5Mês·

My opinion on the DOJ lawsuit against VISA


The DOJ Visa $V (-2,19%) lawsuit is absolutely laughable.


Visa is clearly not a monopoly, Mastercard $MA (-0,48%) is also still there. If you want, you can add American Express $AXP (-2,45%) can also be included. To apply double standards here is simply extremely unprofessional.


The DOJ is particularly bothered by the "client incentives" and debit cards. The "client incentives" are simply marketing expenses to Visa customers. These do not even serve to exclude others, everywhere you can pay with Visa, Amex, Mastercard and PayPal are also accepted.

The focus here is only on debit cards and not credit cards, in order to develop a narrative that Visa is harming the "poor" here.


In addition, Visa's fees are allegedly partly to blame for inflation. Anyone who has ever looked at quarterly reports from Visa or Mastercard knows that this is absolute bs.


On the one hand, the DOJ claims that Visa charges too high a fee, forcing merchants to permanently raise their prices. On the other hand, it bothers the DOJ that these merchants receive money from Visa.


The fact that merchants choose Visa (also Mastercard and Amex) because the transaction network is extremely secure and a basis of trust is ignored.


The DOJ, which is so concerned about consumers, also doesn't seem to realize that none of these consumers need to use Visa's network in any way. They also ignore the fact that paying with cash also incurs costs (article in the comments).


I really hope the DOJ doesn't start looking for scapegoats for inflation now.


If that is the case, it looks very politically motivated to blame others afterwards, as always, but not those who make the political decisions that were/are a driver of inflation.

10
14 Comentários

imagem de perfil
will wait for the amis today and then strike
2
One man's sorrow... 🛒
1
imagem de perfil
@Baisse-Jumper don't have a visa yet but let's see
I haven't yet either. So I wouldn't be sad if it boiled a little more. I think anything between €220-240 is a good to very good starting point.
1
imagem de perfil
@Baisse-Jumper likes Mastercard a little more than Visa but let's see
@TaxesAreTheft Also a very good value. 👍🏻 You can't go wrong with either of them in my opinion.
imagem de perfil
@Baisse-Jumper definitely not, Mastercard has a juicy ROCE of 40%, Visa has the better margins.
1
imagem de perfil
I also find the lawsuit questionable as to whether it will go through, but it is explicitly about the American market if I have understood it correctly and Visa clearly dominates that market. In addition, there often seems to be no other choice than Visa for some companies or high fees, at least from what I've read.
1
imagem de perfil
@User03 the companies always have another choice, it's just that when it comes to cash the bank and IRS cause problems. Ultimately, the legislator is responsible for Visa having this position. Visa itself knows about the risk of lawsuits, which is why they are very careful with their fees. Visa is also given much less leeway than Mastercard when it comes to acquisitions. For me, this is simply a witch hunt. Visa doesn't exploit its market position in any way like other companies do (Apple, Pharma, Fico, Google etc), this lawsuit creates a dangerous benchmark for what the DOJ considers a "monopoly".
1
imagem de perfil
@TaxesAreTheft Yes, as I said, I also find the lawsuit questionable and, despite all the conspiracy theories etc., don't forget that the elections are coming up soon and the government has to do something "for the citizens".
1
imagem de perfil
@User03 that anyway, I also think that those in the DOJ are afraid for their jobs. Like the SEC, they have not done a good job in recent years.
imagem de perfil
The DOJ is simply useless to the maximum. We know that. They know that themselves. That's why they have to take aim at some company every few months, so that the taxpayer has the feeling that the billions are not being spent completely pointlessly and that the company could not be closed down or significantly downsized.

This is simply typical of an administration that regularly has to provide a justification for its existence in order to justify why it exists at all. And right now in the election campaign, the Democrats also have to show that they are not completely corrupt and oriented towards maximum profit (spoiler warning: they probably are). It's also clear that, as always, nothing will come of the investigations in the end.
1
imagem de perfil
@Soprano I see it the same way
Participar na conversa