13 ms·

Great work Visa, now I hate you

551 points by roee 14y ago

JackFr 14y ago
You are a customer of your bank, not Visa. Visa's customers are merchants and financial institutions.
corin_ 14y ago
This reads like the sort of post that so often goes on bad logic riding on emotion, but it's a completely valid point. I'm a Visa user, plus I don't plan on going anywhere near the Olympics despite living fairly close to London, but when I heard about this marketing plan I literally thought it had to be one of those hilarious fake news stories. But it wasn't. Stuff like the McDonalds sponsorship he mentioned (banning people from selling chips) is bad, but at least as a consumer if you want chips... you can still buy them. But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. Oh, and the OP talks as if there's a difference between how international and UK people are affected by this, but that really isn't the case. Based on my own anecdotal evidence I certainly know many more people who have at least one Visa card than people who have at least one non-Visa card (myself for example, my personal debit card, personal credit card, and company credit card, despite being from three different providers, are all Visa), but there are still plenty of people using, for example, cards from MasterCard.
- klausa 14y ago
  >But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. I think both OP and you (or me, for that matter) don't have access to important data - specifically, what's the percentage of people that have BOTH Visa and MasterCard (and what percentage of those that do not, are likely to buy ticket for games). If it's low - then it probably was a stupid move, although I don't really feel qualified to say that. If, on the other hand, it's very high (like 90% (which I think it is)), then it's very smart move.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    I suppose it depends on the demographic, if the olympics is mainly attended by relatively affluent people with multiple credit cards. I know plenty of people who don't even have a credit card beyond a bank issued Maestro debit card.
  - Wilya 14y ago
    I agree, though I would think the ratio is the opposite. The thing is, having multiple cards might be a sign of wealth, but it's also a consequence of local culture. In some countries, everyone has a gazillion of cards. In some countries, having two cards is sort of an exception. In some countries, half the shops usually don't take VISA (Belgium is like that iirc, but I might be mistaken). So, by taking a decision like that, you're alienating quite a few people, based on non-relevant criteria (not wealth related ones).
  - makomk 14y ago
    Well, anyone who was British and bought their tickets through the official UK process for buying Olympic tickets had to use Visa to pay for them anyway. I think lot of people bought their tickets through travel agents, though.
  - pbreit 14y ago
    Even if the percentage overlap approaches 90%, I don't think it's a smart move. It's very anti-customer and will cause a decent percentage of people a great deal of angst and a much larger percentage of people will be quite disappointed. And don't forget that high-spending corporate travelers use Amex almost exclusively. The problem with a payment provider striking an exclusive deal like this is that it creates very real problems for people unlike, say, and exclusive beer deal. And it creates a great deal of negative feelings towards both Visa and the Olympics. I'm sure Visa is able to show that it is a good deal for them. But I suspect it is just as easy to show the opposite. Not smart at all.
- baddox 14y ago
  It seems like you and the author are assuming that everyone has some sort of right or reasonable expectation to be able to buy products with any payment method they choose. But that's rarely the case. There are tons of places that simply don't accept MasterCard or American Express, for example. Almost no place will accept barter. The only way this was a bad decision by Visa and the Olympics is if the sponsorship payment wasn't enough to cover the lost sales, which is unlikely to be the case.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    Expectation? No. Desire? Yes! If someone goes out of their way to make me unable to use the form of payment I want, and that is accepted in many other places, I will dislike them, despite not having the "right" to use it.
- Osiris 14y ago
  But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I do not have a Visa card. I have one Mastercard and one Discover card, plus my PayPal credit/debit card which is also Mastercard. The only Visa I've had in years have been those prepaid rebate cards. But I don't think it's VISA that we should be blaming but the Olympic Committee that agreed to this and the McDonald's deals. They didn't have to accept those conditions.
  - jarek 14y ago
    Why do you have a Discover card? Serious question, I've never been sure of the utility or purpose.
    - Osiris 14y ago
      Why do you drive a Honda instead of a Toyota or GMC or Ford or Kia? A credit card is a credit card. I did get 5$ cash back on a lot of travel I did for work like hotels, restaurants, etc., so that was one reason.
      - jarek 14y ago
        Yeah but both Hondas and Kias can drive on almost any road. That's not the case with Discover acceptance, though I understand it's a lot higher in the U.S. High cash back is a fair enough reason, thanks.
- MartinCron 14y ago
  bad logic riding on emotion Humans make purchasing decisions in a fundamentally emotional way. Most of the best marketing out there trades on emotion. People get pissed off and hold grudges in a completely irrational way. Think of all of the people who refuse to buy [BRAND X] because the first product they had from them eventually failed. Visa just went out of their way to have a lot of people hold grudges against them.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  > But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. It's been working for the past 26 years that Visa has sponsored every Olympics game. This isn't a new thing. This is what pays for the Olympics even occurring. Their sponsors are exclusive sponsors. Visa's already committed to the next 4 games as well (through 2020). As far as Visa's point of view: > According to the U.S. Sponsorship Tracker, a Visa commissioned study following the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games conducted by Performance Research, an independent research company, Visa cardholders who were aware of Visa’s Olympic Games sponsorship claimed a 16 percent and nine percent increase in Visa card usage in Canada and the US respectively. The same report found Visa’s brand equity was 32 percent and 38 percent higher among consumers who were aware of Visa’s sponsorship in Canada and the US respectively. http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/visa-and-the-olympic-games.pdf http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/vis...
  - mvc 14y ago
    > This is what pays for the Olympics even occurring Even conservative estimates of the final cost of the Olympics are around 10bn. Visa paid only 100m so I think the games would have been fine without them.
    - dangrossman 14y ago
      40% of the Olympic costs are funded by The Olympic Partner (TOP) program, of which Visa is a charter member. I was making a general statement about exclusive sponsorships making the Olympics possible, not Visa alone.
      - cromulent 14y ago
        40% of Olympic revenues come from TOP. Revenues generally don't cover costs by a long way.
- barrkel 14y ago
  I live just beside Victoria Park, about 0.5 miles away from the Olympic park. You would scarcely even know the Olympics are on by what I see in east London. If anything, it's much quieter than usual. Staying away on account of it isn't necessary. At worst, there's a little bit of delay on the A12 as it goes past one of the park entrances and narrows down to a single lane for 200m or so, but that's about it.
apendleton 14y ago
I'm not sure what the basis is for the assumption that this is a marketing move. It seems like the more obvious motivation would be to force everyone to pay with Visa to get the credit card fees from what will undoubtedly be several million dollars' worth of purchases, as a means of partially offsetting the cost of the investment in the sponsorship.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  I don't think Visa Inc., which has been sponsoring the Olympics since 1986 in whatever country it's held, gets any transaction fees from Visa card acceptance in Europe. Visa Europe is an independent company with an irrevocable license to the Visa brand and an interoperability agreement. That suggests to me that the sponsorship is purely a marketing move.
  - apendleton 14y ago
    That may well be; these articles hint (without supporting evidence) that fees are part of the motivation, but I'm not sure how much credence to lend them: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153008/Visa-branded-cynical-bans-rival-cards-Olympics.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153008/Visa-branded... and http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2910799/Visa-in-Olympic-Games-tickets-storm.html http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2910799/Visa-in-Ol...
jonknee 14y ago
So this is about a man with a Visa card upset that his Visa card is accepted everywhere he goes. Visa has been exclusive at the Olympics for a long time and even though I have never been I know that.
- chokolad 14y ago
  But the fact that only Visa is accepted is not really something to be proud of, is it?
  - jonknee 14y ago
    The fact of any corporate sponsorship isn't something to be proud of. Your Big Mac isn't going to taste better because they forked over a ton of cash to the IOC. I have a Diet Coke on my desk right now and I'm not proud at all over it being available at the Olympics instead of Pepsi.
    - mthoms 14y ago
      Equating the fact that you can only pay by Visa with the fact you can only eat McDonalds french fries is a bit disingenuous don't you think? Paying Visa directly costs me more money (and inconvenience). It's a tax on everything.
      - jonknee 14y ago
        You're able to use cash, though I doubt they'll give you a discount.
- fleitz 14y ago
  Here's the issue, you walk into a store that you've been going to since you were a kid, pull out the payment card that you've been using since you were an adult, and they point you to a sign that says only Visa is accepted even though you bought something on interac a week before. It's not about visa being exclusive to the Olympics, its about VISA being the only thing you can use to buy shit in your hometown. Basically, if you could buy a quaachi in the store then it was going to be a pain in the ass. It's a piss off, people don't like to be forced to do things for arbitrary reasons.
mthoms 14y ago
During the Vancouver Olympics not only were we not permitted to use other credit cards, we couldn't even use our bank-issued debit cards for payment (in Canada we don't have Visa Debit cards - our debit cards are issued directly from banks have been accepted everywhere for nearly two decades.) Cash or Visa Only. So there I was at an official Olympic souvenir shop picking up some gifts when I was told no - I'd have to walk down to the other end of the airport terminal and take out cash... come back and pay with that. Needless to say they lost the sale. How many other sales did they lose I wonder?
- jonknee 14y ago
  > Needless to say they lost the sale. How many other sales did they lose I wonder? Surely not enough to cover the massive amount of money Visa paid to be an exclusive sponsor. In London this year that is reportedly over $100M and during the first week Visa racked up $700 million worth of charges at the games.
  - mthoms 14y ago
