XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.books   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article , Gutless Umbrella   
   Carrying Sissy  wrote:   
      
   > YourName@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote in   
   > news:YourName-2408131046210001@203-118-187-72.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz:   
   >   
   > > In article , Gutless   
   > > Umbrella Carrying Sissy  wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> Doc O'Leary  wrote in   
   > >> news:droleary-6DB040.10492919082013@news.eternal-september.org:   
   > >> >   
   > >> > Since cash is a legacy cost, it's probably best to offer a   
   > >> > business the smallest bills you can along with exact change.   
   > >>   
   > >> That is true only if you have change in hand when the cashier   
   > >> starts ringing you up, sufficient to reach any amount possible.   
   > >>   
   > >> And can count change in a less than geologic time frame (and   
   > >> many people can't). The thing the store wants more than   
   > >> anything is to move you through the line as efficiently as   
   > >> possible, so they can reduce the number of employees they have   
   > >> to pay (payroll is second only to cost of goods as  business   
   > >> expense, in retail). The cashier can count out change from the   
   > >> till far faster than you can from your pocket, and generally   
   > >> faster than you can from your hand.   
   > >   
   > > There's a TV advert playing here in New Zealand for the new   
   > > "tap" / "wave" credit card systems. It has people all using   
   > > "tap" / "wave" cards to buy their lunch and then eating it in   
   > > the cafeterria almost like a conveyor belt and clockwork machine   
   > > ... then one person offers the cashier actual money and   
   > > everything grinds to a shocked pause while she puts it in the   
   > > cash register. Once he goes past the machine restarts ticking   
   > > over again.   
   >   
   > Well, whoda thunk a commercial selling a new product would make it   
   > look superior to what it's supposed to replace? Color me amazed.   
      
   It was simply an advert that fitted the topic.  :-)   
      
      
      
   > But generally speaking, when the customer interacts with the card   
   > reader (of any flavor), it *can* be faster than cash. If everything   
   > is working. Card readers are high maintenance hardwaer, in my   
   > experience (we seem to be replacing ours about every year or two,   
   > due mostly to some kind of corruption in the flash memory, but also   
   > due to wear and tear on the units - people beat the hell out of   
   > them).   
      
   The cards aren't too good either. I've got one rewards-type cards that   
   still uses the magnetic swipe strip, and it is showing problems of not   
   being readbale sometimes.   
      
   Of course, that's part of the reason why card companies replace the cards   
   every few years.   
      
      
      
   > And, of course, in the commercial, everybody knows how to   
   > use it (you'd be amazed/appalled at how many people simply cannot   
   > handle the instructions on the screen of the card reader - with   
   > animated pictures). But then, even cash *can* fail on a mechanical   
   > level, and there are an appalling number of people who are too   
   > stupid to spend cash, too. But generally speaking, cash is the most   
   > reliable form of payment in terms of people knowing how to use it.   
      
   There's the problem of some machines, like in parking buildings, that   
   refuse to accept anything at all. I don't think I've ever been able to get   
   one to work with my credit cards.   :-\   
      
   There's a toll motorway a bit north of me which they now changing the   
   roadside machines to be "cash only" (although you can also pay via the   
   Internet using a card).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)