VISIT OUR NEW ADDRESS
Click here to be redirected
WayTooHigh.com is being redirected to a new, more modern and functional web service. All future posting, along with all previous postings are now available there. No future postings will be provided to this site.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
WayTooHigh.com - New Look
Since we launched our merchant interchange antitrust class action against Visa, MasterCard and its leading member banks in 2005, this site has provided more than 800 daily news and commentary updates. Today we are modernizing the site to better enable it to be viewed by more people. The new site boasts several features to garner more attention.
Mitch Goldstone & Carl Berman [lead plaintiffs]
co-editors - WayTooHigh.com - The Credit Card Interchange Report
Mitch Goldstone & Carl Berman [lead plaintiffs]
co-editors - WayTooHigh.com - The Credit Card Interchange Report
Sunday, November 11, 2007
"Its Overhaul Complete, Visa Shoots for the Moon with Its Pending IPO" (Digital Transactions)
Highlights from Digital Transaction Nov 10th article - click here.
- "Under the planned IPO, which could happen as soon as 120 days after the global reorganization Visa completed Oct. 3, Visa would sell an approximately 51% interest in the company to the public through so-called Class A shares. The rest of the shares—Class B held by Visa USA members and Class C held by other financial-institution members internationally—have no voting rights.
- The filing says Visa will use the IPO’s net proceeds for ..., and for a deposit into an escrow fund to cover settlements or judgments from litigation.
- ... Visa still faces a host of suits and regulatory challenges involving everything from interchange to antitrust to currency- conversion fees.
- Despite MasterCard’s encouraging experience, Visa’s success on Wall Street is by no means guaranteed. Shares of Discover Financial Services LLC have fallen 37% since Morgan Stanley spun off its card subsidiary in late June.
Understanding the Word "Insolvency" Is Crystal Clear (WayTooHigh.com)
If our merchant antitrust litigation is successful, and the facts are on our side, Visa® and Mastercard® could face insolvency. These aren't our words, but those warning statements published in both card associations' offering documents.
However, the news of what could be the second largest IPO in U.S. history is garnering little attention. Other than a few wire service updates, so far the news has been deafeningly silent. The big news is that with the American Express® settlement solved, according to the news stories, it's clear sailing for Visa's IPO.
Not!
We think, just like with MasterCard, the thousands of banks which own Visa will try to cash out as fast as possible. So fast, that it might even topple and overturn the offering.
Last time, the member banks were not in the fiscal calamity that they face today. When MasterCard went public, the member banks were not realizing billions in mismanaged losses. Today, they are in much greater need of enhancing their capitalization; what better way than to pass off their ownership in Visa? Their earlier rush to sell off part of their MasterCard investment , and its overshadowing price-fixing litigation, turned into one more multi billion dollar fiasco - the price they set was $39.00 a share. Oops - with MasterCard nearing $200.00, it seems that nothing they do is right. Are they so distracted by our lawsuit that they have lost their focus and spirit?
Whether it was buying up the subprime housing mortgages and loosing billions, to their other poor decisions that even forced CEOs to flee, they just cannot get it right. This time, they might get extra greedy at the exit and seek an offering price that will melt even the appetites of the most drunk-on-risk thrill-seeking investors'.
Reporters are not writing about the warnings of insolvency, nor are they explaining that our litigation is a much larger threat than even their pay off to AmEx.
[Commentary: WayTooHigh.com]
However, the news of what could be the second largest IPO in U.S. history is garnering little attention. Other than a few wire service updates, so far the news has been deafeningly silent. The big news is that with the American Express® settlement solved, according to the news stories, it's clear sailing for Visa's IPO.
Not!
We think, just like with MasterCard, the thousands of banks which own Visa will try to cash out as fast as possible. So fast, that it might even topple and overturn the offering.
Last time, the member banks were not in the fiscal calamity that they face today. When MasterCard went public, the member banks were not realizing billions in mismanaged losses. Today, they are in much greater need of enhancing their capitalization; what better way than to pass off their ownership in Visa? Their earlier rush to sell off part of their MasterCard investment , and its overshadowing price-fixing litigation, turned into one more multi billion dollar fiasco - the price they set was $39.00 a share. Oops - with MasterCard nearing $200.00, it seems that nothing they do is right. Are they so distracted by our lawsuit that they have lost their focus and spirit?
Whether it was buying up the subprime housing mortgages and loosing billions, to their other poor decisions that even forced CEOs to flee, they just cannot get it right. This time, they might get extra greedy at the exit and seek an offering price that will melt even the appetites of the most drunk-on-risk thrill-seeking investors'.
Reporters are not writing about the warnings of insolvency, nor are they explaining that our litigation is a much larger threat than even their pay off to AmEx.
[Commentary: WayTooHigh.com]
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Visa's Inc's® $10,000,000,000 Misguided Hedge From Litigation (WayTooHigh.com)
Visa Inc's® hope to raise $10 billion, in what would be the second largest U.S. IPO, and could then transfer partial ownership to outside shareholders. This seems to mirror MasterCard's® strategy to limit the member bank's antitrust liabilities. But, not so fast. Our litigation doesn't start on the day of the IPO, but, instead goes back years. Similar to how if someone breaks the law then, after the fact turns good, they still violated the law.
The credit card network in its filing said that from the proceeds they hope to raise, they plan to deposit a portion of it into an escrow account to pay settlements or judgments related to litigation.
