Comment by ekjhgkejhgk
17 days ago
I always find it entertaining to hear people try to argue that what these companies do is soooooo difficult and that's why they're valuable. It's just multiple computers keeping a balance. It's not complicated.
No, these companies keep themselves in power not because they've solved such a difficult problem that nobody else can, but because they have a moat which they protect.
Time to do away with these foreign entities.
I'm a little shocked that of all the comments so far, no one has mentioned the financial risk borne by this whole value chain. OP is operating as if it's just a debit system moving money from one account to another but:
- For many consumers there isn't sufficient money in the account to settle all the one-time and ongoing transactions they are liable for -- credit cards are giving you a revolving loan, there's risk it will not be repaid, and that risk ends up reflected in processing fees
- For many _businesses_ managing cash flow is existential -- as merchants they want to be paid as quickly as possible, but as B2B customers they want to have 30-60 days to sell the input goods they've purchased so they can pay for them upstream. There is a premium for that flexibility that gets reflected in processing fees.
- For both consumers and merchants, fraud risk is real and while it's the most solvable part of all this it's a real (and costly!) factor today. That risk for fraud gets moved upstream to the networks/acquirers/processors/issuers and that premium shows up in (you guessed it) processing fees.
If you want to switch the world to a debit-based system where economic transactions are limited by cash on hand, I'd argue that's a poorer and less dynamic world than the one we're operating in today.
None of what you’ve mentioned has anything to do with Visa and Mastercard. Visa and Mastercard are just payment networks, their whole business is literally just transporting transaction information from payment terminals to banks and payment processors, plus keeping track of all the numbers (which is pretty important).
Payment networks don’t provide credit or any kind of liquidity whatsoever, that entirely provided by the various financial entities that communicate via the payment network. The reason Visa and Mastercard haven’t been easily replaced is simple network effects, nobody wants to integrate with a payment network where there’s nobody to transact with.
I had no idea visa/mc didn't bear the cost of fraud. I remember Paypal almost getting killed by fraud in the early days, and I always thought of Paypal as basically replicating visa/mc for online purchases. I didn't realize they were doing so much more than visa/mc by assuming fraud risk.
5 replies →
I replied downthread but I used "value chain" deliberately -- there are lots of intermediaries of which the card networks are just one link in the chain -- and the statement above is about risk being borne (and value being created for consumers) by the entire value chain that is different and difficult/impossible in a FedNow-style immediate settlement model: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46964968
4 replies →
There are many countries where debit cards are the norm and credit cards are extremely rare. In France, people are so afraid of consumer credit that cards are renamed ‘deferred debit cards’ rather than credit cards, otherwise people do not want them.
Growing up in the EU, living in North America now, it's mind blowing to me how much credit these companies are making available to me. Not that I ever would outside of an actual emergency but I can see how it's tempting to someone who didn't grow up in a financial risk averse society.
8 replies →
There is also a major difference as I understand it. They need to be resolved at the end of a certain period. There is a legal difference from Credit cards as in there is no continual liability and thus no continued line of credit. Getting a true credit card is also a lot harder here (not France) than a deferred payment card (usually 1 month) and has stricter credit checks.
13 replies →
Here it's more normal to save up for something and then buy it. Rather than buying on credit and then paying it off.
It makes much more sense too.
The financial system is built to stimulate that. For example if you'd buy a house you need to pay about 30% in cash and you can't loan that money somewhere else. This way you get people that know how to deal with money. And also the bank doesn't run a big risk if there's a market slump.
2 replies →
Debit cards come with the same fraud protection as credit cards do, which is the most important benefit of Visa/MasterCard.
49 replies →
> For many consumers there isn't sufficient money in the account to settle all the one-time and ongoing transactions they are liable for
This is a uniquely American viewpoint. In most of Europe you don't buy anything on credit ever.
Most places outside the USA actually. A liability is someone else's asset, and everyone wants USA assets, so the USA needs to generate a lot of liabilities.
I would never buy a plane ticket on debit.
Airbnb reservations I also tend to do on credit.
Anything related to company expenses I also do on credit and receive reimbursement prior to having to pay it myself.
14 replies →
There are numerous credit providers in Europe that would beg to differ.
By December 2025, consumer credit in the Euro area alone stood at an estimated €812 billion.
3 replies →
I would have said "true", or at least - I would have said "I do, but never incurring a charge on next month's bill", but with services like Flex from Monzo, you can actually get credit over 3 months with 0% interest rates, which not only makes buying stuff more likely, but spreads out the costs. It doesn't solve over spending though.
5 replies →
It is not. https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/private-debt-to-gd...
The widespread use with "buy now pay later" also counters your wildly baseless claim. Klarna, PayPal 30 days etc.
5 replies →
> credit cards are giving you a revolving loan
I'm confused - is it not the issuing bank that gives you the loan, and the credit card company just provides the infrastructure?
Btw. having an overdraft limit of a few hundred Euros is quite typical for those liquidity issues. You don't need a credit card for that.
