What is Digg?100 Comments
- StingingNettle, on 03/19/2008, -2/+37Visa was owned by around 1500 banks. If its so profitable to them, why are they selling it? The answer is the banks are desperate from the housing melt down and need money.
- robbob, on 03/19/2008, -1/+24Visa has been investing in me for years
- holmesfour, on 03/19/2008, -1/+21Definitely a good investment. Visa gets paid regardless of whether or not you pay your bill.
- Condemned, on 03/19/2008, -0/+17There was more important news, like virgins and World of Warcraft...
- inactive, on 03/19/2008, -0/+13i once got a story to the front page without shouting to anyone.
- TobiasParker, on 03/19/2008, -1/+11This is a really good time for Tyler Durden to strike.
- bstock, on 03/19/2008, -1/+11If I recall correctly, I believe I heard about Visa's IPO on NPR before the subprime mortgage stuff.
- gr0ver, on 03/19/2008, -1/+11i'm not the submitter's friend and i dugg it
- zenerdiode, on 03/19/2008, -0/+9You wouldn't have been able to buy if you're a regular joe schmoe investor. The initial $44 something price was available pre-trading to investment bankers and larger firms. By the time the market opened, it was already at $60. Throughout the day, it has been hovering around $60 and slightly below. Unfortunately, $100K won't get you into the world that these investment bankers trade in. :(
- jemka, on 03/19/2008, -0/+8I wrote this post below, but I included it up here because I think it's important for everyone to know.
Visa made this move for the same reason MasterCard did, for protection. If you see article1 below, Visa settled with AMEX for an antitrust lawsuit. Both Visa and MasterCard have taken the position that consumers or at least merchants can be part of a much larger and more devastating class action lawsuit. A group that goes by the name Merchants Payments Coalition has been pushing congress to look into Visa and MasterCard from the perspective of antitrust and monopolistic business practices. As the MPC states on their website, the amount that Visa, MasterCard, and the Banks charge for credit card transactions is essentially a hidden tax on all goods and services. You, the consumer, pay much higher prices on goods and services to allow merchants to cover the costs of processing credit cards. The MPC wants Visa and MasterCard to explain why they are so high.
This is the real reason they went public, for protection.
article1:http://www.newser.com/article/1A1-D8SP72KO0.html
article2:http://www.unfaircreditcardfees.com/ - Raian, on 03/19/2008, -3/+10It is still a little scary... the new public Visa will be going to new lows to get a larger share of your pocket. Everyone with a Visa card-- brace yourself.
- TimDigg, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6more like a larger share out of your favorite businesses pocket...
who this will really affect are all the small shops and store owners who can barely pay visa fees as it is
I know a small store in my building that tried to have no limits on credit use, almost put them under. People would buy a $1.45 cookie on credit
now they have a $6 limit
interestingly enough...maybe this could bring us to using cash again - trexdave, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6I don't mind that small businesses require a minimum, and tack on an extra charge if you don't meet the minimum. I don't want to hurt the small business owner, and if that means I have to pay $.40 extra when spending under $10, I'm fine with that.
- rroeserr, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6Visa is the method of payment..the account and the interest are up to your bank.
- inactive, on 03/19/2008, -1/+6that's one of the stupidest comments i've seen on digg in a while. why would the banks have gotten involved in subprime if they saw the subprime mess coming?
- SkippyDoorknob, on 03/19/2008, -1/+6They wouldn't have gotten into this subprime mess in the first place if they had any decent ability to forecast ahead a few years.
- jemka, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5Visa made this move for the same reason MasterCard did, for protection. If you see article1 below, Visa settled with AMEX for an antitrust lawsuit. Both Visa and MasterCard have taken the position that consumers or at least merchants can be part of a much larger and more devastating class action lawsuit. A group that goes by the name Merchants Payments Coalition has been pushing congress to look into Visa and MasterCard from the perspective of antitrust and monopolistic business practices. As the MPC states on their website, the amount that Visa, MasterCard, and the Banks charge for credit card transactions is essentially a hidden tax on all goods and services. You, the consumer, pay much higher prices on goods and services to allow merchants to cover the costs of processing credit cards. The MPC wants Visa and MasterCard to explain why they are so high.
This is the real reason they went public, for protection.
article1:http://www.newser.com/article/1A1-D8SP72KO0.html
article2:http://www.unfaircreditcardfees.com/ - papavb, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4guess my book buying sprees on amazon did something for the economy
- kelowna4life, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3your right...there has been talk of this for awhile...ever since mastercard raised a ton of money with theirs.
- Blandyman, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3It wont cause cancer or kill baby seals DIRECTLY, but they sure as hell will raise transaction fees or interest rates or anything that could garner them a larger profit.
I'm a capitalist, but I know a problem when I see one. Hopefully, this WON'T happen, and maybe the opposite will hap- nevermind. - TimDigg, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Mastercard baby!!
