Why the added costs are legal or even considered to be moral when applied to all customers, despite the fact that only some require such a service, is beyond me. Surely it is essential that the friction in the marketplace is minimised and each purchase stand alone? Is not an efficient market a good market?

As a user of both a credit and a debit card, I understand and accept that a small percentage can be added to my purchases non-cash purchases, provided that it is disclosed and is thus avoidable by the simple expedient of using cash - - - legal tender. Remember that stuff? Apparently Telstra have decided that they no longer need to recognise the legality of legal tender, but that is another story.

To sum up, I wonder how many purchasers would choose to take a discount on purchases equal to the cost of the points on the card, instead of paying top shelf rates in the hope that their frequent flier points can be cashed in within 2 years.

This is very similar to the current row about superannuation fees and ripoffs by financial planners.

At the very least, transparent disclosure of the actual costs of the schemes, purchase by purchase, is appropriate, preferably in the same way that Rediteller charges and GST are disclosed at the point of sale.

The page is http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/investors-full-year-results-2009/global/en. Other documents are also available there.