Unsurprising that they've ceased to accept Bitcoin. The only significant use cases thus far have been ransomware and buying recreational drugs. And early adopters cashing out of the pyramid scheme.
The two key value propositions noted in the post are:
> Buy APIs instantly without signup or credit card
> Sell APIs instantly without a bank account
...which are solutions looking for a problem. If you are working with legal businesses and dealing with signup, credit cards, or bank accounts are deal breakers, then there are other significant problems with your business model.
We don’t have credit cards. At all. We use EC (the E in EMV), which is a completely independent payment system, but isn’t used at all outside of Europe.
So, no US websites accept it.
I’ve been trying for 3 years to find an actually free way to send Google money to get a Google Play Dev account, but the only way is to pay money to get a credit card.
Seriously, if companies in the US would just accept a fucking international wire transfer – globally standardized, free to send and accept, processes in a few minutes – I could use a lot more international services.
As for wire transfers, they are most definitely not free to send or receive in the US. Fees are on the order of $25 each way depending on the bank, and actual humans and faxed forms are involved.
I don't know how it is in Germany, but in my country you pay for credit cards, and the amount you pay for the card determines how much insurance you have, as most all provide some type of travellers/medical/theft/etc. type of insurance.
Everyone pays their credit cards off every month because it's the law. If you are unable to pay, you can work out arrangements with the bank. If you need to use lots of money you don't have, you ask the bank for a loan and pay it back gradually.
It's my understanding that in the US, card companies make their money off fees and interest, which to me sounds like a much less appealing system designed to take advantage of the consumer.
I suspect the fees+interest thing is mostly a cover story. As unflattering as it seems, I'd be unsurprised to learn that the three pages of fine print are a calculated display, to make it seem as though they're merely not-entirely-oriented-to-the-public-good but otherwise aboveboard private corporations. And it's not as if they don't get some income from putting the screws to those short on cash, but if that were the extent of it then I should never get a credit card offer, ever. My only credit history is on-time rent payments, and my employment history + no dependents + no college loans should make it obvious that I would never generate any income from late-payment fees or interest. And yet, I've received offers throughout my adult life.
But even if they never saw a penny of income directly from me, what they would still get out of it would be the data. And insight into the purchase habits of consumers with plenty of expendable income - the same people that would otherwise be a losing proposition for a business that actually relied on failure to pay on time to stay afloat - seems like it'd be far more valuable than the entirety of what they'd be able to squeeze out of the already-cash-strapped.
I'm actually highly impressed at the extent to which they're completely successful in focusing the public discussion on their "outrageous" and exploitative policies. They put on a thoroughly convincing show of fighting tooth-and-nail against regulations to reign in that behavior. But I think it's because, if it ever got seriously done, people would start asking how it was they were still in business - and they would definitely still be in business. But the finance operation is just how they collect the raw material for their actual product.
I think you have an interesting argument here but I would like to raise some points as counter-arguments:
1. Your argument is premised on the fact that since you personally have been offered a credit card, and you personally have almost no credit history, that therefore credit card companies don't make money from charging interest on late-payments. That's an absurd premise.
2. I believe, based only on my subjective observations, that you are the exception in your use of credit. Many people are irresponsible in how they use credit cards and end up paying exorbitant interest to credit card companies. Mostly lower-middle class individuals who are trying to live beyond their means. In Canada the average citizen carries ~20 000$ of personal debt (excluding mortgages) and the majority of that is credit card debt.
3. I think you're ignoring the "brand" value of having market saturation for your product. For example, Coke vs Pepsi. Yes they are not exactly the same product but they're very similar and there's no doubt that Coke has reaped a huge benefit from having dominant market share. When you go to a diner and order a burger, and they ask you what you want to drink, if you want a cola you say "I'll have a Coke please". Its understood by that request that you want a cola, and would likely be okay with either a Coke or a Pepsi, but regardless you said Coke, and there's the value of market saturation. So yes the credit card companies want to get as many customers as possible to use their product in an attempt to saturate the market.
4. Credit card companies also charge merchants for using credit cards so even if the customers paid all their bills on time the credit card companies would still be making money. I don't imagine they make the majority of their money from charging merchants but it is still revenue they want in their coffers.
5. Your final point borders on a conspiracy theory.
Perhaps. But it means that in the US banks pay you to setup credit cards. Rewards credit cards can have sign up bonuses valued in the hundreds of dollars. They also have annual fees though, but anyone without terrible credit can get a no fee card with a smaller bonus. Most credit cards pay yoy to use, in the form of cashback bonus or rewards. Insurance is provided without fee and to some extent by law.
Wire transfers are absolutely unheard of at the consumer level outside of things like escrow for a house.
This is why I prefer to work with international banks, even in the US. If they don't know what an IBAN is I don't bother. HSBC is pretty good in this regard. Minus the money laundering.