Visa Hopes to Raise $10B in IPO
[Source: via AP, Commentary: WayTooHigh.com]
The credit card network in its filing said that from the proceeds they hope to raise, they plan to deposit a portion of it into an escrow account to pay settlements or judgments related to litigation.
Visa Hopes to Raise $10B in IPO
[Source: via AP, Commentary: WayTooHigh.com]
Friday, November 09, 2007
WayTooHigh.com Prepares To Change Format
Editors note: If you are eager to help the cause and have experience with Blogger and WordPress, please let us know. We are preparing to transfer this site to a more modern, high tech service because our first postings took place way back when Blooger was just beginning - so much has changed.Email us with your portfolio of other blog experience and a link to your existing WordPress site.Thanks for your interest.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
AP:Analysts Say MasterCard Inc. is Next to Settle with American Express Co (via AP)
Click here to read the AP story. Which included a mention by "Bear Stearns analyst David Hochstim [who] said Mastercard® may not feel pressured to resolve the litigation quickly. Visa, he said, was concerned about resolving the issue before its upcoming initial public offering."
This news is most significant, as the AmEx® suit is tiny in relation to the much larger and more widespread merchant antitrust litigation, which has the potential not just to distract from the VISA IPO, but cause the company to face insolvency.
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via AP news story]
This news is most significant, as the AmEx® suit is tiny in relation to the much larger and more widespread merchant antitrust litigation, which has the potential not just to distract from the VISA IPO, but cause the company to face insolvency.
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via AP news story]
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Associated Press Goofs on Visa® / Amex® Settlement Story (WayTooHigh.com)
Wow, did the Associated Press goof. They must have had all the lead financial reporters covering the market plunge on Wednesday and had a second-string reporter copy press releases rather than research what is a huge admission by Visa®. You would think that $2,250,000,000 was enough money to get the story right?
According to AP, "The truce announced Wednesday rids Visa of a potential albatross before the San Francisco-based company's initial public offering of stock." The reality is the AmEx® settlement is puny when compared to the more than $100,000,000,000 mega-billion dollar violations that Visa, MasterCard® and their member banks could owe in our class-action merchant interchange litigation. With more than eight-hundred WayTooHigh.com news and commentary postings - spanning more than 2 1/2 years - and with a great deal of attention drawn towards our litigation, Visa and its sister payment network, MasterCard, are not in the clear, by any means.
Extracted from the preceding SEC IPO filing, in MasterCard Inc's own words:
1) "... We have not established reserves for any of the significant legal proceedings in which we are currently involved."
2) "If we are found liable in any of these lawsuits, we may, among other things, be forced to pay damages and/or change our business practices and pricing structure, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and profitability, or, in certain circumstances, even cause us to become insolvent, and result in a significant reduction in the value, or the complete loss, of your investment ..."
3) "If we are less successful than Visa in defending interchange fees, we could also be competitively disadvantaged against Visa."
4) "If we are ultimately unsuccessful in our defense of interchange fees, such regulation may have a material adverse impact on our revenue, our prospects for future growth, and our overall business."
Largest Planned IPO Since Google has No Safety Net (WayTooHigh.com)
If you read into the AP story, it appears that Visa's IPO will now face calm waters. Hardly. Just look at their SEC filing and very clear risk factors that if [when] we are successful and prove our case that they illegally used their market power to conspire to fix prices, along with the triple damages, they could face "insolvency." The same is true for MasterCard as well. Can't get any clearer than that!
"Besides raising financial uncertainties, the case threatened to raise embarrassing questions about Visa's past business practices with a September trial date looming," said AP. Embarrassing?, just read the prior eight-hundred and one WayTooHigh.com postings! Overlooking our weak grasp of English and liberal rules of grammar, and you see something much more ominous.
Although Visa today did not acknowledge any wrongdoing, a first-grader would know that something must have happened as they prepare to hand out $2,250,000,000. Could you imagine if they DID do something wrong?!
According to the AP story, "American Express' three-year-old lawsuit painted an unflattering portrait of Visa, alleging the network operator conspired with some of its largest card issuers to thwart American Express' growth." So far, MasterCard's head remains in the sand. Everyone at the card association seems blind to the reality of our case, especially Sharon Gamsin, their PR and communications hack, who according to the same wire story said "MasterCard remains confident about its defense against the allegations." Sure. Since the same financial institutions which own and control Visa and gave the green light to settle, were also on the MasterCard and Visa boards for many years, what's the difference?
Getting back to that first-grader, even they would have to conclusively understand that MasterCard is next to recognize that the game is up.
"Before IPO, Visa Reaches a $2.25 Billion AmEx Antitrust Settlement" (Digital Transactions)
[commentary: WayTooHigh.com, via AP news story]
According to AP, "The truce announced Wednesday rids Visa of a potential albatross before the San Francisco-based company's initial public offering of stock." The reality is the AmEx® settlement is puny when compared to the more than $100,000,000,000 mega-billion dollar violations that Visa, MasterCard® and their member banks could owe in our class-action merchant interchange litigation. With more than eight-hundred WayTooHigh.com news and commentary postings - spanning more than 2 1/2 years - and with a great deal of attention drawn towards our litigation, Visa and its sister payment network, MasterCard, are not in the clear, by any means.
Extracted from the preceding SEC IPO filing, in MasterCard Inc's own words:
1) "... We have not established reserves for any of the significant legal proceedings in which we are currently involved."
2) "If we are found liable in any of these lawsuits, we may, among other things, be forced to pay damages and/or change our business practices and pricing structure, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and profitability, or, in certain circumstances, even cause us to become insolvent, and result in a significant reduction in the value, or the complete loss, of your investment ..."