I used "value chain" euphemistically because you can get really complex on this and I wanted to spare the casual reader. I meant your credit card as an end-user product in your pocket and not meaning the card networks in isolation, but the value chain is roughly:
1. Merchant (bears little fraud risk but a lot of chargeback risk)
2. Payment Gateway (little direct risk but some liability risk)
3. Merchant Acquirer (more direct risk but mostly if merchants become insolvent)
4. Card Network (Visa/MC/AmEx - less risk but significant underlying costs managing a global technology that spans the financial system and needs to be distributed to almost every merchant of any scale in America)
5. Issuers (Banks + AmEx - most risk but get a big share of interchange fees)
I've surely missed something here that the very smart (and increasingly grumpy these days!) HN community will doubtlessly pile-on to correct, so I apologize in advance for errors or omissions... and I bow down if @patio11 swoops in to tell me about the complexity I've missed in either payments or Japanese economic/cultural conventions
Will also add that the benefit of credit is not overdraft but smoothing cash flow... if I'm living paycheck to paycheck and get paid every two weeks, I will incur essential expenses at the beginning of the fortnight that I can afford but lack cash in my account to pay now. I can't overdraft because I won't have the funds to deposit into that account for another two weeks. I'm getting a service that smooths my cashflow and there's a small premium added to reflect that. (Could you save up enough to avoid needing this? Is that a uniquely American way of living? I don't know! I'm making a descriptive claim not a normative one!)
2 replies →
I shouldn't have to pay for your usury economy if I'm using cash. If that were really the issue, these companies would have no problems with businesses charging different prices or offering discounts for cash.
The networks allow cash discounts if it's posted clearly and the customer has an option to use a different payment method -- you see this on every gas station sign alongside every highway in America. (What's _not_ permitted is adding a secret surcharge or item mark-up for credit card payments)
7 replies →
Sure, as long as I don't have to pay for how much your cash costs the business in cash handling, security, theft, counterfeiting losses, and more. Studies show businesses pay more for a transaction in cash than on credit. If they really were losing out on taking cards, they wouldn't accept them.
Companies did do that - but I belive now it’s not allowed to charge less for cash.
1 reply →
> credit cards are giving you a revolving loan, there's risk it will not be repaid, and that risk ends up reflected in processing fees
Neither Visa nor MasterCard are loaning customers their money. It's the European banks that hold the bulk of the risk for European credit card transactions.
Also worth noting that who owns the risk is a regulatory question, not a technical or product one - and, like all regulatory questions, is different for different countries/regions.
Chip and pin and NFC transitions took off much quicker outside the US because merchants generally owned more of the chargeback risk than in the US, and therefore were willing to update their POS equipment accordingly.
Risk (like debt) is another place where a US-centric view will likely lead you to misunderstand the purpose of Visa/MC.
2 replies →
> Neither Visa nor MasterCard are loaning customers their money. It's the European banks that hold the bulk of the risk for European credit card transactions.
And the bulk of the fees from credit card transactions goes to the bank(s) since they hold the risk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee#:~:text=The%20...
This shows a fundamental understanding about the market you're commenting on. The European market is nothing like the US market. The vast majority of transfers are already debit based. Most people have a credit card, but for most part it's not a daily driver. Many European countries don't have credit scores at all, and in the ones that do, it isn't nearly as important as in the US. Since there isn't much of a practical need to take on debt, most people don't do it (leaving aside mortgages and leases, but you don't take those on a credit card anyway).
Yeah very disconnected comment I agree, Europe is different (and dare I say better or more stable long term in this regard).
I have credit cards for decades with various institutions, but NEVER EVER went to minus, see no reason to change it. Just a bit of discipline. We don't have public credit score or similar dictatorial stuff here. The only loan I will ever have on my name is called mortgage on real estate, and beyond that is a line I'll never cross. Same goes for everybody I know - family, friends, coworkers.
This comes from somebody working for a bank so not some clueless fool.
I meant to write misunderstanding, sorry about the typo.
Cash flow and fraud, yes. Credit, not much in most of Europe. AFAIK nobody has had something close to real credit cards until recently. They were called credit cards but it was a debit card with payment and deferred to the end of the month and backed only by the cash in the bank account linked to the card. I guess that no financial institution did like to risk any money on the behavior of European customers.
> For many consumers there isn't sufficient money in the account to settle all the one-time and ongoing transactions they are liable for -- credit cards are giving you a revolving loan, there's risk it will not be repaid, and that risk ends up reflected in processing fees
This is really much less of a thing in Europe, or at the very least in Germany and Spain. Mostly it's the overdraft from banks that you can use as what you call a revolving loan. Most of the visa and mastercards I've had in my life simply debit from my main account.
> If you want to switch the world to a debit-based system where economic transactions are limited by cash on hand, I'd argue that's a poorer and less dynamic world than the one we're operating in today.
Disagree. Credit has its uses, but debit is superior for the vast majority consumer transactions: lower fees, lower risk, instant settlement, easy P2P transfers, and broader accessibility. That we've become used to credit card payment system in the West is largely a historical aberration that needs correcting.
Also, I'm a bit biased since I live in China, but WeChat Pay and Alipay are so far superior to the credit card system that I can hardly find a single redeeming quality in the latter. China was lucky in that it leapfrogged the traditional credit card system since it didn't have that historical baggage.
Instant settlement is an anti-feature.
I don't want some asshole to be able to instantly drain my bank account. If I did, I'd be carrying a suitcase of cash around with me.
