Latest aus frequent flyer newsletter

[Jobeki111]

For those people not signed up to the newsletter please have a look around this site and sign the petition. Without my credit cards I could never have afforded to experience international business class on virgin or domestically on the business.
Further Information

 

[drewbles]

A little late, the majority of banks have already started. Citibank started with the March devaluation of all their good cards, and their sister cards from Virgin Money are also being culled.

Banks are just way too greedy

 

[theevilmuppet]

A little late, the majority of banks have already started. Citibank started with the March devaluation of all their good cards, and their sister cards from Virgin Money are also being culled.

Banks are just way too greedy

Citibank are the only issuer to have made changes thus far.

This has nothing to do with the "greed" of the banks (whether there is greed involved in banking generally is another discussion). The issue here is the completely inappropriate mandate the RBA has in regulating payment instruments in this country.

Citibank does not have sufficient business outside of their card issuing to absorb the Interchange Rate cuts that the RBA is pursuing, whilst many other card issuers have sufficient market presence in acquiring, retail banking, business banking and plenty of other segments.

The intent of heavily regulating Interchange Rates is apparently to benefit consumers. Given my earn rate on my primary Visa card is being cut by 25% and the card benefits are being destroyed and the points earn rate drops further after a certain amount of spend, I would like the RBA to present the net benefit to those in my position.

Taking the value of those points earned when redeemed, the RBA should be showing me a benefit in the $2,000 - $5,000 per year range however no such benefit has ever manifested as a result of Interchange Fee regulation.

If payment regulation is so important, how exactly can the RBA allow for fees in the $25 - $35 range to be levied on account holders by both the biller and the financial institution for Direct Debit rejects? And this is but one example.

 

[LonePine]

Virgin started cutting the earn rate on their cards, mobile phone and broadband and fuel through BP in the last month or so

 

[theevilmuppet]

Virgin started cutting the earn rate on their cards, mobile phone and broadband and fuel through BP in the last month or so

Let's take each of those in turn:

The Virgin Money cards are issued by Citibank, and the changes involve Citibank just as much as Virgin. When people with no clue (namely the RBA Payments System Board) make massive changes to Interchange regulation, something has to give when you have as small a domestic business as Citi does. The reductions are broadly in-line with those impacting Citi cards.

Virgin Mobile is not owned or operated by the Virgin Group and haven't been since 2006, so with regard to Mobile Phone and Mobile Broadband earn, Virgin are not responsible (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Mobile_Australia#History)

Regarding fuel via BP, the earn rate is exactly the same as it has been since introduction, unless I'm missing something?

 

[Jousams]

I disagree with much of the information the taxpayer alliance has put on the petition. Centrally, that these changes to the law will be competition destroying.

I do not support the changes to the law, but I have not signed the petition.

 

[BAM1748]

While if disagree with changes I have in the back of mind less well off and less educated getting themselves into trouble trying for points for a holiday to Fiji. Those people who never get enough points and waste their precious money trying.


Matt

 

[theevilmuppet]

While is disagree with changes I have in the back of mind less well off and less educated getting themselves into trouble trying for points for a holiday to Fiji. Those people who never get enough points and waste their precious money trying.


Matt

In what regard are they in the back of your mind?

 

[BAM1748]

In what regard are they in the back of your mind?

While I disagree with changes, the there might be argument for doing it.

 

[theevilmuppet]

While I disagree with changes, the there might be argument for doing it.

I completely disagree with any argument along those lines being justifiable.

On that basis lotteries and supermarket loyalty/points programs are questionable as well. If people aren't willing to arm themselves with information that is readily available I don't see why they should be protected from making uninformed choices about credit cards and rewards programs.

Given the same body charged with these responsibilities has done absolutely nothing about the ridiculous charges to account holders involved for Direct Debit dishonours I don't see them as particularly well-placed to make statements targeted at the financial welfare of the general population.

 

[kyanar]

For those people not signed up to the newsletter please have a look around this site and sign the petition. Without my credit cards I could never have afforded to experience international business class on virgin or domestically on the business.
Further Information

While I absolutely disagree with the RBA's meddling in systems they clearly don't want to understand, I despise the Taxpayer's Alliance (who are really just the IPA in disguise, a far right fringe group that makes the Coalition look socialist) a whole lot more.

The intent of heavily regulating Interchange Rates is apparently to benefit consumers. Given my earn rate on my primary Visa card is being cut by 25% and the card benefits are being destroyed and the points earn rate drops further after a certain amount of spend, I would like the RBA to present the net benefit to those in my position.

I read that the actual reason why they are slamming interchange rates is much more insidious. The last time they regulated interchange rates, they went on record saying it was to reduce the reliance on credit cards, and the influence of the worldwide networks when a local competitor (eftpos) existed. Basically, protectionism. The reason they'd be doing it again now is simple, they failed last time - credit card use is up, and eftpos is as much of a dead duck as it was then (albeit true it does have some advantages, it certainly hasn't delivered lower prices to consumers).