3) "If we are less successful than Visa in defending interchange fees, we could also be competitively disadvantaged against Visa."
4) "If we are ultimately unsuccessful in our defense of interchange fees, such regulation may have a material adverse impact on our revenue, our prospects for future growth, and our overall business."
Largest Planned IPO Since Google has No Safety Net (WayTooHigh.com)
If you read into the AP story, it appears that Visa's IPO will now face calm waters. Hardly. Just look at their SEC filing and very clear risk factors that if [when] we are successful and prove our case that they illegally used their market power to conspire to fix prices, along with the triple damages, they could face "insolvency." The same is true for MasterCard as well. Can't get any clearer than that!
"Besides raising financial uncertainties, the case threatened to raise embarrassing questions about Visa's past business practices with a September trial date looming," said AP. Embarrassing?, just read the prior eight-hundred and one WayTooHigh.com postings! Overlooking our weak grasp of English and liberal rules of grammar, and you see something much more ominous.
Although Visa today did not acknowledge any wrongdoing, a first-grader would know that something must have happened as they prepare to hand out $2,250,000,000. Could you imagine if they DID do something wrong?!
According to the AP story, "American Express' three-year-old lawsuit painted an unflattering portrait of Visa, alleging the network operator conspired with some of its largest card issuers to thwart American Express' growth." So far, MasterCard's head remains in the sand. Everyone at the card association seems blind to the reality of our case, especially Sharon Gamsin, their PR and communications hack, who according to the same wire story said "MasterCard remains confident about its defense against the allegations." Sure. Since the same financial institutions which own and control Visa and gave the green light to settle, were also on the MasterCard and Visa boards for many years, what's the difference?
Getting back to that first-grader, even they would have to conclusively understand that MasterCard is next to recognize that the game is up.
"Before IPO, Visa Reaches a $2.25 Billion AmEx Antitrust Settlement" (Digital Transactions)
[commentary: WayTooHigh.com, via AP news story]
"AMERICAN EXPRESS REACHES $2.25 BILLION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH VISA" (via, company press release)
Interesting that MasterCard put $650,000,000 in reserves from its IPO to cover litigation expenses, yet, it was Visa who agree to settle first. From the below American Express press release, they explain that: "[a]s the sole remaining defendant, MasterCard would be liable for the full amount."
---------------------------
Reprinted AmEx Release in it's entirety.
AMERICAN EXPRESS REACHES $2.25 BILLION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH VISA
NEW YORK, November 7, 2007 --
American Express said today that it has reached an agreement to drop Visa as a defendant in a lawsuit alleging that MasterCard, Visa and their member banks had illegally blocked American Express from the bank-issued card business in the United States.
Under terms of the settlement agreement, Visa will pay a maximum amount of $2.25 billion to American Express. Individual banks named in the lawsuit will also be dropped as defendants. These include: J.P. Morgan Chase, Capital One, U.S. Bancorp, Wells Fargo and Providian. The agreement is subject to the approval of Visa’s member banks.
MasterCard remains the sole defendant in the American Express case. The lawsuit, which was filed in Federal court (November 2004) by American Express, seeks monetary damages for the lost business opportunity that resulted from the illegal conspiracy to boycott American Express. American Express is expected to seek damages in the billions of dollars. As the sole remaining defendant, MasterCard would be liable for the full amount.
“The size of this settlement, along with earlier court rulings, underscores the seriousness of the damage done by the illegal boycott,” said Kenneth I. Chenault, chairman and chief executive. “We plan to move forward with the litigation to hold MasterCard accountable for the illegal actions that blocked banks from working with us for many years and to seek full compensation for the value that would have been generated for our shareholders.”
Under terms of the agreement reached with Visa, Inc., Visa USA, and Visa International, American Express will receive an aggregate maximum payment of $2.25 billion. An initial
payment of $1.13 billion will likely be recognized by American Express in income during the fourth quarter 2007. The remainder, payable in installments of up to $70 million per quarter over the next four years, is subject to achieving certain quarterly performance criteria within the U.S. network services business of American Express.
“Given the strong growth momentum we have built within that business, we are highly optimistic in our ability to meet those performance requirements,” said Mr. Chenault.
In light of the settlement, American Express said that it is likely to incur a number of significant additional fourth quarter expenses, including:
Incremental investments in marketing, promotion, rewards, cardmember services and other business building initiatives designed to capitalize on competitive opportunities in the payments industry at a time when some competitors are pulling back.
Additional funding for the American Express Foundation, which will support the company’s ongoing philanthropic activities.
Litigation expenses related to the lawsuit against Visa and MasterCard.
Given the continued evolution of its rewards programs, the Company also said that it is currently evaluating enhancements to its method of estimating its liability for Membership Rewards®, including the consideration of an actuarial based approach for estimating the ultimate redemption rate. These enhancements could result in a significant one time addition to reserves upon implementation.
“Rewards and customer loyalty programs have been a key element of our success, and we expect them to continue to be a centerpiece of our strategy going forward,” said Mr. Chenault. “The overall economics of a rewards-based strategy are very favorable: higher spending, stronger loyalty and superior credit metrics. Our expectation is that more Cardmembers will enroll in rewards programs and generate a growing share of their overall spending with American Express. Our higher enrollments and improvements to the program in recent years are causing us to continually evaluate and enhance the method to estimate the ultimate usage of points earned by our Cardmembers.”
