Recent advertisement for Visa - what a joke

[The Sceptical Chymist]

As jackg has pointed out, they are losing market dominance. 20 years ago if you wanted to buy something in a store or online, you could pay in cash, Visa, or Mastercard. Now you can use Google Pay, Apple Pay, Microsoft Pay, PayPal, Venmo, Cash App, Zelle, Advanced Cash, dozens of other banking or payment apps, and now bitcoin too.

I don't doubt any of what you wrote, but I still question whether it's advantageous for Visa to be advertising to the public.  It isn't like an advertisement for Coca-Cola or Twinkies, where the ad is designed to create a craving in the viewer for the product.  Nobody is going to crave a Visa card after watching a Visa advert, know what I mean?  I'm just not sure that creating brand awareness through a TV-type ad really helps a service like theirs.  I could be wrong, of course.

Anyway, banks are already addressing banking issues themselves such as lack of a valid ID or a permanent address.

That's good to hear, though I don't know any of the details of what banks are doing.  What I do know is that there are a lot of people who don't have permanent addresses--whether they're living on the street or in a shelter--and who need banking services.  Fortunately in those cases if they receive assistance from the government (at least in the US), they can deal with social service offices in their local county and can usually get a food stamp card which also functions as an ATM card if they get cash benefits.

[1714911346]

1714911346

[1714911346]

1714911346

[1714911346]

1714911346

[Karartma1]

As jackg has pointed out, they are losing market dominance. 20 years ago if you wanted to buy something in a store or online, you could pay in cash, Visa, or Mastercard. Now you can use Google Pay, Apple Pay, Microsoft Pay, PayPal, Venmo, Cash App, Zelle, Advanced Cash, dozens of other banking or payment apps, and now bitcoin too.

I don't doubt any of what you wrote, but I still question whether it's advantageous for Visa to be advertising to the public.  It isn't like an advertisement for Coca-Cola or Twinkies, where the ad is designed to create a craving in the viewer for the product.  Nobody is going to crave a Visa card after watching a Visa advert, know what I mean?  I'm just not sure that creating brand awareness through a TV-type ad really helps a service like theirs.  I could be wrong, of course.

They need to be under the eyes of the public all the time because like what happens to Amazon, Visa needs customers like us to survive. People need to feel secure when they use their VISA/MC/AMEX what-else credit card payment gateway. While they rip-off merchants and businesses with their astronomical fees, they need us to keep using their cards and their network.
Hence, all this advertising.

[Hydrogen]

I don't watch much TV on the TV itself nowadays, so I don't know if anyone has been talking about this ad or not:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbvl60_CZl8

Anyone else get the sense they had crypto in mind when they wrote the script for it?

That ad definitely looks as if it were written with bitcoin in mind rather than visa. It seems as if visa is trying to take credit for everything bitcoin currently does.

Visa should advertise more about withdrawing support from pornhub after PH included cryptocurrency support.

They're giving people the wrong idea about their business and scope of them being "friendly" to all platforms and merchants.

[Darker45]

Anyway, banks are already addressing banking issues themselves such as lack of a valid ID or a permanent address.

That's good to hear, though I don't know any of the details of what banks are doing.  What I do know is that there are a lot of people who don't have permanent addresses--whether they're living on the street or in a shelter--and who need banking services.  Fortunately in those cases if they receive assistance from the government (at least in the US), they can deal with social service offices in their local county and can usually get a food stamp card which also functions as an ATM card if they get cash benefits.

Well, in my country, in the absence of a valid ID, there are certain documents such as birth certificate, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) clearance, police clearance, village certificate, and so on which could be used as identification documents. To someone who doesn't have a permanent address, one could simply request for a certification from the village saying that he/she is a resident of where he/she is currently staying.

The point is, if people are really interested to open a bank account for whatever reason, they could.

[el kaka22]

They need to be under the eyes of the public all the time because like what happens to Amazon, Visa needs customers like us to survive. People need to feel secure when they use their VISA/MC/AMEX what-else credit card payment gateway. While they rip-off merchants and businesses with their astronomical fees, they need us to keep using their cards and their network.
Hence, all this advertising.

