Old Mar 19, 16, 3:10 am
  #280  
Phantom707
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,112
Originally Posted by Kremmen View Post
Exactly. And time and again those transactions go through marginally under the interbank rates given by xe.com, showing that there is zero fee.
As stated before, xe.com is only one source for currency rates. It is not the only source, especially so given the existence of sites like the MasterCard currency conversion tool.

I can only assume you made that remark to be inflammatory, given that I have been providing data from the beginning of this thread and you have provided none.
That's being a little bit mean (I'm not saying inflammatory; I'm saying mean). I was not being inflammatory. I legitimately did appreciate that you were providing data. You mention that you have been providing data from the beginning of the thread. However, you didn't provide the raw data that I'm interested in. Yes, it's good that you provided data, but that says nothing if the data has already been interpreted through a lens that is faulty.

Then you say I've been providing no data. I'm providing third party data by citing other people.

Further, I'm providing data in the form of the statements of financial institutions such as Barclay. That is also a valuable form of data even though it doesn't involve numbers. Data can be both qualitative and quantitative, and both are important, especially in this discussion.

I am not posting the whole of my purchase history on FT, nor do I understand why you'd want me to, except to cause havoc and waste time. The values vary and posting individual data points is, in my opinion, much less valuable than posting long-term averages.
I've explained very, very, very, very explicitly why the information for the individual transactions would be highly important. I will state the reason again.

Rates listed on xe.com are only one rate. Another source of rates is the MasterCard tool. Those rates can differ. Those rates can differ by a substantial amount (such as by 1%).

One of my contentions has been that MasterCard uses a rate lower than places such as xe.com, but they add on a ~1% fee. The net result is often a rate on par with the rate from xe.com or a little lower or a little higher.

That is why it is important to see the individual transaction amounts.

It is most definitely not about the long term averages. It would be more important to know the individual data points.

If you do not wish to provide the information for privacy reasons or any other reasons, that's perfectly reasonable. I'm not going to force you, and I obviously don't have the power to. However, your choice to not provide the individual data points directly means that your claims are unsubstantiated.

No, it would have no more credence than posting averages. What it would do is expose tons of my private information to the world for no reason and massively bloat the thread, making data harder to find and comprehend, which is exactly what your recent barrage of posts is doing.
Again, if you value your privacy, then that's perfectly reasonable. However, that also means that we can't actually scrutinize the data. For all we know, you're misinterpreting it.

That's been one of my main points all along. If you just pay attention to the xe.com rates, then yes, you are misinterpreting the data, and your conclusions are therefore skewed and false.


You yourself said of the exchange rate: "That's where they would build in the fee." Yes. Exactly. It's not there.
I've given a mathematical example of a way in which MasterCard could add on a fee.

Again, all you're doing is vague hand waving and saying there's no fee, but you haven't actually shown the data.

Yes, that's why I started putting this data into a spreadsheet and why I started this thread.
Again, that's why it's important to know the actual individual data points instead of just the end results as calculated by you. Again, you don't have to reveal that if you don't want to reveal your privacy. Again, that means that other people are not able to verify your methodology, are not able to know whether you messed up your calculations or not.


Nope.
Yup. It lends credence to the possibility that MC might be doing this.


So, you have zero empirical data to provide and just want to ruin this thread by filling it with your data-less comments. Great. If you wanted to be helpful, I'd suggest removing every post you've made from this thread that doesn't contain empirical data.
Again, not all data is quantitative.

I've shown empirical qualitative data in the form of the statements of the financial institutions. Empirical means verifiable by empirical methods. You can see the documents that I linked to. You can contact institutions like Barclay or Chase and ask them about any fees they charge. That's all empirically verifiable data.

If anything, you're being inflammatory here by refusing to accept even a small possibility.

You seem to think that your results cannot possibly coexist with my hypothesis that there is a fee. That's wrong. My hypothesis not only explains your data but also explains the existence of those documents and statements from the financial institutions. It has more explanatory power than what you've said.
Phantom707 is offline  
Reply With Quote