2 replies →
> lower risk, instant settlement
That's ridiculous. Why should I, as a consumer, care about the merchant's "risk?"
1 reply →
I agree the risk transfer is very important, but Visa and Mastercard don't do that (they just facilitate it)
Gotta echo other commenters here. Many people do not want revolving credit, or want to just use it to smooth out balance spikes and for emergencies. The American tropes of carrying a large debt balance or maxing out cards (eg to launch a business) as financial strategies are viewed as somewhere between gambling and fraud by a lot of people.
Visa/MC have built walled gardens which provide many services.
Some of the services include: - Consumer Credit - Fraud protection - Payment network - Discount service (rewards, etc) - Concierge services - Rental/Ticketing services - etc
No one is denying the utility of what they have created. The problem is they’ve built monopolistic walled gardens where these are all bundled together which raises overall costs while also prevents competition.
These services can easily be unbundled (for example in India the payment network is open and cost free, so anyone can provide those other services on top of the payment network).
What has made this far more urgent, however, is that these companies are located in the U.S. which has recently leveraged the power these networks have to attack EU citizens for frivolous reasons.
So even if the MC/Visa business model was perfect, it would be foolish for even American allies to rely on them given the actions of the current administration.
In this response, I detect the typical European tendency of elevating risk over opportunity.
This is not meant as a personal attack, or meant to be defamatory. I am detecting a familiar pattern, that is entrenched culturally.
Further, I identify this cultural trait as one of the obstacles or reason for many European problems.
It’s an opinion I have.
Hmm, maybe for countries with strong consumer protection, yes.
I lost 3 credit cards INSIDE an airplane (hello AirAsia!). I only realized it when I turned on my phone while queuing at immigration and was bombarded with dozens of "Successful transaction" messages. That's ~30min from stepping off the airplane. When I checked my statements, I saw dozens of physical transactions (swipes/taps) with different merchants in different cities from the airport.
All 3 cards have different PINs. All require a PIN for transactions above ~USD200. Yet the banks rejected my disputes because "it's a physical transaction, so you must be the one doing it." Apparently, they all think I could fly to different cities, buy different items, and fly back to wait in immigration, all in 30 minutes.
I had missed the warning that this tech is now widespread. Must have not logged into Hacker News that day
https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/nfc-gate-relay-attacks-2026/5...
1 reply →
If my bank did this to me I would immediately drop them.
Lawsuit time! Against your bank.
Isn’t that financial risk of credit cards borne by the banks doing the lending? It’s not really any different to a debit card transaction on a bank account with an overdraft facility.
> For many _businesses_ managing cash flow is existential
Err, no - for _all_ businesses managing cash flow is the _only_ NR 1 crucial thing, because if they dont, they will disappear by tomorrow :)
> - For many consumers there isn't sufficient money in the account to settle all the one-time and ongoing transactions they are liable for -- credit cards are giving you a revolving loan, there's risk it will not be repaid, and that risk ends up reflected in processing fees.
Their risk is covered multiple ways (as reflected in their profits). You pay an annual fee to have a card. You pay per transaction, you pay for paywave, you pay 21% in interest.
They cover their risk by hitting every possible angle.
They are taking a percentage point or two on the entire consumer payment system.
I think there's plenty of money to back all the activity.
Especially if there are central banks willing to back them
> They are taking a percentage point or two on the entire consumer payment system.
Visa/MC make about 0.1-0.13% of each transaction, not a 1-2%. The rest of the interchange (the vast majority) goes to the issuing bank.
2 replies →
You're mixing debit and credit cards.
In the EU, debit cards are pretty common, and largely its a network effect. You need to get terminals that are supported by your payment provider.
A lot of merchant terminals are provided by banks, and frankly they are itching to get a sweet sweet cut of each transaction. Not only the information, but the cut of each transaction. Something like 0.2-1.5% of each transaction. (I'm sure mastercard and visa give them a cut)
For Credit cards, the banks/operator already handle most of the risk, and then pay visa a percentage for the privilege of charging usury like rates
I'm not mixing -- if I have $0 in my bank account today and I don't get paid until Friday, I cannot buy food today with a debit card. Being able to buy things today on the promise of future cash flows is a risk-based financial product and risk comes with premiums. (Again: could you solve this problem by having more money in your account? Sure! But there are a lot of downstream consequences of every consumer and business in society operating that way and there are real trade-offs that should be discussed with more nuance than "monopoly hoard ledger boo")
This risk is all covered by the banks, not the interchange networks?
man who has only used the american financial system: the world not singularly using the american financial system is less dynamic. surely there are no counterexamples to this.
That's all the bank's problem, not the network's.
Unlike americans, the rest of the world isn't as addicted to credit cards, and operate on a mostly debit based system already.
In Europe, credit cards for individual use are extremely rare. I've only had one to manage a company expenses account.
In some parts of Europe. Credit cards are extremely common in the UK and Ireland, at least.
A debtless society probably wouldn't suffer as many catastrophic economic recessions/depressions though (usually a result of cascading liquidations/unpayable debts)
Switch? We mostly use debit cards today.
Replacing EM dash with "--" doesn't take away LLM smell.
