4 ms·
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 wi
by 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 agoI 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 agoThat 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...