Credit Cards

[BWB]

What is the opinion of using a credit card to pay for your Safari ? Going to South Africa in August and have the option of paying at the end of the hunt. Would bringing cash be better?

 

[PARA45]

Depending on the amount. I wouldn't want to be walking around S. Africa with 10K in my pocket. On my 2022 safari I wired the full amount in advance, and I paid with a credit card the additional animals I hunted. I took cash for tips and incidentals.

 

[mdwest]

What is the opinion of using a credit card to pay for your Safari ? Going to South Africa in August and have the option of paying at the end of the hunt. Would bringing cash be better?

A lot is going to depend in how much you intend on spending.

If the balance of your hunt is going to be more than $10K there are significant hoops you are supposed to jump through before you take that amount of cash outside of the US..

For me, I put almost everything I purchase on my American Airlines credit card and then pay the card to a zero balance each month (never pay interest). The points I accumulate over the course of a year typically pays for the 2x international flights I will take the following year to go hunt somewhere (plus some).. and while I hate American Airlines, living in DFW, AA pretty much gets you anywhere on the planet you want to go either with them or one of their code shared partners (AA's global HQ is in DFW and DFW is their largest global hub)..

Most outfitters will allow you to send a wire or do some sort of other bank transfer at the end of a hunt to shore things up if you prefer that over a card.. some will accept US checks.. etc..etc..

I typically take a few grand in US currency with me when I leave the country and convert it to local currency as needed.. it gets used to pay for incidentals, tips, and other things and is an "emergency" fund if there's an "emergency".. but I normally don't carry a whole lot of cash beyond that unless there is a specific reason to..

 

[Firebird]

I wire about half the cost then carry the rest. But I take my card just in case we run across an unplanned opportunity that needs to be taken.
As mentioned, it depends heavily on the agreed amount of the safari to begin with

 

[rookhawk]

What is the opinion of using a credit card to pay for your Safari ? Going to South Africa in August and have the option of paying at the end of the hunt. Would bringing cash be better?

First rule of economics:

There is no cost incurred that isn't ultimately passed on to the customer.

Therefore: At minimum if I were your outfitter in Africa, I would assign you a 5% upcharge for international credit card processing, I'd assign you 20% upcharge (just my gut) for using credit card out of fear you attempt to reverse the charges fraudulently after the hunt, and I'd charge you another 10%+ because I cannot bury some of the cash and have to pay the taxes on all of it as claimed revenue.

Cash is always king. There are consequences to additional terms and conditions in any transaction.

 

[mdwest]

I am forever thankful that you are not an outfitter and that none I am aware of take your approach

Ive yet to work with an outfitter in the US or abroad that has hit me for an upcharge..

Taxidermists are another story.. most taxidermists Ive used for whatever reason want a 3-3.5% upcharge if you use the card..

 

[375Fox]

Depends on the amount you plan to spend and the outfitter. For large amounts I do wires. If outfitter accepts credit card it’s a good way to pay final bill at end of a South African hunt that wants paid before you leave camp. Outfitter policies differ. Larger hunts usually let me wire money on return home. Make sure if you pay on a credit card you have a card that does not charge foreign transaction fees it’s usually 3%. I would not bring cash except for tips. Cash can get stolen. Credit cards just get replaced.

 

[rookhawk]

I am forever thankful that you are not an outfitter and that none I am aware of take your approach

Ive yet to work with an outfitter in the US or abroad that has hit me for an upcharge..

Taxidermists are another story.. most taxidermists Ive used for whatever reason want a 3-3.5% upcharge if you use the card..

Well, since these are forces of economics there are only two not-great conclusions @mdwest

1.) The businesses are overcharging everybody to have enough padding to allow for the risk of CC reversals, additional taxes, and the 3.5%-7% international surcharge.

OR

2.) They're terrible at business and don't understand impact of expenses against gross revenue

If this wasn't a universal truth of economics, tariffs wouldn't increase the costs of goods sold. Any tax, fee, surcharge, or overhead on a business is ultimately absorbed by the consumer.

Nothing is free, the consumer pays for everything, always.

 

[Schmidty]

I personally wired money in advance and then paid any remaining balance with credit card at the end. Only cash I bring is for tips.

 

[deewayne2003]

I am forever thankful that you are not an outfitter and that none I am aware of take your approach

Ive yet to work with an outfitter in the US or abroad that has hit me for an upcharge..

Taxidermists are another story.. most taxidermists Ive used for whatever reason want a 3-3.5% upcharge if you use the card..

Yep seems like every local restaurant wants 3.5% for using debit or credit card where I live.

In Africa I would clarify if credit card is an option, at the end of our hunt in Zimbabwe this past July one hunter in camp asked if he could pay his balance in full on the spot by credit card.

The outfitter simply does not take credit cards, we were given an invoice at the end of the hunt and had 10 days after our return to pay the balance by wire transfer.

I thought that was REALLY trusting of the Safari company to let $40K +/- of accounts receivable leave the country with the promise to pay upon returning home.

 

[375Fox]

Yep seems like every local restaurant wants 3.5% for using debit or credit card where I live.

