Loading…
Financial literacy and shrouded credit card rewards
Credit card companies charge an interchange fee for each transaction, and almost half of this fee is returned to consumers in the form of a reward or perk program. Among credit card users who do not use cards for borrowing (convenience users), rewards are a means to negotiate the implicit price of t...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of financial services marketing 2013-09, Vol.18 (3), p.177-187 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Credit card companies charge an interchange fee for each transaction, and almost half of this fee is returned to consumers in the form of a reward or perk program. Among credit card users who do not use cards for borrowing (convenience users), rewards are a means to negotiate the implicit price of the interchange fee. Any consumer whose time cost is less than the value of rebates should rationally choose a reward card. Half of convenience users do not own a reward card. We hypothesize that credit card companies segment customers by marketing non-salient credit card characteristics to appeal to naïve consumers while offering lower-price cards (net the rebate) to compete for more sophisticated consumers as suggested in Gabaix and Laibson (2006). Consumer sophistication is measured using a 20-question financial literacy instrument in a large national data set. When household characteristics such as education, income and wealth are controlled in a multivariate analysis, respondents in the highest financial literacy quintile were twice as likely to own a rewards card. The relation between literacy and reward cards provides evidence that credit card rebates resemble other markets where hidden product attributes create a welfare transfer from naïve to sophisticated consumers. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1363-0539 1479-1846 |
DOI: | 10.1057/fsm.2013.11 |