> I simply can't understand how it could be viewed positively by any consumer
Visa's market research suggests a significant increase in Visa usage and Visa brand value among consumers aware of their Olympic sponsorship (which has been ongoing since 1986, and already committed through the next 4 Olympics games):
> According to the U.S. Sponsorship Tracker, a Visa commissioned study following the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games conducted by Performance Research, an independent research company, Visa cardholders
who were aware of Visa’s Olympic Games sponsorship claimed a 16 percent and nine percent increase in Visa card usage in Canada and the US respectively. The same report found Visa’s brand equity was 32 percent and 38 percent higher among consumers who were aware of Visa’s sponsorship in Canada
and the US respectively.
http://corporate.visa.com/_media/olympic-games-media-kit/vis...
> I've been trying really hard to understand why Visa would make such an obviously unfriendly and counter-productive decision
The first Olympics game where Visa was exclusively accepted was Calgary 1988. This isn't a decision they just made.