In Africa I would clarify if credit card is an option, at the end of our hunt in Zimbabwe this past July one hunter in camp asked if he could pay his balance in full on the spot by credit card.

The outfitter simply does not take credit cards, we were give an invoice at the end of the hunt and had 10 days after our return to pay the balance by wire transfer.

I thought that was REALLY trusting of the Safari company to let $40K +/- of accounts receivable leave the country with the promise to pay upon returning home.

Paying by credit cards is pretty common in South Africa. Higher volume and lower cost hunts. In other countries, it’s lower volume and longer more expensive hunts. Paying by wire and paying final bill after returning home is standard in those countries.

 

[Andrew62]

Different outfitters like being paid different ways. Generally, I wire a significant amount of the funds in advance, then I take cash and credit card for the balance. For my upcoming hunt in Zimbabwe the outfitter has asked me to bring 9900.00 cash, and a personal check for the balance. I've been to Africa a lot of times and I've never had an outfitter ask for a check to cover over runs. This is my 2nd hunt with this outfitter, maybe he trusts a check, I can't say I would!

 

[375Fox]

Well, since these are forces of economics there are only two not-great conclusions @mdwest

1.) The businesses are overcharging everybody to have enough padding to allow for the risk of CC reversals, additional taxes, and the 3.5%-7% international surcharge.

OR

2.) They're terrible at business and don't understand impact of expenses against gross revenue

If this wasn't a universal truth of economics, tariffs wouldn't increase the costs of goods sold. Any tax, fee, surcharge, or overhead on a business is ultimately absorbed by the consumer.

Nothing is free, the consumer pays for everything, always.

I think You are exaggerating costs in this case. If you have an extra $3000 to pay at the end of your hunt there is a cost for convenience. I can pay the final bill on credit card and maybe a built in fee of 4%, but I’ll get 1.5-2% back anyway, so it’s actually less and be done with it there and then. Or I could pay by wire and pay the bank $50-$75 to wire the money. The difference is negligible. No outfitter is accepting American Express to be talking about 7%.

 

[DieJager]

What is the opinion of using a credit card to pay for your Safari ? Going to South Africa in August and have the option of paying at the end of the hunt. Would bringing cash be better?

I payed my SA safari with a credit card. Used the cash to tip. It was not the whole amount because I wired a part beforehand. Felt better without a lot of cash on me.

Last safari in Namibia cash only, never comfortable with a lot of cash on me. But sometimes necessary.

 

[rookhawk]

I think You are exaggerating costs in this case. If you have an extra $3000 to pay at the end of your hunt there is a cost for convenience. I can pay the final bill on credit card and maybe a built in fee of 4%, but I’ll get 1.5-2% back anyway, so it’s actually less and be done with it there and then. Or I could pay by wire and pay the bank $50-$75 to wire the money. The difference is negligible. No outfitter is accepting American Express to be talking about 7%.

You must remember that in the USA our card issuers charge not just a processing fee through the card network, but an international transaction fee and a foreign currency fee. It's simply because there is greater risk for an American using a CC in Africa than for a South African using a card in his local region.

The other unfortunate thing about Americans is we sadly have a lot of unscrupulous scammers. A common scam is to use a credit card and then dispute the charges. It made international news this week when one such scum-bag American got arrested by Interpol for spending $160,000 on timeshares via their credit card, resold the weeks of timeshare condos to others, pocketed the cash, and disputed several years of legitimate charges. It happens all the time but rarely does it lead to prosecution for fraud. If I was an outfitter in Africa, I certainly wouldn't want to have a $40k charge on CC only to find out that the whiny client wasn't happy with their silver-medal trophies and wants to play the CC dispute game.

If you're talking about trivial incidentals being charged, I'm sure that's lesser risk and may be more common in some regions.

 

[mdwest]

Well, since these are forces of economics there are only two not-great conclusions @mdwest

1.) The businesses are overcharging everybody to have enough padding to allow for the risk of CC reversals, additional taxes, and the 3.5%-7% international surcharge.

OR

2.) They're terrible at business and don't understand impact of expenses against gross revenue

If this wasn't a universal truth of economics, tariffs wouldn't increase the costs of goods sold. Any tax, fee, surcharge, or overhead on a business is ultimately absorbed by the consumer.

Nothing is free, the consumer pays for everything, always.

you leave out a 3rd option..

they accept the risk...

risk can be avoided, mitigated, or accepted..

you're only offering risk mitigation strategies or assuming if a business doesn't mitigate or avoid that they are terrible at business... (every MBA program on the planet, and every major business on the planet that employs risk managers would argue that you're wrong)..

risk acceptance does not immediately mean "terrible at business"..

experience and/or market analysis may well be telling a business that potential impact or likelihood of occurrence is low.. or the benefit of accepting risk outweighs the potential cost..

multi billion dollar businesses "assume" risk every single day.. a good friend of mine is a Sr. VP at JP Morgan Chase.. he is a corporate risk guy (specifically works in Cyber risk now, but has worked in financial and property risk in the past)... JPMC has a very robust and detailed system by which they determine which risks they will accept, which ones must be mitigated, and which ones must be avoided..