    Interesting. What you're implying is that the marketing benefits of Visa become a sponsor are secondary to the direct revenue it generates at the event. This could be the most profitable marketing spend with the quickest ROI ever.
    - jonknee 14y ago
      No, I'm saying that any lost sales the IOC sees from people who don't have cash or Visa will be more than made up by the huge amount of cash Visa paid to be a sponsor. The $700m figure just shows that the exclusive relationship is doing just fine.
      - wtracy 14y ago
        More likely, in my mind: The IOC gets the marketing money from Visa, while the independent vendors at the Olympics take the hit from not being able to accept MasterCard.
haeikou 14y ago
So I'm European and everything, and not so much used to credit cards everywhere ... but is it really so hard to pay cash for a day?
- pavel_lishin 14y ago
  Not really, but you have to estimate how much cash you'll need. You also run the risk of that cash being stolen.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
    And there's also the convenience thing of not having to withdraw in advance
  - kaybe 14y ago
    It won't go bad after this day.. (but theft is a valid point)
    - archangel_one 14y ago
      If you don't live in the UK, having a fistful of sterling when you get home is not really the ideal situation. It's not far from it going bad, in a sense.
      - jarek 14y ago
        For values of "going bad" approaching "losing 2-4% of its value." The horror.
        archangel_one 14y ago
        Well yes, but you have to go to a bank and exchange it, and they do their best to charge more - the last time I asked about selling €50, the bank wanted a $5 fee... Anyway, it seems reasonable to me that people might want to avoid that when they have a perfectly good Mastercard which has always worked in the past.
shtylman 14y ago
You hate them and yet will probably change nothing in your usage habits regarding their cards or make an effort to support systems that are not visa?
- vitalique 14y ago
  It seems to me that, regardless of what blogpost author is going (or not going) to do, we can draw a lesson or two here for our own products/services: take away freedom of choice from your customer, and he may quickly become a pissed off and lost customer to you. You have to be very careful in estimations of potential profits and losses of your marketing efforts. Customers may not care (nor should they, actually) about your business or marketing strategies. (Though I'm absolutely sure that Visa is benefiting a lot right now and will not suffer any long-term losses because of this campaign.)
jiggy2011 14y ago
I'm surprised Visa even needs to market, whenever I have been issued a card by my bank sometimes it's been a VISA and sometimes a Mastercard/Maestro. I assume I could get one particular type of card if I specifically requested it but I really don't understand what the difference would be to the end user. I guess perhaps if the only differentiating factor is "you can use this one if you goto the olympics" then maybe that is enough to sway a bunch of people?
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  The simple truth is that Visa largely is marketing. It's also a huge transaction processing system, but the larger part of the organization is in fact responsible for managing the brand. Think about that next time you're looking at your interest rate and/or merchant fees associated with your credit/debit card.
- bennysaurus 14y ago
  You have to understand what Visa is competing against; it's not against the other card providers, it's against cash. Considering how much money they have spent to be a sponsor I don't think they count their return to happen during the Olympic period, this looks more to be a habit forming thing (when you go out their aim is you'll go for your Visa by default).
  - X-Istence 14y ago
    I go for the card with the highest amount of cashback for me...
    - bennysaurus 14y ago
      Yep but that's up to the banks and their bundles more than Visa/MC; the cards company's mission is more one of convenience.
Shenglong 14y ago
I disagree completely. Visa sponsored the event - why would they want competitors there? When the average person sees that his or her Mastercard is not accepted, I don't think the first response is "damn you, Visa!" Just like, when I see an AMEX card isn't accepted, I don't say "Damn you Visa and Mastercard for offering lower rates!" The image that Visa is trying to promote is that they're the most commonly accepted card. Because consumer perks vary only slightly (if at all) in home countries, for most consumers, the question becomes permeation. If they see lots of places accepting Visa and not Mastercard then they're more likely to get a Mastercard. To give you a closer-to-home example: In Canada, we have Tim Hortons - which is a cheaper version of Starbucks (and it's very popular). They take Mastercard, but not Visa. There have been several situations where I've been unable to purchase food because I use Visa and I hate cash. At no point have I said "damn you, Mastercard! I hate you!" In fact, if I actually drank coffee, I'd probably have gotten a MC already.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  "damn you, Visa!" is exactly what my first response would be, either that or damning the Olympic committee. This is particularly jarring , because in the UK we are just used to the fact that everywhere that accepts VISA will also accept Mastercard. I can't think of a single situation I have been in where that hasn't been the case. AMEX is a little different , since most banks that offer AMEX will also give you a Mastercard/VISA on the basis that it's less ubiquitous but offers better perks.
- pavel_lishin 14y ago
  Were there ATMs at the Olympics that would dispense cash from a non-Visa card? You can always walk out of Tim Hortons and get cash out of an ATM, or go to another coffee shop. When your options are either "have no money" or "waste ticket by exiting venue to get cash I can not use at that venue because I can't come back in", it's a bit different.
  - simonw 14y ago
    "Were there ATMs at the Olympics that would dispense cash from a non-Visa card?" Actually, no there weren't! Visa insisted that any ATMs that accepted other cards were removed from the venues. This lead to a marvellous screw-up when all of the Visa card machines at one venue went down and there were only 8 freshly installed Visa ATMs to handle the crowds (which replaced 27 that had been removed): http://news.sky.com/story/966545/olympics-anger-as-visa-cards-crash-at-wembley http://news.sky.com/story/966545/olympics-anger-as-visa-card...
netaustin 14y ago
The flip side of this marketing proposition (give something, not take something) is exactly what American Express does. At last year's US Open, American Express gave cardholders a special little radio from a booth in the concession area. Many people had these radios, which was good marketing for American Express, especially considering the presumably affluent audience attending an expensive event. But they didn't actually inconvenience anyone in the process.
peterwiese 14y ago
Pay cash, moron. That's how we roll in Europe.
- tonfa 14y ago
  s/Europe/??/ (Germany?) I know at least a couple of European countries where debit/credit cards are prevalent.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
    Like the United Kingdom, which is hosting the Olympic games...
    - bencoder 14y ago
      Compared to some European countries, the UK is far behind. Many of the smaller retailers and pubs/bars still don't accept card or require minimum spends (£5 or £10) to be able to use cards. In Finland it seems that absolutely everywhere accepts card and cash is very rare. I'd guess at least 95% of the in-person transactions that I see are made with card. Even for the smallest amounts.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
        At least we have Chip and PIN!
      - christoph 14y ago
        This is very true. The merchant fees in the UK and therefore the minimum spend between merchants can vary enormously. For instance, I can buy milk at £0.49 on an American Express card in Tesco, but in my local pub, anything under £10 (on any card other than AmEx - AmEx is still not accepted in that many places in the UK) requires me to pay a £1 transaction fee. There is no reason behind this, other than Tesco are so huge, they can negotiate a much better rate than a small business, who clearly can't even consider the huge American Express merchant fees. The sooner somebody disrupts this 'business', the better for everyone.
timrogers 14y ago
The oddest thing for me was seeing a "Visa Customer Services" desk at an Olympic venue yesterday with two exceedingly bored looking staff. I'm not at all sure what they were meant to be doing given that all the customer service is provided by card issuers, not the network...
donpdonp 14y ago
Not having been to the olympics before, an important detail is how far this 'zone' covers. I am going to assume its a significant number of blocks, maybe even a mile, around the olympic venues that include everyday businesses that people use, olympics or not. The not-selling-fries bit sounds hugely anti-competitive and way beyond the scope of what should be possible by this event. Payment cards go a step further. People rely on their particular card and the norm is to accept at least two kinds of cards. Creating a temporary monopoly on payment cards is again way beyond the reach of what is reasonable for a marketing agreement.
- elemeno 14y ago
  It's only within the sites themselves, nowhere else.
ArbitraryLimits 14y ago
On the one hand, the author makes a good point. On the other hand, he actually uses the phrase "simple folks" as if this were a Populist meeting in the 1890s. I'm really surprised by how much that one slip has undermined his credibility with me.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  I am surprised that it had that effect on you too. You even realize that it did, and don't rationally reevaluate? How does that work?
  - ArbitraryLimits 14y ago
    Well, I mean the rational portion of my brain realizes it and tries to compensate for it, but I don't knock myself out making sure the rational portion is fully engaged when scanning blog posts.
dredmorbius 14y ago
It's more than just Visa -- this is the marketing arrangement for (AFAIK) ALL Olympic sponsors. The marketing agreement with the IOS is: - You get your brand prominently featured across venues, media feeds, and collateral. - All competitors are iced out. I'm OK with the first. I'm not OK with the latter. Particularly in light of the Orwellian trademark and copyright enforcement (including significant changes to corresponding statutes) the IOC is granted. That and the fact that Olympic athletes are no longer amateurs, but professionals. It's a charade. An impressive one at times, but a charade all the same.
- zzygan 14y ago
  Yep, there is also the stipulation that no Shops in London are allowed to sell hot Chips unless sold with Fish aka Fish and Chips, because McDonalds has exclusive sponsor rights on Chips. I should say that English Chips really are nothing like McDonalds french fries. Same thing, different brand
  - aes256 14y ago
    > I'm not sure if this was the point Yep, there is also the stipulation that no Shops in London are allowed to sell hot Chips unless sold with Fish aka Fish and Chips (...) Just to clarify, the restriction only applies in and around the Olympic venues, not the whole of London!
  - kmm 14y ago
    How are they enforcing that? Please don't tell me it's actually illegal to sell french fries in London right now.
- crag 14y ago
  Actually it's worse. All video footage belongs to the IOC. In other words, athletes don't own their image at the Olympics. This is true with the NCAA too, by the way. And the NFL. So if a company signs an athlete to wear their tennis shoes (for example) any image from any olympics, the IOC gets a fee. Not the athlete (of course the athlete is begin paid anyway).