Your comment seems to miss the point. It is totally possible to enable the first two of your bullet points without Visa or Mastercard, for example banks could just give lines of credit directly to consumers. Indeed, the myriad of loan products is run without Visa and Mastercard.
Yet if the airline goes under, or I never receive the product I bought online, using Visa/Mastercard I'm not left holding the bag.
If I take a random loan with the bank and use those funds to do the same purchases using debit, then I'm the one taking the loss.
1 reply →
You know here in Europe you can just overdraw your bank account anytime without bullshit fees, just with interest that is still way lower than average US Credit Card Interest (around 11%)?
Also bank transfers are easy, instant and free.
> For many _businesses_ managing cash flow is existential -- as merchants they want to be paid as quickly as possible, but as B2B customers they want to have 30-60 days to sell the input goods they've purchased so they can pay for them upstream. There is a premium for that flexibility that gets reflected in processing fees.
Yes those businesses use a bank loan for this, no need for a credit card again.
> If you want to switch the world to a debit-based system where economic transactions are limited by cash on hand, I'd argue that's a poorer and less dynamic world than the one we're operating in today.
Thinking that the world doesn't have credit just because they use debit cards is one of the most idiotic things I've read today
I think it's probably a little bit harder than you think with all the rules and regulations out there. I would highly encourage anybody who's remotely interested, listen to the Acquired podcast episode regarding Visa. It's actually quite fascinating how it was started. You may balk at the length, but the whole thing had me interested.
https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/visa
In the Netherlands, before VISA, there already was a national debit card standard called PIN [1]. Sure, times have changed and it's probably not super easy, but it's also not going to be super hard.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIN_(debit_card)
Fun fact: until about a year ago it was not possible to pay using normal debit cards in most Dutch shops, you had to have a local card. I distinctly remember that AH, Vomar and Jumbo would typically reject foreign cards while Lidl and Dirk would typically accept them. Of course there were exceptions, but that was the rule of thumb.
Most Dutch people were unaware of the issue (because Dutch cards worked abroad), and those who were, were fully convinced that it's because Dutch system is objectively better (it wasn't, it was just a separate network). Then in like 2024/2025 Visa and Mastercard finally retired their special V-Pay and Maestro brands, and now most terminals in the Netherlands accept most normal cards.
1 reply →
I think most people miss that the biggest hurdle is political. Once a political will exists, this system will come to exist.
A card I can tap on a vending machine anywhere in the world. Crypto was probably the hope to compete but that didn't pan out.
India built RuPay, China built UnionPay. There's no reason why Europe can't do the same.
France still has CB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CB_Bank_Card_Group
3 replies →
The most obvious difference being that unlike China or India, Europe (or the EU) is not a single country. This doesn't make things impossible but certainly complicates them.
8 replies →
European countries each have their system. But they do not interoperate. You can't pay with blik in Germany, you can't pay with German debit card in Poland.
1 reply →
> with all the rules and regulations out there.
And who wrote those? Aren't they just another part of the moat?
> It's actually quite fascinating how it was started.
Visa was founded in 1958 by Bank of America (BofA) as the BankAmericard credit card program.[1] In response to competitor Master Charge (now Mastercard), BofA began to license the BankAmericard program to other financial institutions in 1966.[8] By 1970, BofA gave up direct control of the BankAmericard program, forming a cooperative with the other various BankAmericard issuer banks to take over its management. It was then renamed Visa in 1976.
The answer is: "Banks."
My takeaway from the episode was that its actually really easy to setup up visa, you just need to get the banks, vendors, and card issuers onboard, which should be easy if you're the government
You still need to make it, but actually making it is a small fraction of the problem, less than half
Sure, it’s hard, but a duopoly is skimming LITERALLY 1-3% off the entire consumer economy for a service that is not that expensive to operate. Additionally, interchange rates are higher for premium credit cards, to pay for the benefits (not to pay for the cost of operating the network.) This cost is shared among all consumers, not just the well-off who can get premium credit cards.
It’s a captive market, which means Visa & MC really don’t have a ton of incentive to compete. How do you get new payment networks to integrate? Banks typically only offer a single network on their cards, and businesses use whatever their PoS systems accept. For a new network to compete, it’d need to be available everywhere.
It’s the textbook definition of core infrastructure for society and frankly should be operated like a utility. It’s not like Visa & MC are innovating - just look at the lethargic rollout of contactless in the US until COVID forced everyone’s hands.
The sole purpose of visa & MC is to grow profit each year. That’s it. I’m not a fan of that being in the middle of practically all consumer spending
> No, these companies keep themselves in power not because they've solved such a difficult problem that nobody else can, but because they have a moat which they protect.
I don't know that the problem is sophisticated, but it's certainly complex [1]. It's a bit of both in terms of complexity and defending a moat, which all businesses do, including, and especially European ones.
And companies like Visa, Mastercard, American Express, &c. arose initially from solving a real need. Before these companies came into existence when you traveled you'd have to take cash, or traveler's checks or some other nonsense. Today you can, at least as an American, just walk in to the subway in just about any country and tap to pay. Need a coffee at Mt. Fuji? Easy. Buying a bottle of Calvados in some remote area? Yea just tap to pay with your Mastercard.
> Time to do away with these foreign entities.