Same goes for places like coca cola, McDonalds, apple and all that, they are super rich and wealthy and everybody knows about them anyway, so if they did no marketing at all they would still be known. However with more marketing comes more money most of the time and that is why I believe that we should not judge them for making a commercial. The weird part here is not that they are one of the few places that does what they do and they are already super highly known so they do not need it, that is something I can understand and I support the decision to make an ad.

However, the weird thing here is that they act as if they are helpers of the world trying to connect people together and help the people who otherwise couldn't, bitcoin really does that, crypto does that but Visa charges a lot of money for that so not like they are a charity, they are a business that makes billions.

[DooMAD]

and I'm not even sure why they need to advertise.  It's not like people want to go get a Visa card after seeing a crappy advertisement like this one.

I suspect they're trying to exploit behavioural science.  They want the public to subconsciously associate words like "network", "signature" and the notion that it's supposedly for "everyone" with their brand before Joe Public hears people like us using those words or phrases in connection with Bitcoin.  People will naturally assume it's all the same stuff if we're all using the same terminology. 

They're not hoping people will think "I want a Visa card".  Most of them already have one.  They want people to think "I'm already part of a network that lets me connect with everyone else, so I don't need any other networks that basically sound the same as what I already have". 

[teosanru]

I don't watch much TV on the TV itself nowadays, so I don't know if anyone has been talking about this ad or not:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbvl60_CZl8

"What a load of bullshit", I found myself saying aloud after witnessing that for the first time.  How can it be working for everyone when so many people in the world are unbanked?  And how much of the wording in that was deliberately chosen to mirror the kinds of things we say about Bitcoin?  It feels very much like a pre-emptive first strike on their part, possibly demonstrating some insecurities about the threat their business model now faces.

Anyone else get the sense they had crypto in mind when they wrote the script for it?

Honestly speaking, if I would not have been into the crypto world, I would agree that VISA definitely is a Network! They are one of the few who have been able to provide global payments solutions with very little downtime and with quite fewer complications for users, even though the fees you might argue is higher. But from a business standpoint, unarguably it's the best option available if you don't consider cryptos in the frame, but then if you bring cryptos in the frame, you'll realize VISA isn't really the best option but yet you cannot argue the market penetration that they have is remarkable and incomparable. Also talking about unbanked people, let's be honest if 30 out of 100 are unbanked, barely 20 out of 100 have put their money in cryptocurrencies.

[Silberman]

I stopped watching at 20 second mark, I've seen what I need to see, they're deceiving people by letting them think that their company is more than just a bunch of credit card which is in fact it really is. Man that's a bit egotistical and ballsy of them to say that they're a signature.

Honesty and advertising have never been the best friends, it is obvious they are lying but try to watch any ad this days and not find several lies in the few seconds they advertise their product or service, so while at one hand this could be outrageous to some people at the same time it is incredibly common these days, which is why I love the fact that now you can stream and watch whatever you want without having to see those ridiculous ads anymore.

[verita1]

Credit cards are a financial instrument for those who have bank accounts and business references, a credit history.
Although I have bank accounts that I used to receive my salary payment, they were never good references to receive a credit card, many times I made applications for credit cards that were rejected because I could not prove that I could pay a credit.

Obviously Visa's advertising is a joke by targeting the unbanked to offer its products.
Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have taken away their business model, it only takes a little while for credit cards to be totally displaced.

[o_e_l_e_o]

It isn't like an advertisement for Coca-Cola or Twinkies, where the ad is designed to create a craving in the viewer for the product.  Nobody is going to crave a Visa card after watching a Visa advert, know what I mean?  I'm just not sure that creating brand awareness through a TV-type ad really helps a service like theirs.