- 14y ago
switch007 14y ago
It's hard to avoid Visa now in the UK. I don't think any banks issue new Maestro debit cards any more - they're all VISA.
ewood 14y ago
Maybe it is a unique marker of those who are technically minded to be especially aggrieved by an arbitrary restriction such as this? Going through the London2012 ticket website today I noticed the requirement to pay by Visa and even though I was intending on using my Visa I clicked on the "What if I don't have Visa?" link to see what alternatives were on offer: If you do not have a Visa card, your bank will be able to help you select and apply for the Visa product that best suits your needs. For more information on how to obtain a Visa product, please visit the Visa website. Do they seriously think I'm going to organise a new card just to buy Olympic products? A better piece of advice might be: If you do not have a Visa card, find a friend who does and get them to buy the tickets for you. Then settle with cash and buy them a beer for their trouble.
- ars 14y ago
  I would rather say: If you do not have a Visa card take your money elsewhere, we don't serve your kind here.
thetrb 14y ago
I think this is a valid complaint, but it's nothing new. Same thing happened to me when I tried to buy Tickets for the NFL. They also only accepted Visa at that time (not sure if it changed since then). I wasn't able to buy Tickets online because of that reason so I looked up the next brick & mortar store which sold these tickets and found that Macy's sells them (at a special counter). So I drove to Macy's thinking that at least they should accept any credit card - but nope, they rejected my Mastercard so I first had to get cash at an ATM. I think Visa's point is that you feel limited by not having a Visa card and so are more willing to get a Visa. In my opinion that's kind of similar to how advertisement works in general. You don't see a commercial and immediately go to buy it, but they try to build the sense in you that you actually need the product.
wilki 14y ago
Don't hate Visa, hate/dislike the venue host that agreed to such terms (thus subjecting you to said terms). Since the article talked about McDonalds - do you hate Coca Cola for striking up an exclusivity deal with McDonalds? If you must place blame, direct it toward the correct entity.
- Zarathust 14y ago
  This a thousand times. It's the olympic commity that agreed on such terms, they are to blame. It does not exempt Visa and McDonalds from being assholes, but if you allow assholes inside your house, now its your problem.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  > "Don't hate Visa, hate/dislike the venue host that agreed to such terms" "Both" is a perfectly valid option. My ire is not zero-sum.. far from it.
rubergly 14y ago
More realistically, Visa was probably hoping that many consumers would, like the author, already have the option of and be forced into using their Visa card. I agree that this seems, in addition to being extremely frustrating to almost all consumers, a silly marketing move, but I'm sure that Visa has run the numbers and has a sound business reason for doing this. Since, judging by mthoms's post, this seems to be a tradition at Olympics, my reasoning may be off, but I imagine that forcing all vendors to only accept Visa must cost a lot more than a sponsorship without that condition—and I really think that they wouldn't blindly jump into that without a sound reason. There's the obvious trade-off of how much extra money Visa makes from users who have multiple cards and are forced into using Visa where they wouldn't have otherwise vs. money lost from Visa-owners who who are pissed off. But there are probably much more subtle, long-term effects. Maybe 75% of consumers present have a Visa, and 50% of those Visa-owners feel entitled and empowered by having the ability to use their card while others are frustrated; and then there's the trade-off of the 'entitled' Visa-owning 37.5% of consumers spending more with their Visa cards over the following months/years vs. the money lost due to the 25% of consumers who didn't have a Visa at the olympics and possibly hold a grudge and never own a Visa card because of the experience. Not to mention the fact that a similar sponsorship would likely be arranged if Visa decided not to do it; for all we know, MasterCard had a clear business incentive to do this but refrained because of moral reasons, but are we (consumers as a whole) discussing how valiant MasterCard is and how much they respect us as consumers or have we all forgotten a little bit about MasterCard because everyone's talking about Visa? Again, I don't agree with this idea; I think it's bad and annoying. But I think it's silly and a bit ignorant for all of us (many of whom have no marketing experience, and most of whom don't on this scale) to assume we know more than the marketers making these decisions because we're annoyed.
- omarrr 14y ago
  A better marketing approach to this would have been to silently only accept VISA and never call attention to the fact that there is an arrangement behind the scenes. Still pretty awful for your potential customers.
  - sigkill 14y ago
Gustomaximus 14y ago
This is stupid marketing by the Visa team. But what has not been mentioned is why would the Olympic committee allow this! And money is not the answer as I would think Visa / Mastercard or other would still sponsor this if the committee had said all cards must be accepted. Personally I am more disappointed in the olympic committee than Visa.
- crag 14y ago
  "Olympic committee allow this" Money of course. What did you think?
brudgers 14y ago
If one needs a reason to hate Visa, their suspension of payments to Wikileaks may be a bit more robust and stand on somewhat higher moral ground, in my opinion.
FuzzyDunlop 14y ago
What I disapprove of most with this is that it totally flies in the face of existing competition laws, that exist to protect the consumer. In any other situation this would not be allowed to happen, and that it actually has happened (amongst all the other things, like the excessive promotion and monopolisation of unhealthy food and drink) makes me resent both the Olympics and the government that gave them so much of a free pass. The sheer amount of corporatism and hypocrisy depresses me.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
ghshephard 14y ago
It used to be the case there were lots of places that wouldn't accept mastercard. It's rarer these days, but I still run into them. It would never occur to me to ever travel anywhere outside my local neighborhood without both Mastercard and a Visa. And I realize that 50%+ of the time my Amex (which, of course, is what I need to use for corporate travel) - won't be accepted at smaller places. Expense Report Hell...
simonw 14y ago
I've been having enormous trouble understanding the thinking behind the "We are proud to only accept Visa" marketing campaign. I simply can't understand how it could be viewed positively by any consumer - it's such an obviously anti-customer thing to do. I've been trying really hard to understand why Visa would make such an obviously unfriendly and counter-productive decision. The only theory I can come up with is that their real customers are the banks, and this is their way of saying to them "We're so completely ruthless that you're better off doing deals with us than anyone else". Seems a bit far-fetched though.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  > I simply can't understand how it could be viewed positively by any consumer Visa's market research suggests a significant increase in Visa usage and Visa brand value among consumers aware of their Olympic sponsorship (which has been ongoing since 1986, and already committed through the next 4 Olympics games): > According to the U.S. Sponsorship Tracker, a Visa commissioned study following the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games conducted by Performance Research, an independent research company, Visa cardholders who were aware of Visa’s Olympic Games sponsorship claimed a 16 percent and nine percent increase in Visa card usage in Canada and the US respectively. The same report found Visa’s brand equity was 32 percent and 38 percent higher among consumers who were aware of Visa’s sponsorship in Canada and the US respectively. http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/visa-and-the-olympic-games.pdf http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/vis... > I've been trying really hard to understand why Visa would make such an obviously unfriendly and counter-productive decision The first Olympics game where Visa was exclusively accepted was Calgary 1988. This isn't a decision they just made.
  - jacalata 14y ago
    He wasn't asking 'why sponsor the olympics', he was asking 'why take the exclusive angle'. Saying 'they've been doing it for years' does not answer that.
    - thebigshane 14y ago
lucisferre 14y ago
I totally read that headline as "Great, work visa, now I hate you." Was expecting an immigration rant.
- smsm42 14y ago
  Yup, same here. Then I remembered the stories about Olympics and Visa and realized why "Visa" is capitalized.
jakeonthemove 14y ago
What the? I'm surprised they could actually pull this off - they must've spent a lot of money on it. In Europe, MasterCard is much more popular than Visa (the latter is used mostly for credit cards, and most Europeans use debit cards) - I'm thinking there are a whole lot of other people cursing the company right now, too. Good going, Visa...
- dangrossman 14y ago
  Only Visa has been accepted at the Olympics since 1988. They're a charter member of The Olympic Partner (TOP) program.
kareemm 14y ago
> I discovered that McDonalds’ terms of sponsoring included that no one else in the areas of the games is allowed to sell french fries, unless they come with fried fish (because the classic dish of Fish & Chips could not be banned in the UK). But besides the Fish & Chips exception, no one is allowed to sell french fries around the games. My friend dealt with sponsorships in the venues for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics. One of her tasks was getting the venue menus signed off on by the sponsors. One of the food vendors wanted to serve potato wedges at the venue. But because McDonald's was one of the 2010 title sponsors, and they had the same "no french fries" clause, my friend spent ~6 months of her life negotiating with the McD's folks over the difference between potato wedges and french fries. In the end, the vendor got to serve potato wedges, but McD's got a ton of concessions in exchange (better signage location, etc etc).
- ww520 14y ago
  Why do McDonald not want to serve french fries? People love fries. And it's a big profit center for McDonald anyway.
  - hartez 14y ago
    I think they meant that no one except for McDonald's was allowed to serve french fries (or anything similar to a french fry).
    - rahoulb 14y ago
      That also gets me - anyone who's ever had fish and chips will know that the chips may be fried potatoes but totally unlike McDonald's french fries.
paulsutter 14y ago
But the olympic organizers need a way to pay for their $70,000 lunches, which totally justifies this. http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-knows-who-was-behind-the-official-olympic-lunch-that-created-a-70000-bill-for-15-people-2012-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-knows-who-was-behind-t...
Happyhippy 14y ago