You'll never do that. Why? Because at a minimum you want American tourist dollars and Europe isn't going to start issuing European credit cards to Americans or other citizens around the world.
[1] Why is it complex? Well you have to deal with American and European financial regulations, KYC, &c. - you have to vet merchants, you have to run the infrastructure to process transactions, refunds, direct payments from bank accounts to pay for cards, and all of those things. Those are real, genuine business activities that are non-negotiable and while they may seem simple, in practice they are not at all simple.
> Because at a minimum you want American tourist dollars and Europe isn't going to start issuing European credit cards to Americans or other citizens around the world.
It could be handled similarly to how tourists in Brazil can now use Brazil's Pix payment system.
One way Brazil handles it is with 3rd party digital wallets that tourists can install on their phones such as Wallbit [1]. Another way is with 3rd party services that let you pay from your own digital wallet or bank app and the service makes the Pix payment [2].
[1] https://www.wallbit.io/en/blog/brazilian-pix-and-a-payment-a...
[2] https://www.pagbrasil.com/lp/pix-for-international-travelers...
Well, you could do that, but that sucks. Not just in philosophy (I don't want to download your crappy app - this applies to any country) but also in practice.
Thankfully Americans at least have enough purchasing power that the demand for convenience - just take my money with this card will keep us away from bad solutions in Europe.
15 replies →
Sorry but this is silly, as an Australian I can also travel anywhere with my visa debit card without issue. No need to setup a random app for the particular country and transfer money into that, if I need to transfer money into a random app why I can't I just pay the vendor directly?
My visa debit card allows me to travel virtually anywhere and use my own money without issue.
Anything else is just extremely inconvenient and technologically not really necessary
> Buying a bottle of Calvados in some remote area? Yea just tap to pay with your Mastercard.
Hard disagree. Until Covid, many small shops didn't take cards in Europe. Taxis, restaurants, market stalls, even trains were often cash only not that long ago. I in the UK ran accounts in companies that had people travel extensively in Europe. We used to issue travellers with EUR200 for the things that cards couldn't buy. Most shops didn't take Amex due to fees. Americans will either have to bring a compliant card or change some cash at the airport.
I also think you have misjudged the mood. I guarantee there are a large number of people in rural Europe that would be very happy never to meet another American tourist, even if it costs them. Americans can look forward to worse service everywhere. I wouldn't be suprised if some people in rural France refused to let you have the Calvados at all.
Its not just American tourists. Its everyone from everywhere.
If you do not accept Visa and Mastercard you are not going to accept payments from all sorts of travellers (tourists, business people, people from your own country living abroad) either.
> I guarantee there are a large number of people in rural Europe that would be very happy never to meet another American tourist, even if it costs them.
Xenophobic or anti-tourism?
15 replies →
What is Europe in this sense? In the Europe I know, every small business has accepted cards for decades. The exception if there are some children selling strawberries to tourists.
As for your second paragraph, you seem to be dreaming. Americans are some of the best tourists to deal with, and anybody who works in the tourism sector is happy to receive them.
4 replies →
There is a strong push towards cashless now though.
> Well you have to deal with American and European financial regulations, KYC, &c. - you have to vet merchants, you have to run the infrastructure to process transactions, refunds, direct payments from bank accounts to pay for cards, and all of those things. Those are real, genuine business activities that are non-negotiable and while they may seem simple, in practice they are not at all simple.
Those are partially or completely taken over not by the card network but by the bank that is issuing you the card, so a change in the underlying technology will be transparent.
> And companies like Visa, Mastercard, American Express, &c. arose initially from solving a real need. Before these companies came into existence when you traveled you'd have to take cash, or traveler's checks or some other nonsense. Today you can, at least as an American, just walk in to the subway in just about any country and tap to pay. Need a coffee at Mt. Fuji? Easy. Buying a bottle of Calvados in some remote area? Yea just tap to pay with your Mastercard.
The reality is more complicated.
I have had Visa or Mastercard being refused in other countries by some retail outlets / institutions.
In fact I never travel with only one card from a single bank because I always want to have a backup. And it is not really Visa vs Mastercard because I have had occurences of having 2 Visas, one of which would work and another would not on a specific shop for no obvious nor documented reason.
In some cases different Visa or Mastercards have different fees associated with them, and if the merchant has configured or negotiated with their service providers to only accept cards under a certain fee percentage then just being a Visa or Mastercard is not enough. One example I can think of is the Chase Sapphire Reserve card as that is (or was I guess things can change) a Visa Infinite card and I believe transaction fees are closer to ~4%> or something versus maybe a standard ~3%. I don't know the exact fee percentages but that's the mechanism.
I agree the reality is a bit more complicated and even wrote about it in France when dealing with gas stations but what I wrote is broadly true. You can just take a credit card to Europe and the vast majority of the time you just won't need cash. I also agree it's a good idea to have a couple of cards though and maybe your debit card too. Frankly I do this in the US as well, and not just when traveling abroad.
> Today you can, at least as an American, just walk in to the subway in just about any country and tap to pay.
Is that really true? I remember wanting to buy a train ticket at Charles De Gaulle airport, and the machine only took French credit cards. That was around 2010, so I don't know if something changed.
