Busting somebody's balls because they're not abstracting away something as significant as 27% seems unreasonable. It shouldn't surprise you that somebody who dislikes giving 30% to apple would be proportionally less concerned about giving 3% to Visa.
It's hardly unreasonable; if their problem is, as they've said, "giving money to Apple", then it's not the amount, but the fact that Apple gets a cut at all.
And none of this is surprising, merely inconsistently applied logic. I fully understand what is happening here, clarifying statements will not help.
Says you, but obviously that's not how most people approach matters like this. Most people can reasonably be assumed to think that differences in degree, particularly an order of magnitude apart, are very relevant. At best you're being a pedantic pain in the ass, hassling people for not explicitly stating that a difference in degree is being considered, when such considerations should be reasonably assumed even when not explicitly stated.