Visa should be reviled for what they did in the Olympics. "Am at the GB v UAE match, and there's a serious problem with Visa. All the cash machines are turned off as they accept non-Visa cards, and the Visa-only card payment system has crashed. There's a lot of frustrated people here with no money and no food for two football matches. No one wants to do anything here. Very annoying, lots hungry and thirsty people here." From http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/london-2012-olympics-blog/2012/jul/29/london-2012-olympics-day-two-live http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/london-2012-olympics-blog/20... Also, pre-Olympics they had the games zones remove all non-Visa machines. http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jun/01/visa-cuts-atms-london-olympics?INTCMP=SRCH http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jun/01/visa-cuts-atms-l... "Visa confirmed that it was replacing the existing cash machines at various Olympic sites with machines running on its own system as part of its exclusivity arrangement as a sponsor. The move means people with Mastercard credit or debit cards will not be able to use the ATMs to withdraw money." Gold in the Corporate foot shooting event goes to.....VISA!
bicknergseng 14y ago
I'm curious... does anyone know where all this money from sponsors goes? The IOC is supposed to be not for profit. I understand hosting the Olympics is very expensive and that the LOCOG wants to recoop some costs, but this is ridiculous. It's going against the IOC's Olympic Charter at the very least...
jamesbritt 14y ago
Visa gets to to do this because the IOC and the sponsoring city allow it. Hate on Visa (because they don't have to do this), but hate on the IOC as well, and on any city government that OKs this sort of shit.
DannyPage 14y ago
I'm not surprised at all. This is a company-wide philosophy that they should be the only CC processor. I once did some contract work at Visa. At the time, I only had Mastercard and American Express. Went to their work cafe, tried to get some food, but was told (almost rudely) that they only took Visa. No cash either. I could buy a pre-paid card that can't be reloaded at one of the nearby kiosks (for 3 dollar fee per card). Needless to say, I went somewhere else for lunch.
pacomerh 14y ago
This title can also be read as a really absurd immigration article.
knowaveragejoe 14y ago
What really gets me is the use of the term "proud" - as if the people displaying such signage really feel anything remotely like pride about it. In reality they likely feel indifferently(they're going to make a lot of money anyways, just being at the Olympics). But they certainly do not think to themselves "This is a good thing I'm doing. I'm happy to present this to my customers."
10dpd 14y ago
Did anyone else read this title thinking it was from a disillusioned immigrant?
pgtart 14y ago
A visa card, and the pin code was 666 only those with sign could pay and trade. Its a scary form of enslavement, like a next world order Or even worse suddenly people's money has no value at all.
elchief 14y ago
You realize they do this because they know there's absolutely nothing you can do about it right?
einhverfr 14y ago
Honest question here. What implications are there under European Anti-Trust law regarding such a rule? Is such a bald-faced restraint on trade illegal? Could many vendors get into trouble here? Could the IOC be sanctioned? I ask because in the US I would expect Sherman Act lawsuits to be flying over stunts like this.
- unreal37 14y ago
  Lol. The IOC be sanctioned? Sponsor exclusivity has been a feature of the Olympics for 20+ years including the Atlanta games. Only Visa was accepted at the Atlanta Olympics. No one was sued.
sirfried 14y ago
i thought he hated "work visa" for a second, silly me
slantyyz 14y ago
The Olympics as a sporting event is great (ok, if you discount women's badminton, fencing, boxing and a few others), but the Olympics as a business.. it's just sleazy.
dools 14y ago
You didn't already hate Visa? I hate Visa, Mastercard, AMEX, the banks, insurance companies, the stock markets, real estate companies, mortgage brokers, you know, pretty much everything to do with finance. How could your opinion of a finance institution get any lower?
ww520 14y ago
I have Master, Visa, AE, and Discovery, just to cover all basis. And the decision to use which one is purely based on the rebate economic. The 2% rebate Master got used the most, while the 3% gas rebate on AE or Discovery got used when filling gas. Only when all else failed I would use the 1% rebate Visa. So the "marketing" campaign by Visa in Olympics have 0 effect on me to use Visa in the future.
Zenst 14y ago
Fiscal descrimination is still descrimination. Maybe Visa broke a law, if not then the law needs to catchup. I don't have a Visa card since a year ago when the ticketing system was announced as Visa only, I didn't attent the games or any aspect of it and it put me of the whole Olympic event that when the torch, cycle races which were going past my house I was like meh and avoided them as Visa had put me off. I don't like credit cards as it is, but bias and descrimination is something I dislike even more and in that I did what I could.
rcavezza 14y ago
This is a golden quote from the post. "If you want people to like you, give them something. If you want people to hate you, take something away from them. "
damian2000 14y ago
My sympathy goes to the writer, but honestly, if you turn up at any major sporting event, anywhere in the world, without CASH, then you are asking for trouble. Cash is still king especially with small vendors, cafes, people selling hot dogs, etc. I'd never go anywhere like that without a plentiful supply.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  Yes, and pickpockets love this fact.
bdunbar 14y ago
This is a problem with a solution: eschew credit for debit cards. Mine is 'visa-compatible' (and others), draws from my checking account.
- peteretep 14y ago
  ...? Yes, Visa offer debit clearing as well as credit-card clearing. As do Mastercard (Maestro). How switching to a debit card would help, I'm not sure, unless it was a Visa debit ... and in which case, how's that different?
  - bdunbar 14y ago
    I was not clear enough. My debit is visa and mastercard compatible. And no credit-card fees, I bank with a credit union. Were I foolish enough to pay money to spectate, I wouldn't even notice the VISA/Master Card thing.
lutorm 14y ago
Can anyone explain to me why the government issues currency for free, but doesn't provide for an electronic equivalent? Instead of having economic transactions being controlled by a giant corporation, shouldn't this be considered an essential function that should be handled by the state?
- kalleboo 14y ago
  Denmark has the government-regulated Dankort, which until 2005 charged no fees, and since then has a fixed yearly fee for merchants (rather than a per-transaction or percentage). This can be a pain for visitors as many small shops and restaurants will only accept Dankort.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
ChuckMcM 14y ago
Any thoughts on making that hate actionable? I agree with everything that has been said about feeding it back to the company and the LCOG but I don't think they care. Clearly the vendors hate it too, maybe NFC will help here? Something where the vendor can claim plausible deniablilty that you didn't pay with the sponsored card? Maybe give out $100 Mastercard gift cards in the middle of the village and drive people nuts? I don't know, something to escalate this kind of thing?
linuxhansl 14y ago
Hear hear. Currently I just take whatever credit card my bank provides (which currently is VISA, which is another story altogether), but I'll make sure that whenever there is a reasonable choice I'll choose another provider in the future. There used to be a time where marketing was about awareness. The extra money that both McDonald and VISA will make from these exclusive deals is likely peanuts to their global revenue, but both squandered their chance of just being visible and now mixed it with "we just spent a lot of money to keep the competition away". Stupid it you ask me.
philip1209 14y ago
The author's assessment is fair; I felt offended on a road trip in Ontario when I found out that the Tim Hortons only accepted Mastercard. An international event like this should not accept only a single type of credit card. I do not understand the reasoning behind this by the Olympic committee, because in all likelihood the big corporate sponsors are using the event to entertain clients, and they will likely pay with company Amex cards. Imagine being a businessperson whose company shelled out a sponsorship cost greater than the GDP of some of the competing countries, only to be embarrassed while buying drinks or food for a client because you have to pay for the items on a personal card. Even more embarrassing would be if their personal card was a Mastercard. Angering these types of visitors is not what behooves the olympic committee.
rickmb 14y ago
Although I agree it's annoying and negative marketing, it's also being completely overblown here. This stuff is just a minor marketing gimmick. Paying with credit card is in itself rare in most of the world outside the US, where debit cards and cash are way more common. My guess is, 95% of all locals and non-US visitors automatically pay with cash and don't even notice the Visa-only signs. Not having the local currency on you and waving your credit card in situations where it's considered inconvenient and inappropriate is a very typically American tourist thing to do. And I really can't think of anything within the Olympic venue that would be considered appropriate to pay for with credit card.
- namdnay 14y ago
  > debit cards and cash are way more common The restriction was on both credit and debit cards (people refer to both as "credit cards" in many European countries). >95% of all locals and non-US visitors automatically pay with cash Hardly. Most tollbooth lanes in Europe only take plastic, self-service checkout lanes at supermarkets only take plastic. It is completely normal to pay for anything worth more than a few euros with a card.
- AlisdairO 14y ago
  Paying by credit card is incredibly common in the UK - very similar usage profile to the US.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  > Paying with credit card is in itself rare in most of the world outside the US I live in the UK: You're incorrect. I would say credit card payments make up the majority of transactions (exceptions: buses, market stalls, and Greggs).
  - pbhjpbhj 14y ago
    Our Greggs has a card terminal, McDs do too now but most people appear to pay cash.
    - 14y ago
smsm42 14y ago
I still wonder what exactly they are proud of. Of not accepting MasterCard and AmEx? Is it some achievement one should be proud of? I should then be twice as proud as they are - not only I don't accept non-Visa cards, I also don't accept Visa cards either! Really, with Visa budgets one expects they could hire somebody to express the same sentiment in a comprehensible manner that doesn't make everybody seeing it go "WTF?!"
babasave 14y ago
Mastercard did the same thing to the 2006 WorldCup in Germany. Took this picture back then. http://flic.kr/p/furNp http://flic.kr/p/furNp
podperson 14y ago
VISA did equally stupid things for the Sydney Olympics, e.g. convincing the taxi companies to only accept VISA for the duration. It's extremely annoying (I was a Mastercard user at the time) and surely anti-competitive.
mgkimsal 14y ago
what would have been perfect to do is give 5% cash back on every purchase with a visa made in london during the olympics. The marketing would have been far more 'word of mouth', the benefits more direct, much happier customers, and it may have prompted people to actually consider getting a visa card if they didn't have one. Or a random "one person per day using their visa card at the olympics wins $1 million". All of these wouldn't have prevented competing currency, but likely meant almost everyone used a visa anyway, assuming they had one. But hey, what do I know? I'm just someone who has a visa card and would have been pissed off and offended at this campaign had I been at the olympics, just like the OP was. I guess we're not the target market, although I can't really determine who is the target market.

