all 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 2 hours ago

Florida has a 1% sales tax that is used to pay for road construction, building fire stations, etc.

These guys are charging 3% globally, which is only used to pay shareholders. No competition, no alternative, no way to avoid paying.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 11 hours ago (7 children)

    Back when credit cards had to take paper carbon copies from a subset of retailers that had been certified to take credit, try their damnedest to decipher the faint blue numbers and names, verify the account information by hand, take on significant risk for higher purchase prices due to lower computer capabilities, then process the billing... Yeah, I can see why they charged 3% to every transaction.

    Nowadays, all of that is automated and digital and proliferated. There is no reason why AMEX should get $0.50 from every purchase of a Happy Meal. There is also no reason why Visa should get more money from a $20 purchase than it gets from a $100 purchase. It's the same amount of work! Same argument about TicketMaster charging a $200 convenience fee on a $500 ticket but only $100 on a $250 ticket.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 9 hours ago (5 children)

    A lot of places here refuse AMEX because of their fees. Oh look at all the benefits they provide, like barely being able to spend money anywhere!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

    That was a big problem a couple decades ago, and with Discover even more so. But I can’t remember any time in the last 15 years when AMEX wasn’t accepted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    Maybe its regional. UK here and any time I see a sign saying a card isn't accepted it's always AMEX. By far more common in smaller shops where the fees are going to be more significant to them. Big chains don't care.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 hours ago

    Overruled, and case dismissed.

    The company had an obligation to maximise shareholder value.

  • source