yeah. 2nd most likely. there isn't much of "lobbying" that you see in USA, say in turbotax or visa/MC or paypal. you have payment gateways fighting in terms o

yeah. 2nd most likely. there isn't much of "lobbying" that you see in USA, say in turbotax or visa/MC or paypal. you have payment gateways fighting in terms of functionality and features, the standard is 2% across the board for "most" payments at retail. In volume, that % can go much much lower. Because of competition, the best bet of any org is to be as open as possible. If amazon implemented their own wallet system, why would i use that when someone else's works ACROSS the board? there is a victim to this "openness" also. Look up "paytm". a fincorp that made headlines with "Cashback" and stuff but when UPI turned up, their wallet essentially dried up. Earlier, they would PAY users with cashback to use their own wallet but now they CHARGE EXTRA for the privilege of using their services. plus, they went public and lost a lot of money. >"we're late to market, so we don't have to repeat the mistakes we saw everyone else doing" thing? i think USA gives too much credit and puts too much reliance on credit cards and "fraud protection". There used to be no autopay until last year i think so EVERY payment had to be a conscious effort. If i paid to amazon and i did not get the goods, well "contact amazon". there is no recourse from banks or cards or gateways. That is not a bad deal. say you do buying/selling on facebok marketplace, well since you are paying directly to the seller, or recieving funds, there is no one to blame. then there is actual fraud, like someone takes your ATM card and withdrawls money or takes your password and siphons off funds. In that case, you have to approach the police and have them fix that or contact the bank and have them try to revert the entry. Why should the intermediary "card" be in the middle? why should they earn that much for one-off chance of fraud?