In New Zealand we also have our own card payment network (EFTPOS). It has the same problem of being unable to make online purchases, where websites only expect Visa/Mastercard.
Luckily all eftpos POS terminals have a quite strict protocol upgrade regimen, and in the last ~5 years or so, it's becoming more common to request a Visa/Mastercard debit card (for a low but non-zero price) instead of an eftpos card (free with a bank account).
Because they are usually aren't free in Europe. And it doesn't feel like a new market opening, it usually is just that single shop once every year.
And additional ancedata because I don't know whether that's a US <> Europe thing: Personally, the idea of going into dept for private consumption is completely foreign to me and most people I know, so the idea of a credit card is very unappealing.
Wire transfers OTOH are simple, practically free and fast enough (<1 day inside the country, ~1 day inside of Europe).
> Personally, the idea of going into dept for private consumption is completely foreign to me and most people I know, so the idea of a credit card is very unappealing.
Though I know many don't follow this rule, I never purchase anything on a credit card I don't have cash for. It's purely for the convenience factor (and the 1-3% discount on all purchases).
Here in the UK, one advantage to using a credit card (even if you don't need credit) or a charge card is that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 gives you a whole bunch of extra consumer protections that you wouldn't get if you paid cash or debit card.
The main reason I got a credit card initially was because when I visited the US, nobody understood what a Maestro card was.
In the UK, credit cards (and bank accounts) are free to open.
In the Netherlands, both bank accounts and credit cards require a monthly fee (€5 / quarter for a bank account, €17,50 / year for a credit card).
I have accounts in both countries and I rarely need to fall back on my VISA card. Indeed, online payments here use an NL specific payment system called iDEAL, which makes use of your bank's online banking - it's far faster than entering 16 digit CC numbers and can integrate with your bank's app on mobile.
In the U.S., it's easy to get a credit card that has no fees. (There are some cards, like the ones associated with airline frequent flyer points, that still have annual fees.)
In fact, some credit cards will pay you a rebate on your purchases. One card I have gives me back 1% of everything I spend (the credit card company charges the merchant 2-3%, so they still come out ahead). Since I pay off my balance every month and thus pay no interest, using my credit card actually saves me money over paying in cash.
US cards don't seem to have fees except "premium" ones that toss in a concierge service. Banks seem willing to give them to anyone that opens an account. Only fees I've known people to pay were for Amex ($99 to $5000 a year.)
Plus US banks give out VISA debit cards, making it a non-issue (well, security/chargebacks might be). Dunno about EU, but in Canada, this doesn't seem easy. I opened a business account, then asked for a VISA debit card and both the service person and manager appeared to be confused as to what that'd be. They insisted I could pay things using Interac (Canadian card network), with no concept this wouldn't work for online use. They kept thinking I wanted a credit card. Bizarre.
Maybe there's some huge cost to making MasterCard or VISA connected debit cards?
I haven't seen an annual fee on a credit card in the US for years. Also, every debit card I've had for the past 20 years acts as if it were a credit card. So any place that takes a credit card can get paid directly from my bank account without dealing with real "credit" at all.
"Also, every debit card I've had for the past 20 years acts as if it were a credit card."
Except that debit cards in the U.S. are not covered by the same consumer protection laws as credit cards[1], so it's harder to do stuff like disputing charges. It's also possible for an erroneous charge on a debit card to wipe out your bank account. For that reason, I specifically ask my bank to give me a card that does not work as a debit card, only as an ATM card.
[1] E.g., the 'Fair Credit Billing Act', a federal law that protects credit card transactions, doesn't apply.
There are a ton of cards that have fees, mostly American Express, but Chase and others too. The fees usually unlock certain benefits, eg: Amex Blue Everday will pay 3% cash back at grocery stores, or for $75/yr, they will pay 6% cash back. The Amex Gold Premier is $190/yr but offer $100/yr back in baggage fees and constantly run $25-100 off deals at Enterprise, Newegg, general travel expenses.
So whether these cards are worth it depends a lot on how you use your card, but, they can pay for themselves very easily.
You can always get a free credit card if you want. I got one for my Apple Developer Account. Many german banks provide a credit card bundled with the bank account and there are also free prepaid credit cards.
All of those require you to have taken at least one loan or credit in your life, or to have an income.
I’m a student, and I was raised to never ever go into debt – I never had a single cent of debt to any institution, the maximum I ever had to a single person were cent volumes.
I tried, seriously.
Even the "free" prepaid cards cost money (usually several euro) to recharge.
> Aufladungen sind der Höhe nach nur innerhalb der vereinbarten Grenzen zulässig. Für die Aufladung der Karte wird ein Ladeentgelt gemäß Preisverzeichnis verrechnet.