551 points by roee 14y ago

You are a customer of your bank, not Visa. Visa's customers are merchants and financial institutions.

This reads like the sort of post that so often goes on bad logic riding on emotion, but it's a completely valid point. I'm a Visa user, plus I don't plan on going anywhere near the Olympics despite living fairly close to London, but when I heard about this marketing plan I literally thought it had to be one of those hilarious fake news stories. But it wasn't. Stuff like the McDonalds sponsorship he mentioned (banning people from selling chips) is bad, but at least as a consumer if you want chips... you can still buy them. But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. Oh, and the OP talks as if there's a difference between how international and UK people are affected by this, but that really isn't the case. Based on my own anecdotal evidence I certainly know many more people who have at least one Visa card than people who have at least one non-Visa card (myself for example, my personal debit card, personal credit card, and company credit card, despite being from three different providers, are all Visa), but there are still plenty of people using, for example, cards from MasterCard.

klausa 14y ago
>But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. I think both OP and you (or me, for that matter) don't have access to important data - specifically, what's the percentage of people that have BOTH Visa and MasterCard (and what percentage of those that do not, are likely to buy ticket for games). If it's low - then it probably was a stupid move, although I don't really feel qualified to say that. If, on the other hand, it's very high (like 90% (which I think it is)), then it's very smart move.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  I suppose it depends on the demographic, if the olympics is mainly attended by relatively affluent people with multiple credit cards. I know plenty of people who don't even have a credit card beyond a bank issued Maestro debit card.
- Wilya 14y ago
  I agree, though I would think the ratio is the opposite. The thing is, having multiple cards might be a sign of wealth, but it's also a consequence of local culture. In some countries, everyone has a gazillion of cards. In some countries, having two cards is sort of an exception. In some countries, half the shops usually don't take VISA (Belgium is like that iirc, but I might be mistaken). So, by taking a decision like that, you're alienating quite a few people, based on non-relevant criteria (not wealth related ones).
- makomk 14y ago
  Well, anyone who was British and bought their tickets through the official UK process for buying Olympic tickets had to use Visa to pay for them anyway. I think lot of people bought their tickets through travel agents, though.
- pbreit 14y ago
  Even if the percentage overlap approaches 90%, I don't think it's a smart move. It's very anti-customer and will cause a decent percentage of people a great deal of angst and a much larger percentage of people will be quite disappointed. And don't forget that high-spending corporate travelers use Amex almost exclusively. The problem with a payment provider striking an exclusive deal like this is that it creates very real problems for people unlike, say, and exclusive beer deal. And it creates a great deal of negative feelings towards both Visa and the Olympics. I'm sure Visa is able to show that it is a good deal for them. But I suspect it is just as easy to show the opposite. Not smart at all.
baddox 14y ago
It seems like you and the author are assuming that everyone has some sort of right or reasonable expectation to be able to buy products with any payment method they choose. But that's rarely the case. There are tons of places that simply don't accept MasterCard or American Express, for example. Almost no place will accept barter. The only way this was a bad decision by Visa and the Olympics is if the sponsorship payment wasn't enough to cover the lost sales, which is unlikely to be the case.
- mikeash 14y ago
  Expectation? No. Desire? Yes! If someone goes out of their way to make me unable to use the form of payment I want, and that is accepted in many other places, I will dislike them, despite not having the "right" to use it.
Osiris 14y ago
But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I do not have a Visa card. I have one Mastercard and one Discover card, plus my PayPal credit/debit card which is also Mastercard. The only Visa I've had in years have been those prepaid rebate cards. But I don't think it's VISA that we should be blaming but the Olympic Committee that agreed to this and the McDonald's deals. They didn't have to accept those conditions.
- jarek 14y ago
  Why do you have a Discover card? Serious question, I've never been sure of the utility or purpose.
  - Osiris 14y ago
    Why do you drive a Honda instead of a Toyota or GMC or Ford or Kia? A credit card is a credit card. I did get 5$ cash back on a lot of travel I did for work like hotels, restaurants, etc., so that was one reason.
    - jarek 14y ago
      Yeah but both Hondas and Kias can drive on almost any road. That's not the case with Discover acceptance, though I understand it's a lot higher in the U.S. High cash back is a fair enough reason, thanks.
MartinCron 14y ago
bad logic riding on emotion Humans make purchasing decisions in a fundamentally emotional way. Most of the best marketing out there trades on emotion. People get pissed off and hold grudges in a completely irrational way. Think of all of the people who refuse to buy [BRAND X] because the first product they had from them eventually failed. Visa just went out of their way to have a lot of people hold grudges against them.
dangrossman 14y ago
> But this Visa deal, what on earth are people without Visa supposed to do? I just don't see how anyone sane could think this was a good plan, either from an Olympic organiser's point of view, or Visa's. It's been working for the past 26 years that Visa has sponsored every Olympics game. This isn't a new thing. This is what pays for the Olympics even occurring. Their sponsors are exclusive sponsors. Visa's already committed to the next 4 games as well (through 2020). As far as Visa's point of view: > According to the U.S. Sponsorship Tracker, a Visa commissioned study following the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games conducted by Performance Research, an independent research company, Visa cardholders who were aware of Visa’s Olympic Games sponsorship claimed a 16 percent and nine percent increase in Visa card usage in Canada and the US respectively. The same report found Visa’s brand equity was 32 percent and 38 percent higher among consumers who were aware of Visa’s sponsorship in Canada and the US respectively. http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/visa-and-the-olympic-games.pdf http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/vis...
- mvc 14y ago
  > This is what pays for the Olympics even occurring Even conservative estimates of the final cost of the Olympics are around 10bn. Visa paid only 100m so I think the games would have been fine without them.
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    40% of the Olympic costs are funded by The Olympic Partner (TOP) program, of which Visa is a charter member. I was making a general statement about exclusive sponsorships making the Olympics possible, not Visa alone.
    - cromulent 14y ago
      40% of Olympic revenues come from TOP. Revenues generally don't cover costs by a long way.
barrkel 14y ago
I live just beside Victoria Park, about 0.5 miles away from the Olympic park. You would scarcely even know the Olympics are on by what I see in east London. If anything, it's much quieter than usual. Staying away on account of it isn't necessary. At worst, there's a little bit of delay on the A12 as it goes past one of the park entrances and narrows down to a single lane for 200m or so, but that's about it.

apendleton 14y ago

I'm not sure what the basis is for the assumption that this is a marketing move. It seems like the more obvious motivation would be to force everyone to pay with Visa to get the credit card fees from what will undoubtedly be several million dollars' worth of purchases, as a means of partially offsetting the cost of the investment in the sponsorship.

dangrossman 14y ago
I don't think Visa Inc., which has been sponsoring the Olympics since 1986 in whatever country it's held, gets any transaction fees from Visa card acceptance in Europe. Visa Europe is an independent company with an irrevocable license to the Visa brand and an interoperability agreement. That suggests to me that the sponsorship is purely a marketing move.
- apendleton 14y ago
  That may well be; these articles hint (without supporting evidence) that fees are part of the motivation, but I'm not sure how much credence to lend them: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153008/Visa-branded-cynical-bans-rival-cards-Olympics.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2153008/Visa-branded... and http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2910799/Visa-in-Olympic-Games-tickets-storm.html http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2910799/Visa-in-Ol...

jonknee 14y ago

So this is about a man with a Visa card upset that his Visa card is accepted everywhere he goes. Visa has been exclusive at the Olympics for a long time and even though I have never been I know that.

chokolad 14y ago
But the fact that only Visa is accepted is not really something to be proud of, is it?
- jonknee 14y ago
  The fact of any corporate sponsorship isn't something to be proud of. Your Big Mac isn't going to taste better because they forked over a ton of cash to the IOC. I have a Diet Coke on my desk right now and I'm not proud at all over it being available at the Olympics instead of Pepsi.
  - mthoms 14y ago
    Equating the fact that you can only pay by Visa with the fact you can only eat McDonalds french fries is a bit disingenuous don't you think? Paying Visa directly costs me more money (and inconvenience). It's a tax on everything.
    - jonknee 14y ago
      You're able to use cash, though I doubt they'll give you a discount.
fleitz 14y ago
Here's the issue, you walk into a store that you've been going to since you were a kid, pull out the payment card that you've been using since you were an adult, and they point you to a sign that says only Visa is accepted even though you bought something on interac a week before. It's not about visa being exclusive to the Olympics, its about VISA being the only thing you can use to buy shit in your hometown. Basically, if you could buy a quaachi in the store then it was going to be a pain in the ass. It's a piss off, people don't like to be forced to do things for arbitrary reasons.

mthoms 14y ago

During the Vancouver Olympics not only were we not permitted to use other credit cards, we couldn't even use our bank-issued debit cards for payment (in Canada we don't have Visa Debit cards - our debit cards are issued directly from banks have been accepted everywhere for nearly two decades.) Cash or Visa Only. So there I was at an official Olympic souvenir shop picking up some gifts when I was told no - I'd have to walk down to the other end of the airport terminal and take out cash... come back and pay with that. Needless to say they lost the sale. How many other sales did they lose I wonder?

jonknee 14y ago
> Needless to say they lost the sale. How many other sales did they lose I wonder? Surely not enough to cover the massive amount of money Visa paid to be an exclusive sponsor. In London this year that is reportedly over $100M and during the first week Visa racked up $700 million worth of charges at the games.
- mthoms 14y ago
  Interesting. What you're implying is that the marketing benefits of Visa become a sponsor are secondary to the direct revenue it generates at the event. This could be the most profitable marketing spend with the quickest ROI ever.
  - jonknee 14y ago
    No, I'm saying that any lost sales the IOC sees from people who don't have cash or Visa will be more than made up by the huge amount of cash Visa paid to be a sponsor. The $700m figure just shows that the exclusive relationship is doing just fine.
    - wtracy 14y ago
      More likely, in my mind: The IOC gets the marketing money from Visa, while the independent vendors at the Olympics take the hit from not being able to accept MasterCard.