The aggregate cost associated with this potential addition to the Company’s Membership Rewards liability and the other items mentioned above could represent a significant portion of the payment expected to be realized this quarter.
The Company said that any decisions about whether to reinvest future payments into business building activities will be made on a quarter by quarter basis over the next four years. “This settlement compensates us in part for past damages in a way that allows us to invest in our future,” said Mr. Chenault. “We intend to be consistent with our approach of the last several years, capitalizing on marketing and promotional opportunities and enhancing our network when we see chance to gain a competitive advantage. We have been generating very attractive returns on our investment spending of the past few years and believe that the pipeline of market opportunities will continue to be strong in the years ahead.
American Express Reaches $2.25 Billion Settlement Agreement With Visa
“At a time when weakness in parts the economy is affecting many financial services companies, the settlement will give us greater flexibility and confidence to meet our financial goals while continuing to fund business building initiatives and support future acquisitions.”
---------------------------
Reprinted AmEx Release in it's entirety.
AMERICAN EXPRESS REACHES $2.25 BILLION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH VISA
NEW YORK, November 7, 2007 --
American Express said today that it has reached an agreement to drop Visa as a defendant in a lawsuit alleging that MasterCard, Visa and their member banks had illegally blocked American Express from the bank-issued card business in the United States.
Under terms of the settlement agreement, Visa will pay a maximum amount of $2.25 billion to American Express. Individual banks named in the lawsuit will also be dropped as defendants. These include: J.P. Morgan Chase, Capital One, U.S. Bancorp, Wells Fargo and Providian. The agreement is subject to the approval of Visa’s member banks.
MasterCard remains the sole defendant in the American Express case. The lawsuit, which was filed in Federal court (November 2004) by American Express, seeks monetary damages for the lost business opportunity that resulted from the illegal conspiracy to boycott American Express. American Express is expected to seek damages in the billions of dollars. As the sole remaining defendant, MasterCard would be liable for the full amount.
“The size of this settlement, along with earlier court rulings, underscores the seriousness of the damage done by the illegal boycott,” said Kenneth I. Chenault, chairman and chief executive. “We plan to move forward with the litigation to hold MasterCard accountable for the illegal actions that blocked banks from working with us for many years and to seek full compensation for the value that would have been generated for our shareholders.”
Under terms of the agreement reached with Visa, Inc., Visa USA, and Visa International, American Express will receive an aggregate maximum payment of $2.25 billion. An initial
payment of $1.13 billion will likely be recognized by American Express in income during the fourth quarter 2007. The remainder, payable in installments of up to $70 million per quarter over the next four years, is subject to achieving certain quarterly performance criteria within the U.S. network services business of American Express.
“Given the strong growth momentum we have built within that business, we are highly optimistic in our ability to meet those performance requirements,” said Mr. Chenault.
In light of the settlement, American Express said that it is likely to incur a number of significant additional fourth quarter expenses, including:
Incremental investments in marketing, promotion, rewards, cardmember services and other business building initiatives designed to capitalize on competitive opportunities in the payments industry at a time when some competitors are pulling back.
Additional funding for the American Express Foundation, which will support the company’s ongoing philanthropic activities.
Litigation expenses related to the lawsuit against Visa and MasterCard.
Given the continued evolution of its rewards programs, the Company also said that it is currently evaluating enhancements to its method of estimating its liability for Membership Rewards®, including the consideration of an actuarial based approach for estimating the ultimate redemption rate. These enhancements could result in a significant one time addition to reserves upon implementation.
“Rewards and customer loyalty programs have been a key element of our success, and we expect them to continue to be a centerpiece of our strategy going forward,” said Mr. Chenault. “The overall economics of a rewards-based strategy are very favorable: higher spending, stronger loyalty and superior credit metrics. Our expectation is that more Cardmembers will enroll in rewards programs and generate a growing share of their overall spending with American Express. Our higher enrollments and improvements to the program in recent years are causing us to continually evaluate and enhance the method to estimate the ultimate usage of points earned by our Cardmembers.”
The aggregate cost associated with this potential addition to the Company’s Membership Rewards liability and the other items mentioned above could represent a significant portion of the payment expected to be realized this quarter.
The Company said that any decisions about whether to reinvest future payments into business building activities will be made on a quarter by quarter basis over the next four years. “This settlement compensates us in part for past damages in a way that allows us to invest in our future,” said Mr. Chenault. “We intend to be consistent with our approach of the last several years, capitalizing on marketing and promotional opportunities and enhancing our network when we see chance to gain a competitive advantage. We have been generating very attractive returns on our investment spending of the past few years and believe that the pipeline of market opportunities will continue to be strong in the years ahead.
American Express Reaches $2.25 Billion Settlement Agreement With Visa
“At a time when weakness in parts the economy is affecting many financial services companies, the settlement will give us greater flexibility and confidence to meet our financial goals while continuing to fund business building initiatives and support future acquisitions.”
"Visa and Member Banks To Pay American Express $2.25 billion (via Reuters)
According to Reuters, CNBC is reporting that Visa® will pay rival American Express® $2.25 billion to settle a separate antitrust suit.
[Click here to view the American Express press release, via American Banker]
From our prospective, this is encouraging for our class-action and important news as the world's largest credit card company prepares for a multi-billion dollar IPO early in 2008. [Then again, pending current stock market conditions, who knows when the right market timing will be?]
