On the flip side, since I know they have to pay a small fee on credit transactions if I’m at a small local store or restaurant I always try to have cash on hand to pay.
I’m also the guy who will use plastic to buy a cup of coffee from McDonald’s rather than break a $20.
Go figure.
I was looking into selling some soft drinks at my bookstore. Wholesale cost on bottles (I didn’t look at cans) was $0.75, and most folks in town sell them for $1.00 to $1.25. There’s not a whole bunch of margin in there.
The places with the fountain drinks, of course, do much better than that.
It’s inconvenient to have to carry cash, because once it’s spent, you have to go somewhere specific to get more, or else pay exorbitant ATM fees. I usually don’t have that kind of time in my day.
I “resent” it only to the extent that I usually don’t have cash. If I had it, I’d gladly hand it over. If a merchant is going to force me to go out of my way to obtain cash, that’s like adding another chore to my day.
One place I worked 25 years ago, the machine that processes the credit card transactions would not accept a transaction for less than 99 cents. (again, 25 years ago, the place I work for now can do as little as 1 cent.) If there was a late charge for a local call. (back then there was no interface for the phone system and the hotel, so all calls had to be added manually.) the charge was written off.
I have see Pepsi on sale for $3 a 12 pack of cans, and Shasta for 99cents a six pack. But yes, that’s per can. Bottles are more expensive.
A couple of posters have opined that there’s something wrong with paying for small purchases with a credit card. But they haven’t explained why this is.
Why is this?
What’s better about carrying cash?
The objective reason that has already been brought up is that, since the retailer is charged a fee for processing a credit card, they could actually end up losing money on a small purchase paid for by credit card.
I can think of several subjective reasons why people might have qualms about paying for small purchases with a credit card:
To some people, cash feels like “real money,” whereas paying with a credit card (or debit card) is too easy: no money visibly changes hands, so it doesn’t feel like spending, and it becomes too easy to waste money on piddly, inessential things.
The word “credit” in “credit card” makes some think (with some justification) of using a credit card as getting a little loan, going into debt. And if you have to get a loan to buy a bottle of soda or a pack of gum, that’s pathetic, and you shouldn’t be buying them.
Some people developed their financial habits and attitudes back in the day when credit cards were less common and less widely accepted, and using them was more of a big deal, so it just feels weird to use them for small, everyday purchases.
They’ve had bad experiences with people who “don’t carry cash”—for example, the mooch who doesn’t pay his fair share because he doesn’t have any cash on him—and are thus inclined to take a dim view of such people.
The only reason I’d be buying a single soda from a gas station or other convenience store would be because I didn’t have the time to make a better or cheaper choice in the first place.
Do you have a cite for this? I mean, I’ve got a Visa card with rewards, and another one which does not (but is also branded Visa). Does the merchant really pay a different fee for the same 50 dollar transaction depending on which one I stumble onto in my wallet?
My monthly merchant account statement. . .
In lieu of that, Merchant account - Wikipedia
So I wonder why it’s against the merchant agreement in the US? Virtually everywhere in the UK does this, apart from the really big places like Tesco’s and Sainsbury’s. It’s normally £5 but sometimes £3.