haeikou 14y ago

So I'm European and everything, and not so much used to credit cards everywhere ... but is it really so hard to pay cash for a day?

pavel_lishin 14y ago
Not really, but you have to estimate how much cash you'll need. You also run the risk of that cash being stolen.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
  And there's also the convenience thing of not having to withdraw in advance
- kaybe 14y ago
  It won't go bad after this day.. (but theft is a valid point)
  - archangel_one 14y ago
    If you don't live in the UK, having a fistful of sterling when you get home is not really the ideal situation. It's not far from it going bad, in a sense.
    - jarek 14y ago
      For values of "going bad" approaching "losing 2-4% of its value." The horror.
      - archangel_one 14y ago
        Well yes, but you have to go to a bank and exchange it, and they do their best to charge more - the last time I asked about selling €50, the bank wanted a $5 fee... Anyway, it seems reasonable to me that people might want to avoid that when they have a perfectly good Mastercard which has always worked in the past.

shtylman 14y ago

You hate them and yet will probably change nothing in your usage habits regarding their cards or make an effort to support systems that are not visa?

vitalique 14y ago
It seems to me that, regardless of what blogpost author is going (or not going) to do, we can draw a lesson or two here for our own products/services: take away freedom of choice from your customer, and he may quickly become a pissed off and lost customer to you. You have to be very careful in estimations of potential profits and losses of your marketing efforts. Customers may not care (nor should they, actually) about your business or marketing strategies. (Though I'm absolutely sure that Visa is benefiting a lot right now and will not suffer any long-term losses because of this campaign.)

jiggy2011 14y ago

I'm surprised Visa even needs to market, whenever I have been issued a card by my bank sometimes it's been a VISA and sometimes a Mastercard/Maestro. I assume I could get one particular type of card if I specifically requested it but I really don't understand what the difference would be to the end user. I guess perhaps if the only differentiating factor is "you can use this one if you goto the olympics" then maybe that is enough to sway a bunch of people?

dredmorbius 14y ago
The simple truth is that Visa largely is marketing. It's also a huge transaction processing system, but the larger part of the organization is in fact responsible for managing the brand. Think about that next time you're looking at your interest rate and/or merchant fees associated with your credit/debit card.
bennysaurus 14y ago
You have to understand what Visa is competing against; it's not against the other card providers, it's against cash. Considering how much money they have spent to be a sponsor I don't think they count their return to happen during the Olympic period, this looks more to be a habit forming thing (when you go out their aim is you'll go for your Visa by default).
- X-Istence 14y ago
  I go for the card with the highest amount of cashback for me...
  - bennysaurus 14y ago
    Yep but that's up to the banks and their bundles more than Visa/MC; the cards company's mission is more one of convenience.

Shenglong 14y ago

I disagree completely. Visa sponsored the event - why would they want competitors there? When the average person sees that his or her Mastercard is not accepted, I don't think the first response is "damn you, Visa!" Just like, when I see an AMEX card isn't accepted, I don't say "Damn you Visa and Mastercard for offering lower rates!" The image that Visa is trying to promote is that they're the most commonly accepted card. Because consumer perks vary only slightly (if at all) in home countries, for most consumers, the question becomes permeation. If they see lots of places accepting Visa and not Mastercard then they're more likely to get a Mastercard. To give you a closer-to-home example: In Canada, we have Tim Hortons - which is a cheaper version of Starbucks (and it's very popular). They take Mastercard, but not Visa. There have been several situations where I've been unable to purchase food because I use Visa and I hate cash. At no point have I said "damn you, Mastercard! I hate you!" In fact, if I actually drank coffee, I'd probably have gotten a MC already.

jiggy2011 14y ago
"damn you, Visa!" is exactly what my first response would be, either that or damning the Olympic committee. This is particularly jarring , because in the UK we are just used to the fact that everywhere that accepts VISA will also accept Mastercard. I can't think of a single situation I have been in where that hasn't been the case. AMEX is a little different , since most banks that offer AMEX will also give you a Mastercard/VISA on the basis that it's less ubiquitous but offers better perks.
pavel_lishin 14y ago
Were there ATMs at the Olympics that would dispense cash from a non-Visa card? You can always walk out of Tim Hortons and get cash out of an ATM, or go to another coffee shop. When your options are either "have no money" or "waste ticket by exiting venue to get cash I can not use at that venue because I can't come back in", it's a bit different.
- simonw 14y ago
  "Were there ATMs at the Olympics that would dispense cash from a non-Visa card?" Actually, no there weren't! Visa insisted that any ATMs that accepted other cards were removed from the venues. This lead to a marvellous screw-up when all of the Visa card machines at one venue went down and there were only 8 freshly installed Visa ATMs to handle the crowds (which replaced 27 that had been removed): http://news.sky.com/story/966545/olympics-anger-as-visa-cards-crash-at-wembley http://news.sky.com/story/966545/olympics-anger-as-visa-card...

netaustin 14y ago

The flip side of this marketing proposition (give something, not take something) is exactly what American Express does. At last year's US Open, American Express gave cardholders a special little radio from a booth in the concession area. Many people had these radios, which was good marketing for American Express, especially considering the presumably affluent audience attending an expensive event. But they didn't actually inconvenience anyone in the process.

peterwiese 14y ago

Pay cash, moron. That's how we roll in Europe.

tonfa 14y ago
s/Europe/??/ (Germany?) I know at least a couple of European countries where debit/credit cards are prevalent.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
  Like the United Kingdom, which is hosting the Olympic games...
  - bencoder 14y ago
    Compared to some European countries, the UK is far behind. Many of the smaller retailers and pubs/bars still don't accept card or require minimum spends (£5 or £10) to be able to use cards. In Finland it seems that absolutely everywhere accepts card and cash is very rare. I'd guess at least 95% of the in-person transactions that I see are made with card. Even for the smallest amounts.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
      At least we have Chip and PIN!
    - christoph 14y ago
      This is very true. The merchant fees in the UK and therefore the minimum spend between merchants can vary enormously. For instance, I can buy milk at £0.49 on an American Express card in Tesco, but in my local pub, anything under £10 (on any card other than AmEx - AmEx is still not accepted in that many places in the UK) requires me to pay a £1 transaction fee. There is no reason behind this, other than Tesco are so huge, they can negotiate a much better rate than a small business, who clearly can't even consider the huge American Express merchant fees. The sooner somebody disrupts this 'business', the better for everyone.

timrogers 14y ago

The oddest thing for me was seeing a "Visa Customer Services" desk at an Olympic venue yesterday with two exceedingly bored looking staff. I'm not at all sure what they were meant to be doing given that all the customer service is provided by card issuers, not the network...

donpdonp 14y ago

Not having been to the olympics before, an important detail is how far this 'zone' covers. I am going to assume its a significant number of blocks, maybe even a mile, around the olympic venues that include everyday businesses that people use, olympics or not. The not-selling-fries bit sounds hugely anti-competitive and way beyond the scope of what should be possible by this event. Payment cards go a step further. People rely on their particular card and the norm is to accept at least two kinds of cards. Creating a temporary monopoly on payment cards is again way beyond the reach of what is reasonable for a marketing agreement.

elemeno 14y ago
It's only within the sites themselves, nowhere else.

ArbitraryLimits 14y ago

On the one hand, the author makes a good point. On the other hand, he actually uses the phrase "simple folks" as if this were a Populist meeting in the 1890s. I'm really surprised by how much that one slip has undermined his credibility with me.

jlgreco 14y ago
I am surprised that it had that effect on you too. You even realize that it did, and don't rationally reevaluate? How does that work?
- ArbitraryLimits 14y ago
  Well, I mean the rational portion of my brain realizes it and tries to compensate for it, but I don't knock myself out making sure the rational portion is fully engaged when scanning blog posts.

dredmorbius 14y ago

It's more than just Visa -- this is the marketing arrangement for (AFAIK) ALL Olympic sponsors. The marketing agreement with the IOS is: - You get your brand prominently featured across venues, media feeds, and collateral. - All competitors are iced out. I'm OK with the first. I'm not OK with the latter. Particularly in light of the Orwellian trademark and copyright enforcement (including significant changes to corresponding statutes) the IOC is granted. That and the fact that Olympic athletes are no longer amateurs, but professionals. It's a charade. An impressive one at times, but a charade all the same.

zzygan 14y ago
Yep, there is also the stipulation that no Shops in London are allowed to sell hot Chips unless sold with Fish aka Fish and Chips, because McDonalds has exclusive sponsor rights on Chips. I should say that English Chips really are nothing like McDonalds french fries. Same thing, different brand
- aes256 14y ago
  > I'm not sure if this was the point Yep, there is also the stipulation that no Shops in London are allowed to sell hot Chips unless sold with Fish aka Fish and Chips (...) Just to clarify, the restriction only applies in and around the Olympic venues, not the whole of London!
- kmm 14y ago
  How are they enforcing that? Please don't tell me it's actually illegal to sell french fries in London right now.
crag 14y ago
Actually it's worse. All video footage belongs to the IOC. In other words, athletes don't own their image at the Olympics. This is true with the NCAA too, by the way. And the NFL. So if a company signs an athlete to wear their tennis shoes (for example) any image from any olympics, the IOC gets a fee. Not the athlete (of course the athlete is begin paid anyway).
14y ago

switch007 14y ago

It's hard to avoid Visa now in the UK. I don't think any banks issue new Maestro debit cards any more - they're all VISA.