The case was initiated a year before our complaint filing, in 2004 by American Express which charged the two leading card associations and some of its member banks of preventing thousands of banks from using the American Express cards through anti-competitive practices. As with our class-action, the two credit card associations were accused of being co-owned by the very same banks. The acquirers and issuers are the same - the leading difference between the giant 80% Visa and MasterCard® market power is the spelling of their names. Yes, the card associations explain they are in head-to-head competition, but what they don't explain is they are on the same team. Think of two pro football players on the same team; yes, they are different, but they have the same ownership, controls and game plan.
American Express claimed that Visa and MasterCard both violated antitrust law by barring banks from issuing credit cards for rival networks. Just as with our litigation, Visa faced triple damages.
We are very encouraged by this news and expect that MasterCard will quickly come to the same conclusion as Visa. As this litigation faces settlement, the associations and banks legal teams will have more time to read WayTooHigh.com and its message that interchange fees are too high, unjustified and in violation of antitrust laws.
[Commentary: WayTooHigh.com , via Reuters]
[Click here to view the American Express press release, via American Banker]
From our prospective, this is encouraging for our class-action and important news as the world's largest credit card company prepares for a multi-billion dollar IPO early in 2008. [Then again, pending current stock market conditions, who knows when the right market timing will be?]
The case was initiated a year before our complaint filing, in 2004 by American Express which charged the two leading card associations and some of its member banks of preventing thousands of banks from using the American Express cards through anti-competitive practices. As with our class-action, the two credit card associations were accused of being co-owned by the very same banks. The acquirers and issuers are the same - the leading difference between the giant 80% Visa and MasterCard® market power is the spelling of their names. Yes, the card associations explain they are in head-to-head competition, but what they don't explain is they are on the same team. Think of two pro football players on the same team; yes, they are different, but they have the same ownership, controls and game plan.
American Express claimed that Visa and MasterCard both violated antitrust law by barring banks from issuing credit cards for rival networks. Just as with our litigation, Visa faced triple damages.
We are very encouraged by this news and expect that MasterCard will quickly come to the same conclusion as Visa. As this litigation faces settlement, the associations and banks legal teams will have more time to read WayTooHigh.com and its message that interchange fees are too high, unjustified and in violation of antitrust laws.
[Commentary: WayTooHigh.com , via Reuters]
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
JPMorgan Chase Giving Away Coal, No Kidding (WayTooHigh.com)
We must have deflected too much attention from the lawyers representing the named defendant, JPMorgan Chase® in our antitrust price-fixing litigation for them to have missed this one. The bank, which owns the world's largest merchant payment acquirer (CHASE Paymentech®), issued a press release on Nov 1 that is offering some of its cardholder customers to qualify for a chance to win a lump of coal. With commodity prices soaring, we wonder how much a lump of coal is going for these days? What might have been intended as a joke, to us, seems more like an invitation for PIN purchases to brush off a space on their mantel for showing off that price.
More info, click here
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com]
More info, click here
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com]
"JPMorgan Chase Calls It: 'A Lump of Coal' - We Call It: More Bait &-Switch Banking Gimmicks (WayTooHigh.com)
More tricks by the card associations and its member banks. As we near the holiday retail selling season, our business, along with millions of other retailers are again being faced with more gimmicks and schemes to force consumers to use their debit cards as credit cards. Even though the funds are instantly withdrawn from their bank accounts, the interchange fees are much, much higher, and that is how the "contest" games. Through contests and bait-and-switch-like small-print rules, cardholders can only enter the fun if they do not use the less expensive PIN-based debit card electronic payment.
We received the below letter today. But, first, as a refresher on how these games are played, see the below links to prior WayTooHigh.com postings. Even JPMorgan Chase® has a sense of humor as it sticks its tongue in the face of all its merchant customers. In the bank's own words from their Nov 1st press release: "(For this promotion, PIN purchases qualify only for a lump of coal)."
Look at What Visa® is Up to Now (WayTooHigh.com)
Confusing Debit Cards (WayTooHigh.com)
Who Is The Real Violator? (WayTooHigh.com)
Dear Mitch Goldstone:
JPMorgan Chase (one of the named defendants in your antitrust litigation, and the biggest bank in my area with a 17% market share) has came up with a sneaky new way to switch people over from cheaper PIN debit transactions to more expensive signature transactions this holiday season, forcing merchants to pay higher fees in the process (just when they need it the least).
The promotion, named "Chase Picks Up The Tab" (which runs until December 31) goes like this: Every 500th Chase Visa Check Card purchase from all enrolled Chase checking customers who reside within the promotional area is paid for by Chase (up to $500, and if the purchase is less than $5, the payoff is $5)... Chase will be giving out an estimated 50,000 purchases. But PIN-based purchases are not eligible among the "qualifying purchases".
Way to go, Chase! You just made merchants furious!
And how will this be paid for? Interchange profits, of course... instead of merchants paying 25-50 cents for PIN debit, they'll have to pay that 1.8+% signature debit fee, so this should be called "Merchants Pick Up The Tab (In Higher Interchange Fees)". And customers will want to sign because of this promotion... so what will be the bottom-line hit to merchants in areas with large amounts of Chase checking customers, and what will be the payoff to Chase (and Visa Inc.)? You can bet on one thing: It won't be pocket change for either.
P.S.: Don't forget that JPMorgan Chase also owns over half of one of the three largest Visa/MasterCard processors (Chase Paymentech), so the payoff to JPMorgan Chase could be even bigger at some merchants. Any wonder why JPMorgan Chase is doing better than Citigroup or Wells Fargo?
