understand
I just think the 'no surcharge rule' is not that great of a risk for bnpl players like apt
as I've said previously, if a merchant is seeing higher sales being driven via the apt platform, why will they bite the hand that feeds them by passing a surcharge on consumers??
I just think people need to think this through ..merchants will always back self interests...so storm in a tea cup imo
if we do see a change then it's most likely going to be voluntary..ie merchant will be given the choice to pass or not pass on the charge
understand I just think the 'no surcharge rule' is not...
Add ZIP (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$1.85 |
Change
0.070(3.94%) |
Mkt cap ! $2.246B | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $1.81 | $1.88 | $1.80 | $7.567M | 4.091M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | 100339 | $1.85 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $1.85 | 21844 | 16 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 10.26am 29/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| ZIP (ASX) Chart |