Well the reverse has been true IME - my Visa credit/debit cards issued by an European Bank have worked just fine abroad, including in the US. There are certainly edge cases where transactions get denied or US people think every card must have a Zip code but overall yes you can just pay.
Ha, well I was just in France last April and didn't have an issue at the machine to buy the train ticket. Though, unfortunately the train just so happened to cease to function on our last night there so we had to take an Uber in to Paris [1].
The wonderful French train company wouldn't refund the ticket either and instead insisted that we might use it one day on another trip to France. Thankfully by the time I got to the front of the line to chat in broken French to the ticket administrator, I had already accepted my fate after hearing a number of tourists (not Americans mind you) yell and stomp their feet uselessly in hopes of obtaining a refund.
[1] That was a fun adventure too. At CDG, well I found out later that taxis are "allowed" and are the same price as the Uber ride and so we could have avoided this by just taking a taxi through Uber, but a group of folks from Great Britain were ahead of me in line and I came across them later when looking for where to get a taxi/Uber. There were rideshare signs or something but they didn't lead anywhere that made sense. They seemed rather aspirational. Well, one of the members of the British group spoke good French (or good enough) and found out the secret spot to go after chatting with an airport employee I think it's at Terminal E (someone else may know for sure) or something and so my wife and I befriended the same British group and went along with them for the long walk over.
We were able to get a ride, though not cheap. Of course the bus was an option and we're no stranger, but we were on vacation and the $50 ride was just chalked up to the cost of doing business. We were already 2 hours behind schedule because of the train fiasco.
All that to say, I think using an American credit card these days is the least of your concerns. I was surprised to see American Express taken rather much more widely than anticipated. Be careful getting gas though as they place holds on your card for $250 or something like that, and once you get enough holds you can't get any more until the prior ones "roll off".
This last summer, I couldn’t use my US-issued Visa or Mastercard credit card in most places in the Netherlands.
Had to use debit.
Why would you expect to be able to use a creditcard in a physical shop in the Netherlands? Surely you knew? It works if the payment terminal has support for it, but since no Dutch person uses a creditcard outside of the internet, your kinda going against the grain.
9 replies →
Literally just got back from a trip there and didn't find a single business or transaction that I couldn't pay for with various US-issued (Chase + BoA) Visa credit cards via tap.
Even more surprisingly to me - a pretty decent chunk of businesses even would accept AmEx. By no means all, but I recall it being basically nonexistent not that long ago.
And to be clear - much of my time was not in areas that get a ton of foreign tourist visitors.
Not saying your experience didn't happen, but given our very different experiences it might be something with your particular bank/issuer/card?
11 replies →
About your point in [1] yes it is complex but maybe 50% is done by the issuing bank/institution
And people do underestimate the complexity of it
> It's just multiple computers keeping a balance. It's not complicated.
It wouldn't be hacker news without a comment like this. I haven't personally worked in finance, but I've had a lot of friends do it.
It _absolutely_ is complicated. It's not too complicated for a nation or the EU to do it in house, but no, there's a bit more there than "Claude make me a ledger"
My usual response to claims like this is “if it’s so easy, why haven’t you done it yet?”
Trolling is not insightful. A number of other companies already have "done it" and are in use across the world. The question is why aren't western nations ALL using alternates yet? The article is pointing out that a new attempt is gaining political momentum, which answers the question.
2 replies →
it's just addition and subtraction, how hard can it really be???
The problem here is interoperability.
Now most merchants have to work with two companies, visa and mastercard. Want to accept russian MIR cards? Well, in some countries you're not allowed to, and in some, you must, since visa and mastercard don't work there. Now if you add a european company to the mix... whill their cards get accepted in south africa? What about in eg turkey? China? Will whatever indian alternative is get accepted in france?
Currently, with a visa and mastercard, except for maybe russia and iran, you're pretty sure it'll get accepted at least somewhere in any urban area you visit, so you won't be hungry and have somewhere to sleep. If my bank replaces my mastercard with the EU alternative, I won't be that confident about that for quite a few years.
On the other hand, cash is still the king of everything everywhere... somehow some politicians are trying to get rid of that for some reason.
Most merchants don't work with Visa and Mastercard, they work with payment processors like Fiserv, or other middle men even further removed from the card networks, that already abstract all the different cards (including existing local debit cards) away into a unified flow.
Sure, there's a gajillion of those processors all over the world, and they somehow all work with mastercard and visa.
Diners club? Well.. "it depends". Many don't work with it.
Indian, russian, chinese, cards? Maybe in india, russia and china, but you shouldn't expect it to work "everywhere" like visa and mastercard. Same will be true for EU cards for quite a few years, especially if the system gets fragmented into many different companies using many different systems, and you'll always wonder if your german card will get accepted in Algeria like your friends' french card is.
> Want to accept russian MIR cards?
Thankfully, this use case has been solved by Russians themselves.
Each individual detail isn't difficult, the moat is dealing with a huge, huge, pile of them. But most of the details are driven by laws and regulations: of the entity in charge of those things decides it doesn't want you to have a moat any more, you've got a problem. If there's one thing the EU really does have, it's the capacity to revise regulations.
Rather than a moat of details, it's first-mover advantage. Anyone can run a credit card network, but merchants and banks need to support them. Many others exist, but the issue is that they don't have widespread adoption. Solutions that work exist, which means the lesser supported alternative is not widely used, which again reduces reason for wider adoption...