We received the below letter today. But, first, as a refresher on how these games are played, see the below links to prior WayTooHigh.com postings. Even JPMorgan Chase® has a sense of humor as it sticks its tongue in the face of all its merchant customers. In the bank's own words from their Nov 1st press release: "(For this promotion, PIN purchases qualify only for a lump of coal)."
Look at What Visa® is Up to Now (WayTooHigh.com)
Confusing Debit Cards (WayTooHigh.com)
Who Is The Real Violator? (WayTooHigh.com)
WayTooHigh.com Reader Comment
Dear Mitch Goldstone:
JPMorgan Chase (one of the named defendants in your antitrust litigation, and the biggest bank in my area with a 17% market share) has came up with a sneaky new way to switch people over from cheaper PIN debit transactions to more expensive signature transactions this holiday season, forcing merchants to pay higher fees in the process (just when they need it the least).
The promotion, named "Chase Picks Up The Tab" (which runs until December 31) goes like this: Every 500th Chase Visa Check Card purchase from all enrolled Chase checking customers who reside within the promotional area is paid for by Chase (up to $500, and if the purchase is less than $5, the payoff is $5)... Chase will be giving out an estimated 50,000 purchases. But PIN-based purchases are not eligible among the "qualifying purchases".
Way to go, Chase! You just made merchants furious!
And how will this be paid for? Interchange profits, of course... instead of merchants paying 25-50 cents for PIN debit, they'll have to pay that 1.8+% signature debit fee, so this should be called "Merchants Pick Up The Tab (In Higher Interchange Fees)". And customers will want to sign because of this promotion... so what will be the bottom-line hit to merchants in areas with large amounts of Chase checking customers, and what will be the payoff to Chase (and Visa Inc.)? You can bet on one thing: It won't be pocket change for either.
P.S.: Don't forget that JPMorgan Chase also owns over half of one of the three largest Visa/MasterCard processors (Chase Paymentech), so the payoff to JPMorgan Chase could be even bigger at some merchants. Any wonder why JPMorgan Chase is doing better than Citigroup or Wells Fargo?
"Arch Critic Calls for Citigroup to be Broken Up" (Telegraph.co.uk)
"The analyst who triggered the departure of Citigroup chairman and chief executive Charles "Chuck" Prince has called on his successors to break up the banking conglomerate" - Read more.
Monday, November 05, 2007
The Banks Misguided Fee Adventure (WayTooHigh.com)
Citigroup Inc.®* deflected its attention from prudent financial management and instead became greedy.
This Reuter's picture of CitiGroup's leaving Charles Prince is "price-less."
Look back at the bank sponsored bankruptcy reform law of 2005; it made clearing consumer debt much harder. Fewer people were able to file for Chapter 7 protection, which was aimed to add further stability and protections for the financial institutions. Or, was it just a another sweetheart deal from Washington to its hefty campaign contributors and lobbyists? It helped the credit card industry and handed them billions of dollars while debtors had to pay back these "loans." The "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act" was little more than a payoff to the banks. Read more.
While the credit card associations and its member banks were cheering, they lost sight of a much bigger storm - sub prime loans that enabled people earning just $40,000 annually to "buy" $800,000 homes and others to with few assets to flip homes. They became little more than renters who were teased with low or no upfront down payments and no income verification requirements.
This Reuter's picture of CitiGroup's leaving Charles Prince is "price-less."
Anatomy of Greed
Look back at the bank sponsored bankruptcy reform law of 2005; it made clearing consumer debt much harder. Fewer people were able to file for Chapter 7 protection, which was aimed to add further stability and protections for the financial institutions. Or, was it just a another sweetheart deal from Washington to its hefty campaign contributors and lobbyists? It helped the credit card industry and handed them billions of dollars while debtors had to pay back these "loans." The "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act" was little more than a payoff to the banks. Read more.
While the credit card associations and its member banks were cheering, they lost sight of a much bigger storm - sub prime loans that enabled people earning just $40,000 annually to "buy" $800,000 homes and others to with few assets to flip homes. They became little more than renters who were teased with low or no upfront down payments and no income verification requirements.
Once the intoxicating, phony interest-only mortgages turned into a devilish nightmare, the banks lost billions. It just cost Charles Prince, Citigroup's CEO his job. But, it already ruined millions of dreams and destroyed lives, except for the few with titanium "golden parachutes." Click here for Reuter's update.
Reuters is reporting that "Citigroup may write off $11 billion of sub prime mortgage losses, on top of a $6.5 billion write-down last quarter." Even MasterCard, had set aside $650,000,000 to help cover its legal liabilities.
Reuters is reporting that "Citigroup may write off $11 billion of sub prime mortgage losses, on top of a $6.5 billion write-down last quarter." Even MasterCard, had set aside $650,000,000 to help cover its legal liabilities.
Where is the leadership? Where is the ethics? Rather than covering these huge losses, the inexpensive solution was to not to be greedy in the first place.
The new must-read manual for the banking executives are a new edition topic of: The Idiots Guide To Common Sense, and especially The Idiots Guide To Understanding the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Barron's has a feature profile (Nov 4) on MasterCard® that explains more, including what it asserts is the card association's "low balling earnings indications."
Today, the thousands of banks, which control[ed] MasterCard and own Visa® were thought to have more greed than even the oil companies. The "Bankruptcy Abuse Protection" scheme was wrought with one-sided greed. Now, the mortgage collapse faces similar greed. Both cost billions to address and the newest round, the ongoing misguided fee adventure with anti-competitive merchant interchange rates can become the banks' newest way to squander billions more.
