Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

squareup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 176 posts

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#21

Post by munch117 »

jedberg wrote: post #9
crazygringo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a penalty, it's just a cost of using the network. If you use the credit card network not just once but twice -- once to process a purchase and then yet again to refund it -- you're using that infrastructure. It makes sense you'd pay for its usage. If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place a…

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one directio…

I've never seen a toll bridge that doesn't have tolls in both directions. I didn't even know that charging in only one direction was a thing. You live and you learn.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#22

Post by jedberg »

__derek__ wrote: post #18
jedberg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one directio…

> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!

Interesting! I'll admit my sample size is limited to bridges in California, but at least in the Bay Area all the bridges only have tolls in one direction.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#23

Post by throwntoday »

they4kman wrote: post #17
CryptoBanker wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see why there’s a penalty for a refund. A chargeback would be one thing, but a refund is a totally normal business process

A refund _is_ a chargeback – the only difference is who initiates it. Technically, any time funds are moved onto a card, it's called a chargeback. This is how one would load a gift card, for instance. When it comes to credit card merchants, a chargeback always dings a transaction fee, and the merchant may additionally tack on a chargeback fee. So a full refund process will incur two transaction fees, plus possibly a…

>Technically, any time funds are moved onto a card, it's called a chargeback.

I've seen more companies offering a reverse debit now (not sure of the actual term). Is this not through a different mechanism? Funds are available instantly same as how they're drawn via debit vs credit.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#24

Post by jedberg »

munch117 wrote: post #21
jedberg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one directio…

I've never seen a toll bridge that doesn't have tolls in both directions. I didn't even know that charging in only one direction was a thing. You live and you learn.

As I am also learning today. If you don't mind sharing, where do you live?

Here in the Bay Area all of our bridges only have tolls in one direction.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#25

Post by dymk »

munch117 wrote: post #21
jedberg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one directio…

I've never seen a toll bridge that doesn't have tolls in both directions. I didn't even know that charging in only one direction was a thing. You live and you learn.

An example: to use the ferry system here in Washington’s Puget Sound, you pay to go to the island, but the return trip is free. Same applies for bridges taking you to islands.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#26

Post by latchkey »

This will affect businesses that do 3rd party merchant services, like events. If the event is cancelled, refunds are issued. Who pays that fee? It would be up to the business to try to claw back funds from the promoter of the event... who is now bankrupt from not being able to do their event. It gets ugly fast.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#27

Post by dymk »

__derek__ wrote: post #18
jedberg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you drive to work on a toll road and then drive back home along the same toll road, you still have to pay the tolls even though you wound up in the same place at the end. Funny you should use that example. On toll roads you get charged in both directions, but I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Usually the argument is that you really can't go any other way so the toll in one directio…

> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!

The floating bridge has a toll in both directions because there’s an alternate route which isn’t too much worse when there’s no traffic (and something about federal highway grant money)

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#28

Post by __derek__ »

jedberg wrote: post #22
__derek__ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!

Interesting! I'll admit my sample size is limited to bridges in California, but at least in the Bay Area all the bridges only have tolls in one direction.

That makes sense. It fits with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which connects Tacoma (urban economic hub) to the Olympic Peninsula (some small towns, mostly wilderness).

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#29

Post by dragonwriter »

jedberg wrote: post #22
__derek__ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never seen a toll bridge that had tolls in both directions. Huh, I think I've only seen this once (the Tacoma Narrows Bridge). Other toll bridges I've driven have all had tolls in each direction, e.g., Ambassador and Blue Water Bridges to Canada, Lake Washington floating bridge. Maybe I need to start taking more bridges to nowhere!

Interesting! I'll admit my sample size is limited to bridges in California, but at least in the Bay Area all the bridges only have tolls in one direction.

I suspect the Bay Area model is more common where the dominant traffic on a bridge is two-way commute traffic that can’t easily escape the toll regime for one side of the commute. In that case, one-way tolls reduce infrastructure and operating costs, and traffic impacts, of toll collection without any significant downside.

Re: Square to no longer return processing fees when buyers are issued a refund

#30

Post by MereInterest »

falcolas wrote: post #19
potamic wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic they should charge by request volume, not by percentage of amount. As a matter of fact, there is no logic in pricing. Sellers will charge what they can get away with, buyers will pay what they can afford. And of course, it is always negotiable.

> And of course, it is always negotiable. Sweet. How do I negotiate with Amazon again? In reality, negotiation is a relic of a long gone era and flea markets. Buyer agency in general has mostly disappeared in modern transactions.

In principle, repeated choice of whether or not to use a specific product is a form of negotiation, where each choice provides information to the seller, who can then update their pricing accordingly. In practice, this is an extremely weak signal, is swamped out by market changes, assumes zero cost of switching, ignores network effects, etc. One of many reasons why I distrust economist’s assertion of fairness.
Post reply on HN