The credit card industry's proposed deal to settle long-pending retailer lawsuits set interchange watchers chattering over the weekend, divided over how much each side won and lost in the deal.
Conventional wisdom held that the long-pending lawsuits were destined to be settled before their September trial date. Conventional wisdom also held that Visa (NYSE: V), MasterCard and the big banks would pay billions of dollars and possibly lift their "no surcharging" rules to settle the lawsuits – but that the merchants would have to pry lasting changes to the interchange system out of the card networks' cold, dead fingers.
And so it was. The proposed deal, announced late Friday, would transfer almost $7.5 billion from the card networks to their merchant frenemies. In exchange for that payoff, Visa and MasterCard will get a wide-ranging release from future litigation.
But the deal leaves intact the underlying system of how Visa and MasterCard set the prices retailers must pay for accepting credit cards. By allowing surcharges on credit card purchases, the deal also gives the card industry a potentially powerful PR weapon, since banks and retailers like to blame each other for how consumers are affected by interchange fees.
Last year, after debit card regulations went into effect, banks struggled to convince customers that their increased checking account fees were all the merchants' fault, but this time around, blaming retailers might be an easier sell. Customers blame banks when banks raise prices, and will likely blame retailers when retailers try to charge them more for using credit cards, a privilege people aren't used to paying for.
One of the main plaintiffs, the National Association of Convenience Stores, has already rejected the proposed settlement, and more merchants may raise objections before the deal is approved.
"The best outcome for this settlement is for it to fail," said one senior executive at a large retailer, which was not involved in the lawsuits. "There are some areas in which it takes us backwards. It still supports the status quo in terms of Visa and MasterCard being able to do what they do in terms of rule-setting and price-setting."
But regardless of those objections, the proposal is one more step in the fraught, co-dependent relationship between the banks and retailers, and a step that many in both industries are watching closely.
We at American Banker spent the weekend and Monday polling several expert observers and industry members, looking for official reactions as well as informed and more impartial opinion on what the deal means for all of the parties. Their replies are below, and readers are invited to add their comments.
Duncan MacDonald, former general counsel of Citigroup's Europe and North America card businesses, independent consultant:
I think the defendants agreed to pay $7.5 billion mostly to get the release, which balances/justifies the cost of the surcharge. ... It is that valuable! Peace, as you know, can be just as expensive as war. … The "release" is a breathtaking success for the bankcard industry. It is about as comprehensive as any I've ever seen. It should end the industry's antitrust wars for years to come.
As crafted, the settlement seems to favor the defendants, despite its hefty price. Most of the objections I've envisioned are problems for the plaintiffs.