Interchange fees are no longer cost-based - only about 13% of interchange fee costs are used to cover its transaction costs. Along with Visa and MasterCard, the banks too are being accused by us and members of the class action of market power to illegally fix prices. With all their other leaking dikes, a new round of billion-dollar floods is unpreventable and they could again turn to wield their unbridled greed by raiding their interchange cash cow, raising rates and causing more hardship.
The banks rich piggy bank are interchange fees - a $40 billion annual hidden tax on the economy. They schemed in their misadventure to dump their legal liabilities by selling off part of MasterCard on the public. Now a much larger IPO is on the horizon to do the same with Visa. Washington and our economy should take notice. Like with MasterCard, Visa is warning that they too could face insolvency if our litigation is successful.
With the loss of leadership jobs at Merill Lynch and Citigroup and many newly homeless customers in defaults and billions in existing fiscal mismanagement, we urge our readers to prepare for the next economic bail out. This time, it is not about mismanagement, but monumental greed. The new looming concern are those corporate chieftains who are looking more Al Capone-like as a modern day "untouchable" symbol of the collapse of law and order. But, don't look for the banks to be robbing themselves to cover their misadventures; interchange fees are their hedge that we must all be very worried about.
Today, the thousands of banks, which control[ed] MasterCard and own Visa® were thought to have more greed than even the oil companies. The "Bankruptcy Abuse Protection" scheme was wrought with one-sided greed. Now, the mortgage collapse faces similar greed. Both cost billions to address and the newest round, the ongoing misguided fee adventure with anti-competitive merchant interchange rates can become the banks' newest way to squander billions more.
Interchange fees are no longer cost-based - only about 13% of interchange fee costs are used to cover its transaction costs. Along with Visa and MasterCard, the banks too are being accused by us and members of the class action of market power to illegally fix prices. With all their other leaking dikes, a new round of billion-dollar floods is unpreventable and they could again turn to wield their unbridled greed by raiding their interchange cash cow, raising rates and causing more hardship.
The banks rich piggy bank are interchange fees - a $40 billion annual hidden tax on the economy. They schemed in their misadventure to dump their legal liabilities by selling off part of MasterCard on the public. Now a much larger IPO is on the horizon to do the same with Visa. Washington and our economy should take notice. Like with MasterCard, Visa is warning that they too could face insolvency if our litigation is successful.
With the loss of leadership jobs at Merill Lynch and Citigroup and many newly homeless customers in defaults and billions in existing fiscal mismanagement, we urge our readers to prepare for the next economic bail out. This time, it is not about mismanagement, but monumental greed. The new looming concern are those corporate chieftains who are looking more Al Capone-like as a modern day "untouchable" symbol of the collapse of law and order. But, don't look for the banks to be robbing themselves to cover their misadventures; interchange fees are their hedge that we must all be very worried about.
*[Citi is is a named defendant in our merchant antitrust litigation]
Background Links
"Visa's IPO Use of Proceeds Plan and Interchange Overview (commentary, WayTooHigh.com)
Consolidated Amendment to Class Action Complaint (WayTooHigh.com)
Letter to Judge John Gleeson, Re Challenge to MasterCard's Stock Reclassification (WayTooHigh.com)
[commentary: WayTooHigh.com]
Sunday, November 04, 2007
WayTooHigh.com Now Powered By FeedBurner
To ensure you receive real time, live updates from WayTooHigh.com, please review the various feeds on the right side. WayTooHigh.com is now powered by FeedBurner, the leading provider of media distribution and audience engagement services for blogs and RSS feeds. With this addition, WayTooHigh.com will now better commercialize, promote, deliver and share our daily news and commentary updates with even more readers who are following this multi billion dollar antitrust litigation against the two leading credit card associations and its member banks.
This site features the most comprehensive international breaking news, daily updates and commentaries on the history of merchant interchange fees. The goal in representing millions of merchants and cardholders is to reform an antiquated, costly and unfair payment system and explain why the nearly $40 billion annual merchant interchange fee is a hidden tax on consumers and retailers.
WayTooHigh.com: The Credit Card Interchange Report, is co-edited by Carl Berman and Mitch Goldstone, founders of California-based 30 Minute Photos Etc., the national online boutique photo service, 30minphotos.com and its newest division, ScanMyPhotos.com. Berman and Goldstone are also the lead plaintiffs and class representatives in the multi-billion dollar antitrust class-action litigation against Visa, MasterCard and member banks. This informational web site was created to provide news and commentary updates only. None of the information posted on WayTooHigh.com is intended to constitute legal arguments; it reflects only the opinions of its co-editors and not of any other plaintiffs or other parties involved in the merchant antitrust litigation. The information is not guaranteed to be correct, complete, or current. We make no warranty, express or implied, about the accuracy or reliability of the information posted by WayTooHigh.com or at any other Web site to which this site is linked.
This site features the most comprehensive international breaking news, daily updates and commentaries on the history of merchant interchange fees. The goal in representing millions of merchants and cardholders is to reform an antiquated, costly and unfair payment system and explain why the nearly $40 billion annual merchant interchange fee is a hidden tax on consumers and retailers.