Regulation changes "why bother" to "oh crap".
jup. once this is built, if adoption is lacking, it's not hard to imagine how the EU could make it the standard payment option.
> If there's one thing the EU really does have, it's the capacity to revise regulations.
This is the central power lever of the EU and one that is frequently underestimated.
European power projection doesn't work through tanks and aircraft carriers. It works with regulations, trade deals and economic incentives. Remember how a few years ago everyone was scrambling to get GDPR-compliant? That wasn't some random event. That was the EU projecting power.
Why do iPhones have USB-C now? European soft power.
Why are things like Champagne and Prosciutto di Parma protected brands that can only be sold if they're from the actual region? And I mean not just in Europe itself, but everywhere it has deals? Canada, Japan, India, China, Mercosur, etc etc? European soft power.
The EU is playing a different game from the other major players. Not one of brute force, but one of shifting the foundational rules of commerce in their favor. And they're very good at it.
Yep. And whereas the EU can't magic itself into having enough fossil fuels or bootstrap a commercially viable reusable rocket launch industry overnight, it absolutely can align payments legislation and mandate that point of sale devices accepting Payment Provider I in Europe should also accept Payment Provider II...
Required Dropbox comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
What about it?
Canada has had the INTERAC payment system for over 20 years now. It is privately run by Canadian banks, universally accepted and runs on a cost recovery basis.
So there are 3 kinds of "debit cards" in Canada:
1. Debit Mastercard/VISA. These are Debit Cards that use the Mastercard/VISA communication system to process transactions. While they are not "Credit" cards because you are using cash in an account that is your money, they rely upon the VISA/Mastercard system and merchants will be charged the Mastercard/VISA fee like a Credit Card.
2. Interac Debit Card. Interac was the first company to offer a debit card type system in Canada, and they are the traditional bank card. These cards use the Interac system (so does eTransfer) and Merchants are charged by Interac for using the system. Its typically less than Mastercard/VISA, which is why you see these "Debit Card only" signs.
3. Mastercard/VISA and Interac hybrid cards. These are newer and combine both Mastercard/VISA and Interac cards in one. The merchant can choose how they want to proceed.
Most of these "Debit" only signs are really saying "Interac only", but because for 30 years Interac was the only provider of Debit cards in Canada, it became the common vernacular to say "Debit" when you mean "Interac".
The fact that Asean and India did it, just like that, shows that the technical difficulty is no longer the issue.
Visa and Mastercard exists because of US hegemony. The Europeans just put their heads in the sand for a long time and accepted the "superiority" of American payment solutions because it benefited their geopolitical play at the time.
Some sources (Old and New):
- https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/exclusive-visa-comp...
- https://jakartaglobe.id/business/indonesia-expands-qris-reac...
- https://www.china-briefing.com/news/wto-china-unionpay-rulin...
- https://valorinternational.globo.com/foreign-affairs/news/20...
Sounds like you should build a competitor if that's literally all it is...
I suspect there's quite a few other things you have to consider when you're managing trillions of dollars of transactions a year. Fraud, settlement times, up times, security, customer service, debt collection, interest rate calculation, reach, KYC, record keeping, legal inquiries.
But I'm sure we're just a couple grok comments away from a competitor
Don't forget stand-ins, much of this hasn't discussed that credit card networks do a lot of "stand-ins" when the issuer is unreachable (bank goes down, latency too high, etc). It's a bit unclear how things like Wero would operate when a network issue hits as Wero and EU rails won't just assume the liability for the transaction and hope it clears later as it does on Visa/Mastercard.
Very good examples. I'd add that Trust and connections are also huge in payments. Even if your technology is perfect, you need to integrate with tons of different systems to get full coverage, and the people who run those systems don't sign contacts with just anyone.
Creating Acceptance is super difficult.
Hence why crypto hasn't taken off with merchants. Because who's going to pay for merchants to change their point-of-sale systems to accept a new payment method.
If the entirety of Europe comes up with a single system I think that'll be more than enough incentive for merchants to update their pos software to accept the new network. I hope that they are eventually so successful that merchants here in the US support them too. I'd love to stop using visa and mastercard.
You mean like Pix in Brazil, or UPI in India.
If we could create a single solution on Europan level, based on cellphones first and order banks to provide service of access to it for all of their customers, free of charge, for the privilege of remaining in the market, it could be done.
Crypto is also a shit payment method though. Expensive and difficult to run and with high transaction fees. And if you use a chain with low transaction fees, there's no consensus on which chain that is (otherwise transaction fees would be high) so you have to support all of them. Then you might as well outsource the whole thing.
I have done some work at crypto exchanges so I am a bit biased.
I would agree that BTC and many assets are a terrible payment method due to poor UX (block time, clunky wallets), speculation, and wild price swings. But crypto in general works well for payments I would say.
Transaction fees have improved significantly where it can be on the order of a few cents per transaction. So yes this is a little high for a $1 candy bar but this is fantastic for a $1,000 watch.
The number of chains and interoperability is a bit of a pain at the moment, but this problem can be resolved by delegating to a payment processor, or simply targetting ETH, the top stablecoins, and BTC which account for the vast majority of the market.
