Total no,individual items yes.
Okay, now we’re getting somewhere. Because, as I said before, in U.S. shops, items are almost always priced in an amount ending with “9.”
Same ere. ence te problem in increasin priceqs by a small percentae (keyboard broken).
Okay, let’s explore this. Because my conclusion would have been “Hence the lack of the problem in increasing prices by small percentages.”
Prices aren’t set at 9s because American consumers prefer it, but because merchants perceive they can squeeze out a bit more per transaction. And it makes little difference to the consumer, because (unless you are in a no-tax jurisdiction) just because a price is set at 9 does not indicate how the final sum is going to come out.
Oh, he’s getting all posh on us, dropping his aitches, now.
Edit: In Britland, isn’t VAT (Value Added Tax, like sales tax but not) part of the price on the price tag?
When I was in Germany at least, all the taxes were already calculated into the price tag. Not “no-tax” jurisdiction but still nice round numbers.
Why do prices end in .99?
The master speaks.
CMC fnord!
If you’re selling to consumers, you have to include it as part of the price by law, so people don’t realise how much of their money the government (and the EU) are stealing.
All good reasons, but people expect prices to end in a 0, 5, or 9 now, y’see.
But what happens if they don’t? I don’t think that anyone here would really care one way or the other. Would a British customer complain about a price ending in a different figure? What would they complain about exactly?
I doubt that anyone would complain per se, but people would be perturbed.
Okay, I just pulled out my merchant services agreement and re-read it. Let me add a few things to the thread:
#1: The one I’m quoting from is Bank of America’s. The rules are different depending upon what bank the merchant uses for card processing. Keep this in mind. I have no agreement with Visa or MasterCard. Only with B of A.
#2: Despite the oft-quoted (misquoted) statement that it’s against the rules to check ID, I see no such restriction in my agreement. The closest thing is probably this (bolding mine):
Read the bolded part of that quote in context with this, from a few pages later:
Sounds to me like I’m not only allowed to check ID, but that it’s part of my responsibility on unsigned cards. And if that doesn’t make it clear enough, how about this?
Let that put the “You can’t check my ID” myth to bed once and for all.
#3: Speaking of unsigned cards, get a load of this (bolding mine again):
If I accept an unsigned card, then the bank’s no longer accepting responsibility! You bet I’m going to check ID on an unsigned card. Oh, and by B of A’s definition, a card that says “Check ID” is an unsigned card.
#4: And as to the original issue:
Section 8.10.C) has an almost identically-worded restriction applying to debit cards.
I wish I’d known about that restriction on maximum amounts. When I bought my last truck, I tried to put it on my Visa card and the dealership said there was a $5,000 maximum. I accepted them at their word and lost out on one heckuva lot of airline miles.
I’ve owned a retail business for almost six years now. I’ve never been charged banking charges for handling cash (I’ve never heard of such a thing), I don’t carry hold-up insurance, I fail to understand how cash shortages are a cost (if we run out through poor planning on our part, we run to the bank and get more cash), and employee pilfering is just as likely through lifting merchandise or modifying register prices for friends as it is through cash–can’t count that as a cost.
Cosmosdan…I thought about sending invectives at you to begin this post but decided on reflection that your gross and obvious ignorance of the economic realities of the 21st century are punishment in and of themselves.
However, I would like to address some of the points that you’ve made repeatedly.
In this post - the misunderstandings you have about why people choose to use credit cards.
First, you have expressed surprise that people have begun to increasingly use credit cards for micro-purchases. I would like to assure you that I know many people who have been making as many purchases as possible with credit cards for MORE THAN TEN YEARS. I include myself, most of my friends and family, and many business acquaintances. The fact that this massive change in consumer behavior has somehow evaded you, does not bode well for your success in business.
More importantly, you repeatedly state that people make this choice to use credit cards simply for “convenience”. Implying…and even stating…that people should just get some cash, it’s not that big of a deal, and pay that way for small items in order to allow small business people to make more money and thereby stay in business. Anyone who objects to not being able to use their credit card is a “petty whiner”.
Well, guess what? The choice is not made simply for convenience; it is not made without forethought; and it is not petty to express a rational preference. The choice, in my experience, is a financial one. JUST LIKE YOURS. Every time I am required to pay in cash I incur some or all of the following costs:
The cost of driving to the bank or to an ATM
The cost of paying a fee to withdraw money from the ATM
The cost of lost interest on the money that would otherwise be sitting in the bank
The cost of lost benefits for using the cards
The cost of having to save the receipt and record the transaction by hand (for business transactions in particular)
The time spent driving to the ATM ALONE costs me FAR MORE MONEY than the service charge the credit card company charges you.