WayTooHigh.com: The Credit Card Interchange Report, is co-edited by Carl Berman and Mitch Goldstone, founders of California-based 30 Minute Photos Etc., the national online boutique photo service, 30minphotos.com and its newest division, ScanMyPhotos.com. Berman and Goldstone are also the lead plaintiffs and class representatives in the multi-billion dollar antitrust class-action litigation against Visa, MasterCard and member banks. This informational web site was created to provide news and commentary updates only. None of the information posted on WayTooHigh.com is intended to constitute legal arguments; it reflects only the opinions of its co-editors and not of any other plaintiffs or other parties involved in the merchant antitrust litigation. The information is not guaranteed to be correct, complete, or current. We make no warranty, express or implied, about the accuracy or reliability of the information posted by WayTooHigh.com or at any other Web site to which this site is linked.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Visa and MasterCard's Merchant Rules Are Irrelevant (WayTooHigh.com)
Last week, we posted a commentary on the fact that the American Red Cross was in violation of their payment processing agreements. They were "requiring" a minimum payment to accept donations from electronic payments. What did Visa® and MasterCard® do? Nothing, as far as we could see. This helps draw renewed attention, not to the invaluable contributions of the American Red Cross, but rather to the breakdown in oversights for the silly interchange fee rules.
Here's another posting on the topic.
Credit Card Fees Force Red Cross to Impose Minimum Donation Amounts
[commentary - WayTooHigh.com]
Here's another posting on the topic.
Credit Card Fees Force Red Cross to Impose Minimum Donation Amounts
[commentary - WayTooHigh.com]
Breaking News on Citigroup [one of the named defendants member banks]
Several news sources are reporting on the imminent ouster of Citigroup Inc.® chief executive Charles Prince.
The WSJ's Robin Sidel is reporting [click here, subscription required] that "Charles Prince, the beleaguered chief executive of Citigroup Inc., is planning to resign at a board meeting on Sunday, according to people familiar with the situation.... Citigroup has lost more than a fifth of its market value since Oct. 12."
The WSJ's Robin Sidel is reporting [click here, subscription required] that "Charles Prince, the beleaguered chief executive of Citigroup Inc., is planning to resign at a board meeting on Sunday, according to people familiar with the situation.... Citigroup has lost more than a fifth of its market value since Oct. 12."
This Holiday, Most Gifts Will Be Gift Cards, According to PayPal (via BW release)
According to the Oct 31, BusinessWire release, "the Nielsen survey [for PayPal] revealed that more shoppers are playing it safe this holiday season by buying gift cards, rather than purchasing tailored gifts for their loved ones. In fact, 64 percent of shoppers said they plan to give gift cards. But recipients don’t seem to mind. Fifty seven percent of respondents said they would actually prefer to receive money or a gift card in place of the traditional present."
In 2006, just under 30% of all holiday shopping was online, this year, according to the PayPal release, it will be 40% which means that the card associations and member banks are poised to take even more money from interchange fees. Nearly all online orders require electronic payments. For our business, 100% of all ecommerce business requires electronic payments.
Why is this so important to our interchange battle?
When you use a credit card, where the acquiring and issuing financial institution are the same, effectively, they mirror gift cards. The gift card is being electronically transacted by the issuing business and ... there are no interchange fees. Just like when you write a paper check, or use a PIN-based debit card in Canada, there are no interchange fees. So, the question is, how can Visa® and MasterCard's® market power still force this $40 billion hidden tax on retailers and consumers?
The banks might counter and explain that gift cards prove there is a choice and that there really is competition. But, not so fast. How are most gift cards paid for? That's right, plastic! And, Visa and MasterCard have nearly an 80% market share of the electronic payment network.
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via survey data from the Oct 31 PayPal BW release]
In 2006, just under 30% of all holiday shopping was online, this year, according to the PayPal release, it will be 40% which means that the card associations and member banks are poised to take even more money from interchange fees. Nearly all online orders require electronic payments. For our business, 100% of all ecommerce business requires electronic payments.
Why is this so important to our interchange battle?
When you use a credit card, where the acquiring and issuing financial institution are the same, effectively, they mirror gift cards. The gift card is being electronically transacted by the issuing business and ... there are no interchange fees. Just like when you write a paper check, or use a PIN-based debit card in Canada, there are no interchange fees. So, the question is, how can Visa® and MasterCard's® market power still force this $40 billion hidden tax on retailers and consumers?
The banks might counter and explain that gift cards prove there is a choice and that there really is competition. But, not so fast. How are most gift cards paid for? That's right, plastic! And, Visa and MasterCard have nearly an 80% market share of the electronic payment network.
[Commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via survey data from the Oct 31 PayPal BW release]
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Understanding Interchange Fees Requires a Master's Degree in Finance at Disney (WayTooHigh.com)
Back when interchange fees were first created, it was cost-based to cover the electronic payment transactions. Today, this job posting shares one more example why interchange fees are out of control. The Walt Disney Company is seeking an executive with a master's degree to analyze interchange costs.
[Source, commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via GadBall Jobs posting, see link]
Job description [GadBall Jobs]:
- This role on the WDP&R Credit Card Management team will be responsible for planning and forecasting credit card commission expense for the Walt Disney World Resort and the Disney Cruise Line and producing variance analysis for actuals versus plan, prior year and forecast. This role will analyze interchange expense to identify and evaluate the source of transaction downgrades and propose remedial action to mitigate the effects of transaction downgrades. This role will also be responsible for identifying industry trends and developing analyses to evaluate the effects of the trends on Segment operations. Additionally this role will be responsible for project management of planned initiatives and for creating executive presentations related to issues, projects, and opportunities.
[Source, commentary, WayTooHigh.com, via GadBall Jobs posting, see link]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)