|
|
|
|
|
by mansa10
309 days ago
|
|
I've never understood this insurance defense of high payment card fees (percentages instead of flat fees).
If it is a truly valuable insurance for the shoppers, why is it not opt-in? My anecdotal experience from EU is that no-one even knows chargebacks exists or how it works and if this was turned into a transparent honest insurance, prompted via a question on the payment terminal/online checkout such as "Do you want to pay 1-3% to insure this purchase?" the vast majority of people would click no on the vast majority of purchases because there is already inherent trust involved between the merchant and the shopper. Now add the chargeback pains that merchants go through for credit card frauds and you have what appears to be a sickly system where both shoppers and merchants lose, with the only winners being visa/mastercard & the acquiring and issuing banks they cooperate with. If I buy a burger from a restaurant and its bad, i tell all my friends and i don't go back. I don't need insurance. If I buy a service on steam, i already trust valve fully for those smaller amount sizes, I don't need insurance. My gut feeling is that >99,9% of purchases made via payment cards are not relevant to insure meaning following the simpler risk model of cash for those would work just fine. |
|