You think that everyone would howl if you raised prices to cover the credit card fees (which BTW it has been pointed out to you NUMEROUS times that this is what the vast majority of vendors do and no howling is to be heard), but in fact by requiring me to pay cash for small purchases you are charging me FAR more than you would if you simply raised your prices to cover your costs. And you would increase my convenience, you would encourage my return visit, and you would NOT be violating your agreements in doing so.
I’ll add here that personally I couldn’t care less if you violate your agreement with the credit card company, as long as you don’t do it in such a way that it costs me much more in cash transaction costs.
If my complaint that you cost me $20 in lost time, effort, and direct money for a $2 purchase is petty whining, then what exactly is your bitching about paying 35 cents for the same transaction?
I realize I’ve made this personal by writing"you". In so doing I’m referring to the hypothetical business owner who requires a minimum purchase for credit cards. You are just the champion for their cause.
It’s clear after reading your post that you have missed the points I’ve been making, and, if this post represents your idea of economic realities I can’t take your ignorence comment too seriously.
Please point out specifically where I have expressed surprise about people using credit cards for micro purchases. I’m betting you can’t because it never happened. The fact is that the % of people using CCs for micro purchases has increased drastically over the past decade or so and that’s why stores are responding with minimum purchase amounts of surcharges.
In this article
This is an inaccurate representation of my position. I am well aware that people use their cards for reasons other than convenience and have stated as much.
I don’t know how you pick your bank but lot’s of folks including myself pick one because of convenient locations. Both of the banks I deal with are on the way to and from work. They also don’t charge account holders a fee for withdrawing cash from their ATM. It’s folks without an account that have to pay. Were you unaware of these economic realities?
As for these other costs you mention, they are laughable. If you maintain any CC balance that you pay interest on it more than eats up all those costs. Even if you don’t, if you pay off your CC monthly then the money comes from somewhere every month and hardly has a chance to acrue interest. We are also paying for those other benefits in higher prices.
Regardless of all that I never claimed people should stop using cards completely for small purchases. They should be aware of the real cost of all those benefits they are getting. CC companies have worked hard to create an illusion that they are free to the consumer. They’re not by a long shot.
I also pointed out that it’s costing small independent merchants a significant amount and maybe we should understand that instead of bitching about it.
Again, please point out specifically where I said this.
I’ve only encouraged posters that seem to adamantly bitch about this to have a little understanding for the economic realities of the merchant. I’ve also acknowledged that raised prices and a small discount for cash is a better way to handle it.
I’d also like CC users to have a real grasp on how much this trend and convenience is actually costing them. It’s a bunch.
And that perturbation affects your business decision because … ? Because people would stop buying items that were priced 53 cents instead of 49 cents? I’m trying to understand exactly what the cultural characteristic is that has such a strong influence on pricing. What are its parameters?
[QUOTE=InvisibleWombat]
Okay, I just pulled out my merchant services agreement and re-read it. Let me add a few things to the thread:
On unsigned cards, perhaps. On signed cards, it seems the only ID checking you are allowed to do is comparing signatures. Let me highlight this portion:
yes…well…I’m only going to do this once since you’ve posted a great deal and quite repetitively, and I value my time. A concept you don’t seem to grasp.
Well there’s this [post=204]here[/post].
And this one [post=222]here[/post].
Before you embarrass yourself by nit-picking that being curious about this mysterious trend in credit card use is the not the same as being surprised at it, I’ll amend my statement:
It should read - “First, you dolt, you have wondered aloud about the trend that people have begun to increasingly use credit cards for micro-purchases.”
No, that is the reason why the VAST MAJORITY of retail stores have priced the cost of accepting credit cards into the prices of their goods - just like they do with all of their other costs - in order to remain profitable…while a small minority of retail outlets have decided to require minimum purchases on credit cards. This small minority succeeds in 1) alienating customers, 2) creating additional costs for their customers that far exceed the transaction costs to the merchant, 3) creating a (small) inefficiency in the market, and 4) violating their agreement with their credit card company…all in one fell swoop. Yeah, that’s a rational solution.
Wow. I’m stunned that you said this.
I’m now convinced that you are either a complete moron, a pathological liar, or a troll.
Alright, here we go.
On your repeatedly stating that people make the choice to use credit cards for “convenience”. These quotes are all from this thread.
