3 ms·
There are vendors I don't necessarily trust, and have never dealt with before. For these vendors, credit cards (with their protection, and the consequent premiu
by rlpb 13y ago
There are vendors I don't necessarily trust, and have never dealt with before. For these vendors, credit cards (with their protection, and the consequent premium) are perfect.
There are other vendors that I do trust and do repeat business with. For these vendors, I detest paying what is effectively a protection surcharge, when I don't need it. This is particularly the case for high value purchases where there is some percentage difference, rather than a small fixed amount. I appreciate the reason the payment purchaser must charge a fee; I just don't want the (protection) service provided.
In this case, I accept that I would take some additional risk, but I feel well enough protected by my country's legal system, when I am confident in the vendor's identity and that the sale would fall under my country's jurisdiction. This is not dissimilar to paying for something expensive by bank transfer to save on costs. This arrangement isn't quite that unusual in the UK, where UK-to-UK bank transfers for consumers are generally free. But this arrangement carries extra admin for the vendor in trying to match up transactions.
So a credit card is useful for some purchases (in particular, international ones, ones where I am not confident about the vendor's identity, or ones where I am not confident in the vendor's reputation). But for other transactions, I prefer to have the option of going direct. Bitcoin would be perfect for that, if it were more widely accepted.
- ig1 13y agoI would almost always put expensive purchases (holidays, events, furniture, etc.) on credit card because if the vendor gets into financial trouble, etc. you basically have no protection under standard sales legislation (you have to get into line with all the other creditors) but you have significant protection if you purchase with a credit card.
- rlpb 13y agoThat's fine - there are specific purchases I would always want to pay the protection premium for, including for some of your examples. But the risk involved varies depending on the situation. In cases where I consider the risk low enough, I would appreciate having the option of not paying the protection premium, and going without.
- canvia 13y agoThere is absolutely no reason for a restaurant to pay 2.9% of their revenue for payment processing. Their total profit margin is probably around that much, so reducing the processing fee to 1% could potentially result in a very significant increase in profits for them. There is no necessity for insurance on a transaction like a restaurant bill.