5 ms·
The title feels a bit disengenious. Technically, yes, it was increased by 50% of what it was, but it is a shift from 1% to 1.5%, not up to 50% of each transacti
by VoidWhisperer 2y ago
The title feels a bit disengenious. Technically, yes, it was increased by 50% of what it was, but it is a shift from 1% to 1.5%, not up to 50% of each transaction.
- colecut 2y agoThat is what a 50% increase means.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- adolph 2y agoKinda. To the degree that the object of increase is also a percentage the statement “increasing X (where x is quantified as a pct) by Y %” could mean that X of 20% is increased to 70% or to 30%. It would be more clear to state “X increases from Y% to Z%.”
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- colecut 2y ago20% to 70% would be quite the fee increase, but I suppose that is a way of thinking of it.
- clipsy 2y agoNo, not kinda. In the example you present, if 20% increased to 70% the appropriate description is either a 250% increase or a 50pp ("percentage point"[0]) increase. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentage_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentage_point
- mtnGoat 2y agoMath doesn’t do “kinda”. If you are paying $100 for something, and then it is $150, that’s is a 50% increase and is an undeniable fact.
- DangitBobby 2y agoPercent increases are kind of a weird metric in a lot of cases. This is one of them. It's not particularly informative.
- colecut 2y agoIf you are a stripe user, it tells you exactly by how much you can expect your fees to increase =)
- DangitBobby 2y agoYou'd also get that information by showing start and end values.
- colecut 2y agoThe goal of a headline is not to tell you everything that you want to know, it's to make you click it.
- qntty 2y agoPercent vs percentage points. It's slightly confusing but the title is correct.
- cplat 2y agoThe title is correct. But I agree that saying "50% increase" conveys less information than saying "1% to 1.5%" (because you don't know 50% of what), and seems to have been used only to make the title more dramatic.
- bananamerica 2y agoI interpreted it as a increase in the fee.
- SoftTalker 2y agoYes, it's editorialized. The actual title is "June 2024 pricing update for Instant Payouts for businesses in the United States"
- wmf 2y agoI understand why companies want to bury bad news under generic titles but that doesn't mean we have to play along. This is a case where "editorializing" the title seems helpful.
- m3kw9 2y agoChoose between “now 1.5%” or “50% increase”
- paulpauper 2y agoA rule of thumb: if it is really bad it will not be reported by the actual company doing it. It will be buried in the TOS and then discovered by angry users, and picked up by media.
- csomar 2y agoI think people who know/use Stripe will have no confusion about this.
- abnercoimbre 2y agoAlthough rare, I use instant payout for my small business. It's a lovely convenience and the extra 1% hit (on top of the usual transaction fees) can be a worthwhile tradeoff. I can't explain it, but the new 1.5% fee killed the motivation to use it entirely.
- dataflow 2y agoI don't feel it's disingenuous at all. When I read the title I instantly understood it to mean multiplying the fee by 1.5. In what world would anyone take this to mean that they're charging 50% of each transaction?
- dataflow 2y agoI don't feel it's disingenuous at all? They're increasing the fee by 50%... of the fee, obviously. In what world would anyone take this to mean that they're charging 50% of each transaction?
- beAbU 2y agoIt's a common problem when reporting on changes of some percentage value. I guess it's more dramatic to say "increased by 50%" rather than "increased by 0.5 points" Common example headline: "Inflation up by 100%" when it went from 1% to 2%. The headline implies goods & services are now 2x more expensive than before, which is not the case.