And of course in the post to which I’m responding
Regarding your multiple statements that people should just get cash to pay for purchases:
About people who complain about the minimum cc charge being petty whiners:
O.K. Fuckwit. Explain how I misrepresented you with FORTY THREE quotes from you expressing in various ways what I’ve said. This should be good.
Damn you are an exceptional asshole.
My bank does not charge me for using their ATM. So in the best case scenario, I only have to go out of my way a short distance to go to my bank and take out cash. Usually I can get the cash in 10 minutes or less, but it is not unheard of for this transaction to take a half an hour…traffic, line at the ATM, etc. I’m not going to bore you with my hourly rate, but I can assure you that it would take MANY, MANY 35 cent transactions to reimburse me for the cost of that half an hour.
And of course there are times…particularly when I am faced with having to buy something from a merchant who demands a minimum credit card purchase…that I have to use some other bank’s ATM. BUT WAIT…my bank will even reimburse me for that charge. All I have to do is save the receipt, fill out a form, and either drive it to the bank or mail it to a processing center, where my $2.25 will be refunded to me in 6 to 8 weeks. Once again, the cost of the time to process this cash transaction FAR outweighs the cost to the merchant of accepting my credit card. How can you not understand this?
So you want all of the customers to be concerned about your cc processing costs, but you dismiss our transaction costs (which are far higher, in my case at least) as laughable.
What could the appropriate response to this attitude be…let me think…oh yeah…
Fuck you and your fat, ugly wife.
I’d love to tell you that I never pay interest on credit cards, but it would be a lie.
In fact, I borrow substantial amounts of money from credit cards at very low rates and drop the money into money market accounts that pay more than double the interest. This creates a supplemental source of income for me at the cost of a few minutes making transactions from my computer.
So, please, educate me about accruing interest.
We do understand it. Apparently better than you do. Please just price the cost of doing business into your products and this problem will go away.
Right [post=222]here[/post], Asshole.
Shithead.
For someone who values your time you spent far to much of it being wrong.
Ahhhh The amended statement. A handy way to avoid admitting you were wrong. The problem with that is that it doesn’t make your previous statement less wrong or your amended statement any less feeble. So I wondered how the trend had progressed, …BFD It isn’t the same as it* evading* me which was your statement and completely wrong. Let’s see if your honest enough to just admit it. For safeties sake I won’t hold my breath.
Yes, the vast majority of stores would be cooperate chains. The title of this thread is Mom and Pop stores who are hurt much worse by transaction fees on small purchases.
Through all that searching for quotes did you notice post #273
which renders half the shit you pulled out of context sorta meaningless.
but I’m the dolt right?
Gee, That would really sting if I valued your opinion, but since you soldier on while continuing to be wrong I’m having a hard time taking it seriously.
Yes the word convenience or some form of appears in those. I’d go out on a huge limb here and say the primary motivation is convenience which was my point in those statements you pulled out of context. If enough posters want to assert that’s not true I’ll reconsider. Your statement was specific. “simply convenience” meaning solely. None of the numerous statements you quoted indicate I asserted that. I didn’t. If you’re going to criticize and call me names make a reasonable attempt at being accurate so you don’t look like a …dolt…wasn’t it?
Once again, that’s a lot of effort put into being wrong.
um,… also does** not ** support your statement. Unless you’re asserting that convenience is not one of the major motivations. Feel free to offer support for that argument if that’s your point.
Did I deny any of this?? What’s your point? For most people there are several convenient ways to get a few dollars in cash to use for small purchases that don’t entail any extra fee. Are you denying that’s true? So I’m asking people to show their local small merchant a bit of consideration, rather than file a complaint. So fucking what?
I didn’t deny this either. I do think* for the most part * that’s it’s petty whining to complain about the local independent merchant rather than extend a little understanding. That point is further made as posters complain that the local merchant is violating their agreement, and deserve to lose business but wouldn’t really consider canceling their CC because the CC company is not enforcing the guidelines or delivering the service they promised the CC holder.
It’s not a horrible crime, just a human trait, that I’m pointing out.
Gee, I think I just did. I find it immensely amusing that you whose time is so very valuable went to all that effort to be wrong.
The funny thing about me is that I responded to your actual post.
such as
which you now confess is minimal.
which was…just a lie?
If you don’t do this, then how is it that you know these specific times? If you know because you do it and your time is so incredibly valuable because of your hourly rate then it would seem like you’re the moron. I know it isn’t the same for everybody but I can get cash from the ATM in about two minutes or I get an extra $40 when I stop at the local grocery since they offer cash back at the check out at no charge. There are exceptions, but I think most people can plan on getting and carrying a little cash with very little trouble and expense.