ewood 14y ago

Maybe it is a unique marker of those who are technically minded to be especially aggrieved by an arbitrary restriction such as this? Going through the London2012 ticket website today I noticed the requirement to pay by Visa and even though I was intending on using my Visa I clicked on the "What if I don't have Visa?" link to see what alternatives were on offer: If you do not have a Visa card, your bank will be able to help you select and apply for the Visa product that best suits your needs. For more information on how to obtain a Visa product, please visit the Visa website. Do they seriously think I'm going to organise a new card just to buy Olympic products? A better piece of advice might be: If you do not have a Visa card, find a friend who does and get them to buy the tickets for you. Then settle with cash and buy them a beer for their trouble.

ars 14y ago
I would rather say: If you do not have a Visa card take your money elsewhere, we don't serve your kind here.

thetrb 14y ago

I think this is a valid complaint, but it's nothing new. Same thing happened to me when I tried to buy Tickets for the NFL. They also only accepted Visa at that time (not sure if it changed since then). I wasn't able to buy Tickets online because of that reason so I looked up the next brick & mortar store which sold these tickets and found that Macy's sells them (at a special counter). So I drove to Macy's thinking that at least they should accept any credit card - but nope, they rejected my Mastercard so I first had to get cash at an ATM. I think Visa's point is that you feel limited by not having a Visa card and so are more willing to get a Visa. In my opinion that's kind of similar to how advertisement works in general. You don't see a commercial and immediately go to buy it, but they try to build the sense in you that you actually need the product.

wilki 14y ago

Don't hate Visa, hate/dislike the venue host that agreed to such terms (thus subjecting you to said terms). Since the article talked about McDonalds - do you hate Coca Cola for striking up an exclusivity deal with McDonalds? If you must place blame, direct it toward the correct entity.

Zarathust 14y ago
This a thousand times. It's the olympic commity that agreed on such terms, they are to blame. It does not exempt Visa and McDonalds from being assholes, but if you allow assholes inside your house, now its your problem.
jlgreco 14y ago
> "Don't hate Visa, hate/dislike the venue host that agreed to such terms" "Both" is a perfectly valid option. My ire is not zero-sum.. far from it.

rubergly 14y ago

More realistically, Visa was probably hoping that many consumers would, like the author, already have the option of and be forced into using their Visa card. I agree that this seems, in addition to being extremely frustrating to almost all consumers, a silly marketing move, but I'm sure that Visa has run the numbers and has a sound business reason for doing this. Since, judging by mthoms's post, this seems to be a tradition at Olympics, my reasoning may be off, but I imagine that forcing all vendors to only accept Visa must cost a lot more than a sponsorship without that condition—and I really think that they wouldn't blindly jump into that without a sound reason. There's the obvious trade-off of how much extra money Visa makes from users who have multiple cards and are forced into using Visa where they wouldn't have otherwise vs. money lost from Visa-owners who who are pissed off. But there are probably much more subtle, long-term effects. Maybe 75% of consumers present have a Visa, and 50% of those Visa-owners feel entitled and empowered by having the ability to use their card while others are frustrated; and then there's the trade-off of the 'entitled' Visa-owning 37.5% of consumers spending more with their Visa cards over the following months/years vs. the money lost due to the 25% of consumers who didn't have a Visa at the olympics and possibly hold a grudge and never own a Visa card because of the experience. Not to mention the fact that a similar sponsorship would likely be arranged if Visa decided not to do it; for all we know, MasterCard had a clear business incentive to do this but refrained because of moral reasons, but are we (consumers as a whole) discussing how valiant MasterCard is and how much they respect us as consumers or have we all forgotten a little bit about MasterCard because everyone's talking about Visa? Again, I don't agree with this idea; I think it's bad and annoying. But I think it's silly and a bit ignorant for all of us (many of whom have no marketing experience, and most of whom don't on this scale) to assume we know more than the marketers making these decisions because we're annoyed.

omarrr 14y ago
A better marketing approach to this would have been to silently only accept VISA and never call attention to the fact that there is an arrangement behind the scenes. Still pretty awful for your potential customers.
- sigkill 14y ago

Gustomaximus 14y ago

This is stupid marketing by the Visa team. But what has not been mentioned is why would the Olympic committee allow this! And money is not the answer as I would think Visa / Mastercard or other would still sponsor this if the committee had said all cards must be accepted. Personally I am more disappointed in the olympic committee than Visa.

crag 14y ago
"Olympic committee allow this" Money of course. What did you think?

brudgers 14y ago

If one needs a reason to hate Visa, their suspension of payments to Wikileaks may be a bit more robust and stand on somewhat higher moral ground, in my opinion.

FuzzyDunlop 14y ago

What I disapprove of most with this is that it totally flies in the face of existing competition laws, that exist to protect the consumer. In any other situation this would not be allowed to happen, and that it actually has happened (amongst all the other things, like the excessive promotion and monopolisation of unhealthy food and drink) makes me resent both the Olympics and the government that gave them so much of a free pass. The sheer amount of corporatism and hypocrisy depresses me.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

ghshephard 14y ago

It used to be the case there were lots of places that wouldn't accept mastercard. It's rarer these days, but I still run into them. It would never occur to me to ever travel anywhere outside my local neighborhood without both Mastercard and a Visa. And I realize that 50%+ of the time my Amex (which, of course, is what I need to use for corporate travel) - won't be accepted at smaller places. Expense Report Hell...

simonw 14y ago

I've been having enormous trouble understanding the thinking behind the "We are proud to only accept Visa" marketing campaign. I simply can't understand how it could be viewed positively by any consumer - it's such an obviously anti-customer thing to do. I've been trying really hard to understand why Visa would make such an obviously unfriendly and counter-productive decision. The only theory I can come up with is that their real customers are the banks, and this is their way of saying to them "We're so completely ruthless that you're better off doing deals with us than anyone else". Seems a bit far-fetched though.

dangrossman 14y ago
> I simply can't understand how it could be viewed positively by any consumer Visa's market research suggests a significant increase in Visa usage and Visa brand value among consumers aware of their Olympic sponsorship (which has been ongoing since 1986, and already committed through the next 4 Olympics games): > According to the U.S. Sponsorship Tracker, a Visa commissioned study following the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games conducted by Performance Research, an independent research company, Visa cardholders who were aware of Visa’s Olympic Games sponsorship claimed a 16 percent and nine percent increase in Visa card usage in Canada and the US respectively. The same report found Visa’s brand equity was 32 percent and 38 percent higher among consumers who were aware of Visa’s sponsorship in Canada and the US respectively. http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/visa-and-the-olympic-games.pdf http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/vis... > I've been trying really hard to understand why Visa would make such an obviously unfriendly and counter-productive decision The first Olympics game where Visa was exclusively accepted was Calgary 1988. This isn't a decision they just made.
- jacalata 14y ago
  He wasn't asking 'why sponsor the olympics', he was asking 'why take the exclusive angle'. Saying 'they've been doing it for years' does not answer that.
  - thebigshane 14y ago

lucisferre 14y ago

I totally read that headline as "Great, work visa, now I hate you." Was expecting an immigration rant.

smsm42 14y ago
Yup, same here. Then I remembered the stories about Olympics and Visa and realized why "Visa" is capitalized.

jakeonthemove 14y ago

What the? I'm surprised they could actually pull this off - they must've spent a lot of money on it. In Europe, MasterCard is much more popular than Visa (the latter is used mostly for credit cards, and most Europeans use debit cards) - I'm thinking there are a whole lot of other people cursing the company right now, too. Good going, Visa...

dangrossman 14y ago
Only Visa has been accepted at the Olympics since 1988. They're a charter member of The Olympic Partner (TOP) program.

kareemm 14y ago

> I discovered that McDonalds’ terms of sponsoring included that no one else in the areas of the games is allowed to sell french fries, unless they come with fried fish (because the classic dish of Fish & Chips could not be banned in the UK). But besides the Fish & Chips exception, no one is allowed to sell french fries around the games. My friend dealt with sponsorships in the venues for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics. One of her tasks was getting the venue menus signed off on by the sponsors. One of the food vendors wanted to serve potato wedges at the venue. But because McDonald's was one of the 2010 title sponsors, and they had the same "no french fries" clause, my friend spent ~6 months of her life negotiating with the McD's folks over the difference between potato wedges and french fries. In the end, the vendor got to serve potato wedges, but McD's got a ton of concessions in exchange (better signage location, etc etc).

ww520 14y ago
Why do McDonald not want to serve french fries? People love fries. And it's a big profit center for McDonald anyway.
- hartez 14y ago
  I think they meant that no one except for McDonald's was allowed to serve french fries (or anything similar to a french fry).
  - rahoulb 14y ago
    That also gets me - anyone who's ever had fish and chips will know that the chips may be fried potatoes but totally unlike McDonald's french fries.

paulsutter 14y ago

But the olympic organizers need a way to pay for their $70,000 lunches, which totally justifies this. http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-knows-who-was-behind-the-official-olympic-lunch-that-created-a-70000-bill-for-15-people-2012-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-knows-who-was-behind-t...