> Monatlicher Freibetrag: 100€ Danach: 1,5% auf Mehrbetrag
As far as I can see, that’s the only limit.
But, also, if you do not have money on the card, your contract is automatically cancelled, and they’ll refuse to reopen one with you.
> Das Kreditinstitut kann die erforderliche Zustimmung versagen, wobei insbesondere die Nichtzahlung des Aufladungsbetrages gem. Ziffer 5 ein Versagungsgrund ist.
Eef, I hadn't seen that yet. That's really quite a thing.
I'm pretty sure that for most legitimate businesses, signup is something they want and wish everyone could do. It helps them track and maintain customer relationships, which is becoming an increasingly essential activity in the age of loyalty cards.
A bank account is similarly desirable. It takes a large part of the task of safeguarding your funds out of the hands of an amateur (i.e., oneself) and into the hands of a specialist with strong fiduciary responsibilities.
A large percent of Americans get paid via check and then use a check cashing store to convert to cash, and then use that to pay for bread. You do not need a bank account in that scenario.
It's actually not. The US and the UK have the same percentage of adults using financial services (91%.) France, Germany, Spain, Luxembourg, etc. have a higher percentage; others have lower such as Norway and Portugal (and Switzerland!.) The average for the US and Europe is 92%. http://mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Economic-Deve...
Not sure where you live, but how easy is it to cash checks at banks with whom you don't have an account? Apparently, check cashing outlets (CCO) handle substantial volume in the US and business is booming:
"Cashing a paycheck at a [check cashing outlet] gives customers access to their
money the same day. [Alternatively,] Banks limit access to $200 or so and can
hold the money for up to five days. Further, low-income and low-balance customers
get frustrated with a bank’s fees eating away at what little is in their
accounts or sending their balances more into the red with low-balance and/or
overdraft fees" [1]
About 8% of US households don't have a bank account. [1] The number seems to be slightly lower in the UK. I believe in some Western European countries it's required to receive government payments so the unbaked rate is lower in those cases.
And global remittances, store of wealth, international monetary system resistant to government and bank controls, to name a few other uses. It's amazing how many people are willing, even eager to dismiss crypto-currencies. The concept is so radical and revolutionary that it scares the shit out of a lot of people. It will take time for humans to catch up but if you think it's just a fad then you are deluding yourself.
"And global remittances, store of wealth, international monetary system resistant to government and bank controls, ..."
BitCoin might be taken more seriously if their advocates explained why any of those need to be solved, and how BitCoin does it better than the existing solutions.
Global remittance isn't something people need very often, and there are already solutions for it.
BitCoin is not a very great store of wealth. Keeping a box of cash under your bed is more likely to retain its value than BitCoin. Storing wealth isn't even a very good idea, though, and if a person has enough money laying around they'd be better off investing it anyway.
Finally, being "resistant to government and bank controls" isn't very convincing either, and I would hypothesize advertising it that way actually hurts take up by making it sound subversive. A drug kingpin would love a money system resistant to the government and the banking system, but what actual benefit does a normal person get from it? And is it even a true statement?
Problems are always subjective. I personally think that Bitcoin will revolutionize certain types remittance and cross-border global transactions, but I think it will happen quite slowly.
What bitcoin isn't that useful for, is this kind of internet microtransactions that Microsoft was accepting. Which is quite funny in a way, because I myself use Bitcoin for this kind of transactions, steam games, humble bundle etc. But it isn't really that I want to use specifically bitcoin, it's just that I happen to have bitcoin lying around, and it is easier to spend btc on this kind of items than other payment methods. People aren't going to buy bitcoin to use them on steam games etc, but they might use them for steam games if they already have some bitcoin.
Considering that what two three mining pools make up the majority of Bitxoin and can thus decide it's fate vs the number of governments and banks and being their varying policy I really feel like bitcoin is if anything more controlled. At the very least a cash transaction doesn't need to be okayed by a third party.
Also never having to deal with credit card fraud, sending money across country borders, taking cash out of 1/3rd of the ATMs in Thailand, buying computer parts, buying anything from overstock, ordering food directly from your computer without punching in any numbers...
If someone uses my credit card to buy something I didn't approve, I get my money back and I get a new credit card, all for free. It's annoying, sure, but also reassuring.
If someone steals my Bitcoin wallet and uses it to buy something I didn't approve, well, boo hoo for me. No doubt it's all my fault. Blame the victim, etc.
I'm much happier "having to deal with credit card fraud."
The two key value propositions noted in the post are:
> Buy APIs instantly without signup or credit card
> Sell APIs instantly without a bank account
...which are solutions looking for a problem. If you are working with legal businesses and dealing with signup, credit cards, or bank accounts are deal breakers, then there are other significant problems with your business model.