Sure, no one is watching the advert and immediately going out to sign up for a new Visa card, as they might go out to buy some food or drink or jumping on Amazon to order some other product after seeing an advert for it. But if for a moment lets imagine there are only two credit card providers in the world, Visa and Mastercard. Visa plaster their name everywhere - TV adverts like this one, on billboards, on the side of buildings, on sports teams' shirts, sponsor big events, put their little stickers with their logo in every shop windows, etc. - and Mastercard do none of that, then next time you go to open a new credit card, you are going to have a heavy bias for Visa, even if the two companies are otherwise identical.

To someone who doesn't have a permanent address, one could simply request for a certification from the village saying that he/she is a resident of where he/she is currently staying.

This kind of service isn't available in every country or jurisdiction, though. Some people might not want to try to request any such ID because they are undocumented and doing so could result in their deportation. Some people might not physically be able to get to a bank to open an account, or have the minimum amount of money required to open an account, or have too poor credit, and so on. There are lots more reasons other than just lack of ID or fixed address to be turned down for a bank account. Whereas bitcoin does not discriminate against anyone.

[Fortify]

I don't watch much TV on the TV itself nowadays, so I don't know if anyone has been talking about this ad or not:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbvl60_CZl8

"What a load of bullshit", I found myself saying aloud after witnessing that for the first time.  How can it be working for everyone when so many people in the world are unbanked?  And how much of the wording in that was deliberately chosen to mirror the kinds of things we say about Bitcoin?  It feels very much like a pre-emptive first strike on their part, possibly demonstrating some insecurities about the threat their business model now faces.

Anyone else get the sense they had crypto in mind when they wrote the script for it?

It is cringeworthy and far too overdone, but adverts these days find it extremely hard to come up with original ideas. Funnily enough there will be a type of person in the cryptocurrency/bitcoin scene who will act in exactly the same way - they have tunnel vision on one idea only. There are many parallels between payment network providers like Visa and cryptocurrency - the only real difference being that one is decentralized. At present the payment networks have a large scale and all the infrastructure required to handle payments. Once cryptocurrency is able to create instant transactions and at much lower charges then the original payment networks will start to become redundant - but that is still some way off.

[Karartma1]

They need to be under the eyes of the public all the time because like what happens to Amazon, Visa needs customers like us to survive. People need to feel secure when they use their VISA/MC/AMEX what-else credit card payment gateway. While they rip-off merchants and businesses with their astronomical fees, they need us to keep using their cards and their network.
Hence, all this advertising.

However, the weird thing here is that they act as if they are helpers of the world trying to connect people together and help the people who otherwise couldn't, bitcoin really does that, crypto does that but Visa charges a lot of money for that so not like they are a charity, they are a business that makes billions.

It's called branding, these guys need to keep their faces clean while doing their dirty business. You're right but the majority of people don't even think in these terms. That's the power that comes from these big brands.
They talk about inclusion, banking the unbanked yet they rip-off merchants and businesses with their fees which are out of the world.
If real crypto payments would take place we could see these giants die but I think that's never gonna happen.

[eaLiTy]

~
And how much of the wording in that was deliberately chosen to mirror the kinds of things we say about Bitcoin?  It feels very much like a pre-emptive first strike on their part, possibly demonstrating some insecurities about the threat their business model now faces.

Anyone else get the sense they had crypto in mind when they wrote the script for it?

Sure Visa will be having cryptocurrency in mind when they wrote the script, if you are not aware of it Visa already started payment settlement with cryptocurrency, prior it used to convert them to fiat and now using USDC for settlement. Binance is offering Visa debit cards without any processing fees and so is the case with Crypto.com and Coinbase while Gemini is using the service of Mastercard.

[fiulpro]

The fact is , they might be trying something new here, they might be developing something new, at the same time they have to understand the fact that people want to mirror cryptocurrencies because this is honestly the only thing which is holding onto strong during the pandemic, therefore all the companies are trying really hard to either replace cryptocurrencies or either try and integrate them within the whole thing.
When you do google what they are saying is not completely wrong but at the same time you have to understand that *why didn't they bother with this before?* Plus 65k views? People getting stimulated in a wrong way, they will ofc now go and buy Visa cards and expect more than they will actually get.