They've also already meddled in the Amex Companion Card scheme just as late as October, designating it so that they can more directly control it (look forward to your bank sending you a letter saying they're doing away with the companion card I bet...)

 

[BAM1748]

I completely disagree with any argument along those lines being justifiable.

On that basis lotteries and supermarket loyalty/points programs are questionable as well. If people aren't willing to arm themselves with information that is readily available I don't see why they should be protected from making uninformed choices about credit cards and rewards programs.

Glad you're perfect then. But many less fortunate get sucked into things especailly when the fine print runs to a 20 page booklet like it does with a credit card.

While you use lotteries as an example some extreme ones the other way can be raised as well, so lets forget the opal petrol, cash restictions on some welfare recipients (where they get a supermarket card) as it's up to them to sort themselves out, if you have a mental illess I'm sure reading the information supplied by the finance sector will be adequate to make informed choices.

I'm just saying, there could be an argument. The hard right will always want freedom of the finance sector but control who marries who. funny.

Matt

 

[theevilmuppet]

I read that the actual reason why they are slamming interchange rates is much more insidious. The last time they regulated interchange rates, they went on record saying it was to reduce the reliance on credit cards, and the influence of the worldwide networks when a local competitor (eftpos) existed. Basically, protectionism. The reason they'd be doing it again now is simple, they failed last time - credit card use is up, and eftpos is as much of a dead duck as it was then (albeit true it does have some advantages, it certainly hasn't delivered lower prices to consumers).

EPAL (the company that administers the EFTPOS network) has had an influx of revenue in recent years due to changes in the way transactions are charged for, claiming such revenue was required for development of contactless payment technology to compete with PayWave, PayPass and ExpressPay. The technology has been developed and tested yet no one has shown any interest in selling or using it. The protections offered to consumers by Scheme cards are vastly superior to those offered by EFTPOS cards (which are, last I checked, none).

There have been multiple attempts to bring EFTPOS into the eCommerce/Card Not Present domain however none of them have resulted in a usable product and would be extremely unlikely to do so given how hard it is to get an EFTPOS-only card and the lack of things such as chargeback options and buyer protection (even Scheme debit cards offer this).

In New Zealand, a law was passed requiring all domestic Visa and MasterCard debit cards to be processed via the NZ EFTPOS network. This move was seemingly made to protect the two EFTPOS providers.

 

[theevilmuppet]

Glad you're perfect then. But many less fortunate get sucked into things especailly when the fine print runs to a 20 page booklet like it does with a credit card.

While you use lotteries as an example some extreme ones the other way can be raised as well, so lets forget the opal petrol, cash restictions on some welfare recipients (where they get a supermarket card) as it's up to them to sort themselves out, if you have a mental illess I'm sure reading the information supplied by the finance sector will be adequate to make informed choices.

I'm just saying, there could be an argument. The hard right will always want freedom of the finance sector but control who marries who. funny.

Matt

I didn't state that I was perfect.

The comparisons you're making are indeed extreme but are also irrelevant to this particular action by the RBA Payments System Board. I'm not advocating restriction of assistance to anyone, rather that measures to protect a specific case of people acting in a legal fashion that ends up harming them not be imposed on everyone.

If someone is willing to sign a contract that has 20 pages of terms and conditions but isn't willing to read and understand those terms and conditions before doing so, why exactly should anyone else be penalised?

Regarding the very important social issues you've raised, they definitely need far more attention than they currently receive (especially when it comes to mental illness) but restricting product availability to everyone on the basis of not enough being done to address these issues that effect actual people is extremely short sighted.

Looking at this another way, any changes enforced will result in lower revenue for card issuers and airlines in this country. Both of these groups are massive employers of Australian residents and there is a strong possibility that profits will fall and/or staff will be made redundant to address this with no benefit seen by merchants (MSF levels have not been reduced as a result of the RBA's previous actions) or card holders (interest rates, interest free periods and card benefits will all be impacted negatively by these changes and prices of goods and services will not be reduced). The net results are unemployment, reduced GST revenues and lower company and personal tax receipts.

There are no benefits to any party involved.

 

[Jousams]

While if disagree with changes I have in the back of mind less well off and less educated getting themselves into trouble trying for points for a holiday to Fiji. Those people who never get enough points and waste their precious money trying.


Matt

I have no sympathy for people who get themselves into things they can't understand, heck good on me for benefiting out of it. I have a problem with putting my name to something I don't agree with that is put forward by a politically motivated group.

 

[theevilmuppet]

I have no sympathy for people who get themselves into things they can't understand, heck good on me for benefiting out of it. I have a problem with putting my name to something I don't agree with that is put forward by a politically motivated group.

I've written directly to the RBA in an attempt to at least find the right point of contact for this issue as I too disagree with a number of points being made by this group but still have issues with further regulation of Interchange Rates.