more merchants don't get rid of them... Why is this a struggle? The reason is obvious. Most individual merchants have little, if any, bargaining power. Once you get big enough, you can negotiate lower rates, but you will almost always pay a percentage per transaction. Encouraging cash isn't necessarily a good thing. Some customers (like me) like the convenience of paying with a card. If a merchant doesn't accept credit cards, I probably won't make a purchase since I rarely carry cash.
  - ddingus 8y ago
    Encouraging cash is a great thing. I make sure to patronize and speak up about cash where I know the merchant will get the message.
    - lathiat 8y ago
      It may be a great thing for consumers, but it doesn't seem like a great thing for electronic transaction processors
      - ddingus 8y ago
        Priorities. Mine are definitely aligned with ordinary people long before payment processors. Ever had bad things happen? I have. Cash counts then. Payment processors not so much. Now do not get me wrong. The processors are not doing anything wrong. I am not making a statement against them at all. Just not one for them. Not a priority, put simply.
- djsumdog 8y ago
  I've never owned a store, but I imagine there have to be processors that charge only the percentage available to most states, even for small businesses. But maybe not? I don't think the major EFPOS providers in New Zealand charge a per transaction fee, because most bars will let you ring up ever single drink individually if you want.
  - lathiat 8y ago
    I think it is very country dependent. In Australia it seems hard to get stuff without the 30c fee.
coralreef 8y ago
66% of free money is still pretty awesome
regecks 8y ago
It's also really easy to screw over the merchant. Report the transaction as fraudulent, and they're out $20-30 over a dispute that's impossible to win.
notatoad 8y ago
On the other hand, stripe is the only party providing any actual service here, so only taking 1/3 of the money is pretty good.
HashBasher 8y ago
Much better use case for lightning network.

View source tells me this uses Stripe. Stripe charges 2.9% + 30c, which leaves the owner with 66c, basically just 2/3rds. Pretty heavy.

by adtac 8y ago

View source tells me this uses Stripe. Stripe charges 2.9% + 30c, which leaves the owner with 66c, basically just 2/3rds. Pretty heavy.

lathiat 8y ago

Per transaction fees in finance really suck. I struggle a little to understand why more merchants don't get rid of them.. as it still encourages cash for smaller transactions at shops. Really confuses me. I guess they are smarter than me.

scottostler 8y ago
I’ve been told the answer is interchange fees: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee
clintonb 8y ago
> I struggle a little to understand why more merchants don't get rid of them... Why is this a struggle? The reason is obvious. Most individual merchants have little, if any, bargaining power. Once you get big enough, you can negotiate lower rates, but you will almost always pay a percentage per transaction. Encouraging cash isn't necessarily a good thing. Some customers (like me) like the convenience of paying with a card. If a merchant doesn't accept credit cards, I probably won't make a purchase since I rarely carry cash.
- ddingus 8y ago
  Encouraging cash is a great thing. I make sure to patronize and speak up about cash where I know the merchant will get the message.
  - lathiat 8y ago
    It may be a great thing for consumers, but it doesn't seem like a great thing for electronic transaction processors
    - ddingus 8y ago
      Priorities. Mine are definitely aligned with ordinary people long before payment processors. Ever had bad things happen? I have. Cash counts then. Payment processors not so much. Now do not get me wrong. The processors are not doing anything wrong. I am not making a statement against them at all. Just not one for them. Not a priority, put simply.
djsumdog 8y ago
I've never owned a store, but I imagine there have to be processors that charge only the percentage available to most states, even for small businesses. But maybe not? I don't think the major EFPOS providers in New Zealand charge a per transaction fee, because most bars will let you ring up ever single drink individually if you want.
- lathiat 8y ago
  I think it is very country dependent. In Australia it seems hard to get stuff without the 30c fee.

coralreef 8y ago

66% of free money is still pretty awesome

regecks 8y ago

It's also really easy to screw over the merchant. Report the transaction as fraudulent, and they're out $20-30 over a dispute that's impossible to win.

notatoad 8y ago

On the other hand, stripe is the only party providing any actual service here, so only taking 1/3 of the money is pretty good.

HashBasher 8y ago

Much better use case for lightning network.