You also seem to be assuming you {and others I guess} are sacrificing billable hours just to stop by and ATM or incorporate getting a bit of cash into their routine. Unless you work almost constantly I really doubt that’s the case. If you do you are the exception and that makes your points irrelevant to what I’ve been saying.
You are the one who assumed I didn’t. You’re wrong. You own inability to communicate accurately as demonstrated by your amended statements and contradicting yourself are mirrored by your lack of reading comprehension concerning my posts and the points I’ve been trying to make. You misunderstood the points I was trying to make and then stopped by to misrepresent them and call me names. It’s a joke.
No, I don’t dismiss them. I think the people on both sides of the register deserve equal consideration. The laughable part IMO is how people will complain about a small merchant charging a fee or having a minimum purchase, and want to boycott them or report them while accepting without complaint or even notice that increased CC transaction fees passed on in the form of higher prices cost them more in the long run than the things you mentioned.
My fat ugly wife said bring it on. She only hopes your dick is a lot more useful than your brain appears to be.
This is so impressive I can hardly speak. It’s also completely irrelevant to the discussion.
Who is the we that this is apparent to? After reading your posts I’m having a hard time thinking its you.
Just one more example of your lack of reading comprehension. The quote you used does not say the same thing as what you accused me of asserting. The fact that you can’t seem to tell the difference only makes your name calling more sad and pathetic.
btw, none of your links worked. good job. It adds a lot of credibility.
You are a troll and a hypocrite.
If 43 quotes proving you a liar isn’t enough support for you, then why don’t you just go ahead and support my balls on your chin.
You’re the whiner.
You’re inconsiderate.
You’re clueless as to basic economics.
You’re an asshole.
Enjoy your miserable fucking retail life.
I don’t know, man. That doesn’t seem the most Solomon like take on the cost of pocket money. Do you really never need cash for parking meters, hot dog vendors, balloons for your kids/grandkids, or what not? Do you not occasionally drive close to your bank?
I honestly think cosmosdan understands the benefits of using a card almost all the time. You mention this is some decade plus habit, you seem to hold it close to your general lifestyle and it clearly works for you. I doubt he’d want to deny it to you.
Might I suggest an interpretation to mitigate, I think I’ve got a handle on his arguments: cosmosdan is voicing points similar to those who demand that State&Federal sales taxes be added up at the cash register, in front of the customer. He wants people to KNOW where that extra money is going. I think that’s a fair analogy, correct me if wrong, cd.
It isn’t the cost of the pocket money, it is the cost of the transaction to me…just like it is the cost of the transaction that cosmosdan finds objectionable to him.
Yes, I occasionally need cash for other things in addition to retailers who demand a minimum purchase (although I pay for hotdogs with a credit card at 7-11), but these things are few and far between. I can’t remember the last time I fed a meter (and BTW credit card parking meters are already on the street in some places). I pay for toys with a credit card at a store.
My point has been that my cash transaction cost is far greater than the cost of the
same transaction to a retailer. I’ve already listed my cash transaction costs and had them dismissed as laughable, so I won’t bother again, but I know very well what the merchant’s cost is for the transaction and I know what my cost is per transaction, and thus I know very well that I pay much more. If you don’t believe it, fine. There are both monetary and time costs of cash transactions. I think this is well accepted among business people…but hey, people value things differently. If you find it cheaper to pay with cash, knock yourself out.
But if you do accept that my cost is greater, than cosmosdan is a blatant hypocrite for asking me to pay more because it is more “convenient” for him not to have to pay as much.
It is NOT about convenience. It is cost.
No, he just wants to:
- Insult people who object to being forced to pay with cash as petty whiners.
- Rationalize breaking an agreement with a cc company.
- Ignore simple solutions to the entire issue.
Jesus Christ, do we really need someone like cosmosdan, with such a slim grasp of basic economics trying to give us a lesson on the economics of credit card usage at the checkout counter, by putting up signs and changing well accepted credit card policies unilaterally?
What difference does it make if people know what the cost of a credit card transaction is? They don’t know what rent you pay…they don’t know how much your liquor license cost…they don’t know what your utility bills are…and why should they? These are all just costs of doing business. Price your goods accordingly and quit fucking with us. Is this the great service we’re supposed to be losing with the demise of the Mom and Pop store? Good riddance.