Yes, it is.
CC companies... WITHOUT interest, WITHOUT fees - make money.
Allowing folks who are not creditworthy to have CC cards MAKES THEM MORE
MONEY - because the merchants still pay fees on transactions.
There is absolutely NO INCENTIVE for CC companies to decline credit.
That isn't the profit to the CC company. That is the profit of the transaction
processor. They are the ones the merchant hires to send the transaction off to
the customers bank. What's in it for the bank that issues the card? Or don't
you know how many hands pass a credit card transaction around before it gets on
Oh and think about this for a second, commercial paper [bonds] is about 8 to 10%
So they have to borrow the money to cover your charge. What's their profit
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Golden California Girls wrote:
Two "kins"? Really? ;-)
Check your facts Jill! CC companies charge a premium to the vendor for
the privilege of allowing the customer to charge. "*NO* money"? Not really.
Cite a reference! Surely you don't expect me to take that on face value.
No I am not and I challenge you to point out where I said that. You
won't fine it.
Really?!? Tell me something I don't know. Better yet tell me something
that's germane to my point!
Regardless, when CC companies get hit, innocents get hit. That's wrong
no matter what you say.
All of this is irrelevant. Either a person is responsible for their
actions or they are not. I can't believe that you appear to be arguing
that people should not be responsible for their actions.
When such deadbeats do not pay their debts then other innocent people
suffer. It is irrelevant if those other innocents are good risks or bad
risks. The point is they are INNOCENT!?! Are you that stupid as to not
understand this simple concept?
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com
You must be Daddy's little pumpkin, I can tell by the way you roll. -
After slogging down one of the longer threads (OT, no less) in this NG, I
sort of lost track of Who's on first, What's on second and so on.
HOWEVER,and with much trepidation lest this starts another cascade -
1) whoever (Steve Scott?) said - in effect - that what can't be retrieved
from the deadbeats should come from the CC companies' profits and not from
the rest of CC holders, seems to miss the point that the CC companies'
profits come from the rest of CC holders: US!
2) whoever commented negatively on BoA for issuing CCs to
non-citizens/non-residents/undocumented folks/illegal aliens, might ponder
the difference between use of CCs in the USA issued by BoA in the USA to
these people VS. use of CCs in the USA issued by BoA to those same people in
their home countries before they somehow made it over the border and stayed.
BeanSmart.com is a site by and for consumers of financial services and advice. We are not affiliated with any of the banks, financial services or software manufacturers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
Tax and financial advice you come across on this site is freely given by your peers and professionals on their own time and out of the kindness of their hearts. We can guarantee
neither accuracy of such advice nor its applicability for your situation. Simply put, you are fully responsible for the results of using information from this site in real life situations.