Happyhippy 14y ago

Visa should be reviled for what they did in the Olympics. "Am at the GB v UAE match, and there's a serious problem with Visa. All the cash machines are turned off as they accept non-Visa cards, and the Visa-only card payment system has crashed. There's a lot of frustrated people here with no money and no food for two football matches. No one wants to do anything here. Very annoying, lots hungry and thirsty people here." From http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/london-2012-olympics-blog/2012/jul/29/london-2012-olympics-day-two-live http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/london-2012-olympics-blog/20... Also, pre-Olympics they had the games zones remove all non-Visa machines. http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jun/01/visa-cuts-atms-london-olympics?INTCMP=SRCH http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jun/01/visa-cuts-atms-l... "Visa confirmed that it was replacing the existing cash machines at various Olympic sites with machines running on its own system as part of its exclusivity arrangement as a sponsor. The move means people with Mastercard credit or debit cards will not be able to use the ATMs to withdraw money." Gold in the Corporate foot shooting event goes to.....VISA!

bicknergseng 14y ago

I'm curious... does anyone know where all this money from sponsors goes? The IOC is supposed to be not for profit. I understand hosting the Olympics is very expensive and that the LOCOG wants to recoop some costs, but this is ridiculous. It's going against the IOC's Olympic Charter at the very least...

jamesbritt 14y ago

Visa gets to to do this because the IOC and the sponsoring city allow it. Hate on Visa (because they don't have to do this), but hate on the IOC as well, and on any city government that OKs this sort of shit.

DannyPage 14y ago

I'm not surprised at all. This is a company-wide philosophy that they should be the only CC processor. I once did some contract work at Visa. At the time, I only had Mastercard and American Express. Went to their work cafe, tried to get some food, but was told (almost rudely) that they only took Visa. No cash either. I could buy a pre-paid card that can't be reloaded at one of the nearby kiosks (for 3 dollar fee per card). Needless to say, I went somewhere else for lunch.

pacomerh 14y ago

This title can also be read as a really absurd immigration article.

knowaveragejoe 14y ago

What really gets me is the use of the term "proud" - as if the people displaying such signage really feel anything remotely like pride about it. In reality they likely feel indifferently(they're going to make a lot of money anyways, just being at the Olympics). But they certainly do not think to themselves "This is a good thing I'm doing. I'm happy to present this to my customers."

10dpd 14y ago

Did anyone else read this title thinking it was from a disillusioned immigrant?

pgtart 14y ago

A visa card, and the pin code was 666 only those with sign could pay and trade. Its a scary form of enslavement, like a next world order Or even worse suddenly people's money has no value at all.

elchief 14y ago

You realize they do this because they know there's absolutely nothing you can do about it right?

einhverfr 14y ago

Honest question here. What implications are there under European Anti-Trust law regarding such a rule? Is such a bald-faced restraint on trade illegal? Could many vendors get into trouble here? Could the IOC be sanctioned? I ask because in the US I would expect Sherman Act lawsuits to be flying over stunts like this.

unreal37 14y ago
Lol. The IOC be sanctioned? Sponsor exclusivity has been a feature of the Olympics for 20+ years including the Atlanta games. Only Visa was accepted at the Atlanta Olympics. No one was sued.

sirfried 14y ago

i thought he hated "work visa" for a second, silly me

slantyyz 14y ago

The Olympics as a sporting event is great (ok, if you discount women's badminton, fencing, boxing and a few others), but the Olympics as a business.. it's just sleazy.

dools 14y ago

You didn't already hate Visa? I hate Visa, Mastercard, AMEX, the banks, insurance companies, the stock markets, real estate companies, mortgage brokers, you know, pretty much everything to do with finance. How could your opinion of a finance institution get any lower?

ww520 14y ago

I have Master, Visa, AE, and Discovery, just to cover all basis. And the decision to use which one is purely based on the rebate economic. The 2% rebate Master got used the most, while the 3% gas rebate on AE or Discovery got used when filling gas. Only when all else failed I would use the 1% rebate Visa. So the "marketing" campaign by Visa in Olympics have 0 effect on me to use Visa in the future.

Zenst 14y ago

Fiscal descrimination is still descrimination. Maybe Visa broke a law, if not then the law needs to catchup. I don't have a Visa card since a year ago when the ticketing system was announced as Visa only, I didn't attent the games or any aspect of it and it put me of the whole Olympic event that when the torch, cycle races which were going past my house I was like meh and avoided them as Visa had put me off. I don't like credit cards as it is, but bias and descrimination is something I dislike even more and in that I did what I could.

rcavezza 14y ago

This is a golden quote from the post. "If you want people to like you, give them something. If you want people to hate you, take something away from them. "

damian2000 14y ago

My sympathy goes to the writer, but honestly, if you turn up at any major sporting event, anywhere in the world, without CASH, then you are asking for trouble. Cash is still king especially with small vendors, cafes, people selling hot dogs, etc. I'd never go anywhere like that without a plentiful supply.

jiggy2011 14y ago
Yes, and pickpockets love this fact.

bdunbar 14y ago

This is a problem with a solution: eschew credit for debit cards. Mine is 'visa-compatible' (and others), draws from my checking account.

peteretep 14y ago
...? Yes, Visa offer debit clearing as well as credit-card clearing. As do Mastercard (Maestro). How switching to a debit card would help, I'm not sure, unless it was a Visa debit ... and in which case, how's that different?
- bdunbar 14y ago
  I was not clear enough. My debit is visa and mastercard compatible. And no credit-card fees, I bank with a credit union. Were I foolish enough to pay money to spectate, I wouldn't even notice the VISA/Master Card thing.

lutorm 14y ago

Can anyone explain to me why the government issues currency for free, but doesn't provide for an electronic equivalent? Instead of having economic transactions being controlled by a giant corporation, shouldn't this be considered an essential function that should be handled by the state?

kalleboo 14y ago
Denmark has the government-regulated Dankort, which until 2005 charged no fees, and since then has a fixed yearly fee for merchants (rather than a per-transaction or percentage). This can be a pain for visitors as many small shops and restaurants will only accept Dankort.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

ChuckMcM 14y ago

Any thoughts on making that hate actionable? I agree with everything that has been said about feeding it back to the company and the LCOG but I don't think they care. Clearly the vendors hate it too, maybe NFC will help here? Something where the vendor can claim plausible deniablilty that you didn't pay with the sponsored card? Maybe give out $100 Mastercard gift cards in the middle of the village and drive people nuts? I don't know, something to escalate this kind of thing?

linuxhansl 14y ago

Hear hear. Currently I just take whatever credit card my bank provides (which currently is VISA, which is another story altogether), but I'll make sure that whenever there is a reasonable choice I'll choose another provider in the future. There used to be a time where marketing was about awareness. The extra money that both McDonald and VISA will make from these exclusive deals is likely peanuts to their global revenue, but both squandered their chance of just being visible and now mixed it with "we just spent a lot of money to keep the competition away". Stupid it you ask me.

philip1209 14y ago

The author's assessment is fair; I felt offended on a road trip in Ontario when I found out that the Tim Hortons only accepted Mastercard. An international event like this should not accept only a single type of credit card. I do not understand the reasoning behind this by the Olympic committee, because in all likelihood the big corporate sponsors are using the event to entertain clients, and they will likely pay with company Amex cards. Imagine being a businessperson whose company shelled out a sponsorship cost greater than the GDP of some of the competing countries, only to be embarrassed while buying drinks or food for a client because you have to pay for the items on a personal card. Even more embarrassing would be if their personal card was a Mastercard. Angering these types of visitors is not what behooves the olympic committee.

rickmb 14y ago

Although I agree it's annoying and negative marketing, it's also being completely overblown here. This stuff is just a minor marketing gimmick. Paying with credit card is in itself rare in most of the world outside the US, where debit cards and cash are way more common. My guess is, 95% of all locals and non-US visitors automatically pay with cash and don't even notice the Visa-only signs. Not having the local currency on you and waving your credit card in situations where it's considered inconvenient and inappropriate is a very typically American tourist thing to do. And I really can't think of anything within the Olympic venue that would be considered appropriate to pay for with credit card.

namdnay 14y ago
> debit cards and cash are way more common The restriction was on both credit and debit cards (people refer to both as "credit cards" in many European countries). >95% of all locals and non-US visitors automatically pay with cash Hardly. Most tollbooth lanes in Europe only take plastic, self-service checkout lanes at supermarkets only take plastic. It is completely normal to pay for anything worth more than a few euros with a card.
AlisdairO 14y ago
Paying by credit card is incredibly common in the UK - very similar usage profile to the US.
UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
> Paying with credit card is in itself rare in most of the world outside the US I live in the UK: You're incorrect. I would say credit card payments make up the majority of transactions (exceptions: buses, market stalls, and Greggs).
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago
  Our Greggs has a card terminal, McDs do too now but most people appear to pay cash.
  - 14y ago

smsm42 14y ago

I still wonder what exactly they are proud of. Of not accepting MasterCard and AmEx? Is it some achievement one should be proud of? I should then be twice as proud as they are - not only I don't accept non-Visa cards, I also don't accept Visa cards either! Really, with Visa budgets one expects they could hire somebody to express the same sentiment in a comprehensible manner that doesn't make everybody seeing it go "WTF?!"

babasave 14y ago

Mastercard did the same thing to the 2006 WorldCup in Germany. Took this picture back then. http://flic.kr/p/furNp http://flic.kr/p/furNp

podperson 14y ago

VISA did equally stupid things for the Sydney Olympics, e.g. convincing the taxi companies to only accept VISA for the duration. It's extremely annoying (I was a Mastercard user at the time) and surely anti-competitive.

mgkimsal 14y ago

what would have been perfect to do is give 5% cash back on every purchase with a visa made in london during the olympics. The marketing would have been far more 'word of mouth', the benefits more direct, much happier customers, and it may have prompted people to actually consider getting a visa card if they didn't have one. Or a random "one person per day using their visa card at the olympics wins $1 million". All of these wouldn't have prevented competing currency, but likely meant almost everyone used a visa anyway, assuming they had one. But hey, what do I know? I'm just someone who has a visa card and would have been pissed off and offended at this campaign had I been at the olympics, just like the OP was. I guess we're not the target market, although I can't really determine who is the target market.