[NotATether]

"A network for everyone": Yeah Sully, tell that to all the third-party credit card processors that need to interface with Visa and all have different criteria for accepting your transaction.

Come to think of it, we need a goddamn advertising agency too. Will help to clear all the misconceptions people have about Bitcoin. It will probably be privately funded by someone but that won't be a problem so as long as they got good intentions for Bitcoin.

[hichamito37]

I stopped watching at 20 second mark, I've seen what I need to see, they're deceiving people by letting them think that their company is more than just a bunch of credit card which is in fact it really is. Man that's a bit egotistical and ballsy of them to say that they're a signature.

Yes ,  You are right the man in the video seems very crazy and egotistical and their shadow when saying they are a signature. really this ad makes us feel unfriendly with a pretty bad scenario i have seen , Pretty poor idea and there should be humility in such ideas , Do you think like me ?

[uneng]

I think Visa isn't deceiving or lying on this marketing promotional video, they are actually everywhere since people want to make use of their services. Even if you don't have an account at a traditional bank and deal only with crypto currency platforms or apps you are probably going to have a Visa flag debit/credit card sooner or later. Moreover, most businesses (even individual ones) I know accept Visa card as payment method.
It makes me believe they are an easy and very accessible company to work with, including for crypto currency investment companies, what improves Visa reputation even more in my opinion.

[oHnK]

"A network for everyone": Yeah Sully, tell that to all the third-party credit card processors that need to interface with Visa and all have different criteria for accepting your transaction.

Come to think of it, we need a goddamn advertising agency too. Will help to clear all the misconceptions people have about Bitcoin. It will probably be privately funded by someone but that won't be a problem so as long as they got good intentions for Bitcoin.

Yes, I also think the same thing that it seems that we really need advertisements that are literate to the public that Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency has many things that banking products don't have and this is safe, not a kind of stupid investment but innovation on traditional versions of currencies that provide solutions to many  the inability of the bank to cover it.  But talking about who will start the ad seems to be more reasonable for the management of current exchanges like Binance etc.  Because the higher the level of public literacy, the more funds that enter the exchange and the larger the market capitalization of Bitcoin.  But does this not violate government regulations in each country?

[jaysabi]

I don't watch much TV on the TV itself nowadays, so I don't know if anyone has been talking about this ad or not:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbvl60_CZl8

"What a load of bullshit", I found myself saying aloud after witnessing that for the first time.  How can it be working for everyone when so many people in the world are unbanked?  And how much of the wording in that was deliberately chosen to mirror the kinds of things we say about Bitcoin?  It feels very much like a pre-emptive first strike on their part, possibly demonstrating some insecurities about the threat their business model now faces.

Anyone else get the sense they had crypto in mind when they wrote the script for it?

Not at all, honestly you’re really reaching hard to clutch at your pearls here. The simple fact remains that bitcoin isn’t used as a currency and it’s not particularly useful as a currency, and centralized networks like Visa will always work faster and better than bitcoin’s slow, expensive transactions. Which is fine, because again, no one should consider bitcoin a currency. If it wasn’t for the lambo dreams and memes, no one would even give a damn about crypto. The worl’s fascination with it is at a get rich quick scheme, and the technology interests a vast minority of the users.

[Darker45]

To someone who doesn't have a permanent address, one could simply request for a certification from the village saying that he/she is a resident of where he/she is currently staying.

Whereas bitcoin does not discriminate against anyone.

Well, this is exactly what I'm saying. Bitcoin has its own share of Visa-like claims. Visa's "A network working for everyone" is similar to Bitcoin's "does not discriminate against anyone." Visa's everyone obviously refers only to those who are banked. Those who are not are not covered by everyone. In the same manner that Bitcoin's anyone refers only to those who have access to electricity, internet, smart phones, and so on. Those who do not have access to these do not belong to anyone. Just as Visa does not literally mean everyone, Bitcoin does not also mean anyone.