> Expensive and difficult to run
Again I am biased because of my experience, but I could set up a payment gateway for ETH in a few hours using free public nodes at virtually no cost. No business overhead. No agreements with payment processors or card companies. The biggest cost and overhead ends up being accounting, because crypto still has ill defined laws and regulation.
I can't disagree that they have a moat, but it's a hard problem and if it were as easy as you say somebody would be disrupting them already to get a share of that $24T.
Just dealing with fraud is a major problem in itself.
Fraud is mostly resolved by the two banks involved. The network is just that, a network.
The problem arises when the banks are in two different countries. If money leaves your account and mistakenly ends up in an account in another country, even within Europe, it can be very difficult to recover.
That is why national payment systems tend to work relatively well. Cross border systems are a completely different challenge.
> I always find it entertaining to hear people try to argue that what these companies do is soooooo difficult and that's why they're valuable. It's just multiple computers keeping a balance.
Roughly nobody argues that part is difficult.
> It's not complicated.
It's very complicated, for the reasons that all complex real world systems are. It's an absolute mess.
> Time to do away with these foreign entities.
I don't really mind the "foreign" part, but it's fairly wild that essential financial infrastructure is privatized, so let's!
I think what people are missing in this conversation is fraud prevention and protection.
Any cross border payment solution, even within Europe, that lacks strong fraud protection is dead on arrival.
But I suspect the fraud problem will be ignored until it cannot be ignored anymore. And then we will go back to square one and try everything again.
It's obviously very difficult. Just not necessarily difficult in technological sense.
Convincing your neighbors to build a refugee shelter in your neighborhood is difficult, and it's not like we have a shortage of house-building knowledge.
It’s a little bit of both right? They’re entrenched yes, but it’s not technologically trivial either. The operations they do for each account might be simple but the shear volume of transactions they handle is enormous. The scale makes it complicated.
If you gave any argument for why and how this is true, I might have believed it.
It's not a technology problem. It's a problem of being compliant with vague government regulations (e.g. AML/KYC) and getting banked (which is very difficult... thanks to perceived AML risk).
If Europe wants its own rails, that's a policy and economic decision not a technical impossibility
What they're doing is a combination of the network effect and fronting a financial risk. The value comes from their ability to intermediate billions of dollars in transaction volume a month. It's not that tough to understand why they are valuable.
Then the vendors pay 2-4% of credit transactions to the payment processor or shift the cost to consumers.
It’s about the cost of another employee in salary per year for restaurants.
While many other countries employ pay by QR code which is free.
> While many other countries employ pay by QR code which is free.
In which countries is this service free? Alipay and Wechat are probably the biggest actors in this space both take a cut.
The #1 thing you're paying for with Visa and the others is uptime.
Knowing the card will always work 24/7/365 with such a high degree of assurance is a non-zero factor in how well a consumer economy performs.
I very distinctly remember a dev talk at early 2000s Microsoft where a distinguished engineer recently come to MSFT from VISA described the herculean effort that it took to run this network. There was an anecdote that he shared that stuck with me where they had a worldwide daily balance mismatch of something like 0.37 cents and it was all hands on deck to find the missing thing. Yeah, man, it is very difficult to run these networks, hence so much money in it.
Yes and a missile is just a big can of propellant. It’s not complicated
Hosted on Amazon and Digital Ocean from what I can tell
>I always find it entertaining to hear people try to argue that what these companies do is soooooo difficult and that's why they're valuable. It's just multiple computers keeping a balance. It's not complicated.
Honestly its a few things.
No, the technical and financial implementation is quite complicated. Its not just a balance in a database.
Yes, they do maintain control through a vertically integrated business structure. But its very easy to justify due to risk management.
>No, these companies keep themselves in power not because they've solved such a difficult problem that nobody else can, but because they have a moat which they protect.
The moat is the difficulty. And they do protect it.
Theres a common type of customer in IT who thinks they can do everything themselves and the "finding out" phase of their shenanigans is often extremely costly, not just for themselves but for their customers.
The chief product of a good supplier is not just software or technical services, its the regimented and disciplined implementation of those services.
Some people will pay more for an IT provider who permits less because they lack the internal organizational discipline to do these things correctly for themselves.
As far as various governments are concerned, the payment card industry is largely self regulating. And that's because the apex card providers provide the balance of enforcement downstream to all the nitwits who would otherwise have to be stung by hundreds of security lapses before they would otherwise respond. The PCI SSC has created an environment where data security is more restrictive than most polity's would require, and its standards are applied worldwide. Often people get liability exemptions for meeting this standard, rather than the standard itself being enforced by legislation or regulation.
Governments honestly love this shit. Its like catnip.
And if you had 1 tiny look behind the curtains of a merchant credit card processor, you would see that they would abandon this level of compliance at the drop of a hat were they permitted. The glue that holds the whole thing together is the restricted access to global Visa and Mastercard payment processing.
If you think all this is trivial, demonstrate how trivial it is, and spin up your own cards, card payment platform, various interconnects and clearing houses. I think you would much more quickly assemble a working computer out of a kids sandpit. Shit I remember a bunch of crypto projects sought to replace Visa and Mastercard, the best we got was Crypto branded Visas and Mastercards.