308 replies to this topic

[RobH]

Pure facts, on 19 February 2011 - 12:41 PM, said:

London, the UK government and the British public (particularly the passionate fans who went to Athens in 2004) knew or should have known about this at the moment of bidding. So crying foul now is a little easy.

Besides, as already pointed out, the option of using pre-paid cards do not oblige anyone to switch to a Visa Credit Card.

Unless of course LOCOG and BOA are keen to return the share of Visa money they got through the TOP Programme...

It's not the government crying foul, nor is it LOCOG.

It's a consumer watchdog (Which?), a non-ministerial department charged with ensuring competitiveness in the markets (the OFT), and the European Commission who putting the pressure on. And they're doing their jobs, not "crying foul".

Not every public body or individual is going to agree with everything the IOC sets out just because we've been given the privilege of hosting; we're not China.

Edited by RobH, 19 February 2011 - 02:23 PM.

[The Tower Bridge Fox]

Pure facts, on 19 February 2011 - 12:41 PM, said:

London, the UK government and the British public (particularly the passionate fans who went to Athens in 2004) knew or should have known about this at the moment of bidding. So crying foul now is a little easy.

Besides, as already pointed out, the option of using pre-paid cards do not oblige anyone to switch to a Visa Credit Card.

Unless of course LOCOG and BOA are keen to return the share of Visa money they got through the TOP Programme...

If you pre-pay pay card isn’t visa you wont be able to use it.

[Kenadian]

This happened in Vancouver, too. At the venues and at the official Olympic souvenir shop at the Bay. If you wanted red mittens and a Muk Muk, you had to have cash or a Visa product. You couldn't even use debit cards (unless they were Visa) and even the Bay's own credit cards were not accepted.

So yeah, it is a bit annoying, but that's their business plan. Visa, like all Olympic sponsors, pay big bucks for those contracts. Money that the IOC and OCOGs need to function.

[Pure facts]

RobH, on 19 February 2011 - 01:13 PM, said:

It's a consumer watchdog (Which?), a non-ministerial department charged with ensuring competitiveness in the markets (the OFT), and the European Commission who putting the pressure on. And they're doing their jobs, not "crying foul".

Not every public body or individual is going to agree with everything the IOC sets out just because we've been given the privilege of hosting; we're not China.

It's not a question of agreeing or not with what the IOC sets out, it's a question of abiding by a contract or not. One does not sign a contract if one doesn't agree with its content.

I fail to see how the Visa exclusive rights is different from any other partners rights. Again, the public has the options of using cash or buying a Visa pre-paid card to purchase Tickets or anything in the venues so it is not like anyone will be denied the possibility of doing so.

But anyhow, it will be interesting to see what happens if the European Commission does rule that the Visa deal hurts competitiveness. That would mean potentially a European Institution stepping over British ones (namely the City of London and BOA who have signed the Host City Contract).

And yeah you are not China but you are either neither the US, Canada, Australia, Greece, Italy, all countries who have survived the Visa exclusive rights without turning into dictatorship.

[RobH]

Quote

It's not a question of agreeing or not with what the IOC sets out, it's a question of abiding by a contract or not. One does not sign a contract if one doesn't agree with its content.

And none of these groups HAVE signed a contract or ever will sign a contract with the IOC. Again, might I point out it's not the government or LOCOG making the noises against this but consumer groups and indeed the European Commission. Just because a government has signed a contract it dooesn't mean everyone has to like it or keep schtum if they don't. The contract will be abided by I'm quite sure, but that's not what I'm debating. I'm simply saying I don't like the concept, even if it does bring in the OCOG a fair amount of money.

And yes, it would be a European Institution stepping over British ones if they ruled against the IOC, but it certainly won't be the first time that's happened and nor would it be the last. The votes for prisoners controversy this week is another, for example. Whatever the case, I suppose the IOC are keeping a very close eye on it all.

Quote

And yeah you are not China but you are either neither the US, Canada, Australia, Greece, Italy, all countries who have survived the Visa exclusive rights without turning into dictatorship.

I think you got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not saying abiding by the deal would make us more like a dictatorship. I'm saying expecting no dissenting voices from public bodies is not realistic if they see something they don't like. i.e. we're not China.

Edited by RobH, 19 February 2011 - 04:42 PM.

[Lee]

Pure facts, on 19 February 2011 - 12:41 PM, said:

London, the UK government and the British public (particularly the passionate fans who went to Athens in 2004) knew or should have known about this at the moment of bidding. So crying foul now is a little easy.

Besides, as already pointed out, the option of using pre-paid cards do not oblige anyone to switch to a Visa Credit Card.

Unless of course LOCOG and BOA are keen to return the share of Visa money they got through the TOP Programme...

What a ridiculous post! So with that logic you are saying that in order to bid for the Olympics any country, it's people or it's government, have to agree with and not question anything that the IOC demands.

And your point about pre-paid cards is flawed too as the whole point of putting your purchases on credit is not only about convenience, but means you have some time to pay off the balance. You need to have your entire budget up front in order to use the pre-pay option. Any other type of sponsor demands I could live with but not monopolising the methods of payment. That is restricting and I will never agree with it.

Edited by Lee, 20 February 2011 - 05:10 PM.

[Kenadian]

Well, you may not agree with it, but you are stuck with it. People grumbled about it in Vancouver, too. And I don't see this European Commission having any authority or grounds to change anything.

[RobH]

Yes, I'm sure we are stuck with it but there's nothing wrong with grumbling, it's our national sport in many ways.

The European Commission certainly has the authority to act if they see fit though. You should see some of the fines and penalties they've handed out to Microsoft over the last five years...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7266629.stm

Over two billion dollars in fines and one of the the net results, Microsoft can longer ship Internet Explorer with Windows in Europe.

I think it's unlikely they'll do anything in this case because the IOC almost certainly aren't doing anything wrong, even if I and others don't like it. But the European Commission do have teeth and it's interesting that they're looking at this.

Edited by RobH, 20 February 2011 - 04:48 PM.

[Kenadian]

But it isn't about the teeth, it is about the legality of the agreement and I'm certain that the IOC and Visa have a crack team of lawyers who made sure that the deal is bullet and water proof...so the Commission is not likely to be able to squash a deal that has existed for decades and backed by solid legal terms just because some people suddenly realized it will impact the way they purchase some sports tickets.

[RobH]

I guess you're half right in your previous post then. They do have the authority but probably not the grounds.