.....well in the US baby! - sporkmonger, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3Eh, Visa isn't all that exposed to the credit crisis. As long as people keep spending, Visa is fine. It's the banks that issue the cards that have problems.
Disclosure: I bought Visa shares this morning (@ 57.90). - CiXeL, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2broken findow fallacy
http://youtube.com/watch?v=krcNIWPkNzA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken ... - badave, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Turmoil is good for business.
- ColonelJessup, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4Here we go with the Digg.com Wall Street insiders............................
- JoshChan, on 03/19/2008, -5/+7Ironically this happens because this one of the biggest credit companies has no exposure to credit risk
BTW how can this news make to the frontpage that late? - loneraven, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2My sams club doesn't take visa, oddly enough.
- Plopfish, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2And if you got in on the IPO price (I hear if certain brokerages let "Joe Schmoes" in for junks of 100share blocks..... you can't sell for 30 days.
- bonavistask8er, on 03/19/2008, -5/+718.5% interest, that seems fair.
- SpongeBad, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2I'd argue there's a case for price fixing, simply because the Visa and Mastercard (and likely AMEX) merchant agreements don't allow retailers to offer discounts for cash without violating their merchant services agreements. Shouldn't retailers be allowed to pass savings on to consumers if consumers are willing to pay cash?
- prodgen, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3This is why many companies take visa over AMEX/Discover. They do over double the business with .75 of the transaction that other credit cards do.
- Firehed, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Not Costco. And that's all that matters.
- dualityim, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Apparently you don't know what you are talking about. It is common practice for companies to spin off one of their holdings when it is profitable. It benefits both parties: the parent company gets a nice return on their investment when they sell their holding for high prices when it is so profitable, and the subsidiary can continue to expand and seek out the best strategies for itself through self-governance.
- gcnaddict, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Not surprising at all. Mastercard had a similarly successful IPO when it went public. Even during times of crisis, there's the potential for money to be made when investing in credit institutions.
- inactive, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2bought 12 shares
- osbjmg, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2I got 40 at 55.50 :) Let the fun begin. I will probably hold for over a year, maybe more. TMI, I know
- BESTenemy, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2- I'd like to buy some Visa stock.
- How would you like to pay for it sir?
- Put it on my credit card. - ThreeDee912, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2You have been spamming this comment in almost every single story. Stop it.
http://digg.com/tech_news/Google_s_Top_17_Easter_E ...
http://digg.com/other_sports/Beijing_Olympics_Face ...
http://digg.com/health/Hospitals_Reusing_Medical_D ...
Ok, I hate how the 'top diggers' have 'friends' to digg up their stories to get to the FP, but please. Just stop spamming. - bubba9999, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2People will rack up bigger credit card debts as the recession progresses. Defaults will go up, but so will everyone's load. Visa will make tons of money unless the whole thing collapses.
- SpongeBad, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2And increased fees to businesses will mean higher prices at retail, so in the end the consumer pays more. Oh, and it's win-win for Visa. If consumer goods go up in price, more money is being spent (and a lot of it on Visa cards) and more interest is being paid. It's a vicious cycle.
- RandoTheKing, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3Visa is ***** rich, BITCH.
- thcobbs, on 03/19/2008, -5/+6You think the banks didn't see it coming?
- CiXeL, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1is there any specific part of the site i should report them to?
- inactive, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1VISA is accepted everywhere. AMEX/Discover are not.
- TheSabre, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1So then don't use Visa. How hard is that?
- dualityim, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2Bear Stearns value didn't decline because of the Fed/JPMorgan bailout offer. It declined because of liquidity issues in the firm. If not for the bailout, the theory goes that the firm would go bankrupt. And of course $2/share is better than $0/share.
- DigitAl56K, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Visa is actually owned by 13,000 banks, and they did not "sell" Visa, they sold just over half the shares in Visa:
http://www.rttnews.com/sp/todaystop.asp?date=03/18 ... - pak314, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2Yes but those things should already be factored into current Visa valuations. What you need to ask is if they will improve in a slowing economy or not.
- jemka, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Sorry, I'm we tall did.
- dualityim, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Look at it this way, the credit card networks are providing a payment processing system for the retailers. It's not like taking cash costs nothing to process: the merchant would still have to handle the cash, deliver it to banking institutions, deposit it, etc. Handling cash costs money. Granted, the cost of handling cash per transaction is probably lower than cost of credit card processing per transaction, but it's a fee nonetheless. When a merchant signs an agreement to pass off some of their payment processing to a credit card network, the credit card network wants to ensure the merchant is not favoring their internal processing (i.e. cash) over the processing offered by their credit card services, thus they put in a clause in their agreement to make sure cash and credit card prices are the same.
It's important to note that using credit card companies isn't mandatory. I know plenty of successful businesses that eschew credit card acceptance to save money. They put ATM machines in their stores instead. -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is