I hardly think the 4th largest business on the planet, that accepts certain financial risks every single day, is terrible at business or doesn't understand the impacts of expenses against gross revenue..

My firm is a tiny fraction of the size of JPMC.. but we are hardly "small" (350+ employees, global presence on 4 continents, etc).. we accept certain risks every day.. that is simply how business is conducted.. if you want to heavily mitigate or avoid all risks, you wont be in business very long..

Risk acceptance may well be occurring in the hunting industry as well.. for example, how many hunters might choose to hunt with someone else if easy, painless, no cost payment options weren't available? Is it worth it to an outfitter to pass on 3.5% if that means they might land more customers?

How many $10K hunts are going to be lost when the outfitter says "yeah.. about that credit card... Im going to have to hit you for an additional 7%.. oh.. plus an additional 20% (per your gut feeling in your first post).. because I don't trust you"... but you're welcome to go to your bank and wire some African dude you don't know cash.. because I expect you to trust me..."...

or.. what about the outfitter that's been in business for more than fifteen years and only once in that period of time did he ever have a client attempt to not pay a balance (this isn't a fictitious story.. it is the real story of Bos en Dal).. and ultimately that client ended up paying (almost a decade later.. but he did indeed pay).. Why is that outfitter suddenly going to start mitigating or avoiding a risk, that has proven to have an extremely low probability and historically has had no consequential impact on the business?

Sometimes its worth eating a 3% cost on your CC customers.. in order to have more customers.. have happier and more satisfied customers.. etc..

Not all outfitters are as stupid or as "terrible at business" as you might assume..

One I am thinking about right now has an advanced business degree, and runs two large (multi-million dollars in annual revenue) businesses in addition to his hunting business... and.. doesn't charge a credit card fee...

 

[375Fox]

You must remember that in the USA our card issuers charge not just a processing fee through the card network, but an international transaction fee and a foreign currency fee. It's simply because there is greater risk for an American using a CC in Africa than for a South African using a card in his local region.

The other unfortunate thing about Americans is we sadly have a lot of unscrupulous scammers. A common scam is to use a credit card and then dispute the charges. It made international news this week when one such scum-bag American got arrested by Interpol for spending $160,000 on timeshares via their credit card, resold the weeks of timeshare condos to others, pocketed the cash, and disputed several years of legitimate charges. It happens all the time but rarely does it lead to prosecution for fraud. If I was an outfitter in Africa, I certainly wouldn't want to have a $40k charge on CC only to find out that the whiny client wasn't happy with their silver-medal trophies and wants to play the CC dispute game.

If you're talking about trivial incidentals being charged, I'm sure that's lesser risk and may be more common in some regions.

Unless you can correct me, I’m unaware of any foreign transaction fees applied to the vendor. It’s passed on to the customer on some cards. It will appear as a 3% foreign transaction fee. No travel card (airline, hotel, Bank’s travel card, many options) has that fee.

 

[rookhawk]

you leave out a 3rd option..

they accept the risk...

risk can be avoided, mitigated, or accepted..

you're only offering risk mitigation strategies or assuming if a business doesn't mitigate or avoid that they are terrible at business... (every MBA program on the planet, and every major business on the planet that employs risk managers would argue that you're wrong)..

risk acceptance does not immediately mean "terrible at business"..

experience and/or market analysis may well be telling a business that potential impact or likelihood of occurrence is low.. or the benefit of accepting risk outweighs the potential cost..

multi billion dollar businesses "assume" risk every single day.. a good friend of mine is a Sr. VP at JP Morgan Chase.. he is a corporate risk guy (specifically works in Cyber risk now, but has worked in financial and property risk in the past)... JPMC has a very robust and detailed system by which they determine which risks they will accept, which ones must be mitigated, and which ones must be avoided..

I hardly think the 4th largest business on the planet, that accepts certain financial risks every single day, is terrible at business or doesn't understand the impacts of expenses against gross revenue..

My firm is a tiny fraction of the size of JPMC.. but we are hardly "small" (350+ employees, global presence on 4 continents, etc).. we accept certain risks every day.. that is simply how business is conducted.. if you want to heavily mitigate or avoid all risks, you wont be in business very long..

Risk acceptance may well be occurring in the hunting industry as well.. for example, how many hunters might choose to hunt with someone else if easy, painless, no cost payment options weren't available? Is it worth it to an outfitter to pass on 3.5% if that means they might land more customers?

How many $10K hunts are going to be lost when the outfitter says "yeah.. about that credit card... Im going to have to hit you for an additional 7%.. oh.. plus an additional 20% (per your gut feeling in your first post).. because I don't trust you"... but you're welcome to go to your bank and wire some African dude you don't know cash.. because I expect you to trust me..."...

or.. what about the outfitter that's been in business for more than fifteen years and only once in that period of time did he ever have a client attempt to not pay a balance (this isn't a fictitious story.. it is the real story of Bos en Dal).. and ultimately that client ended up paying (almost a decade later.. but he did indeed pay).. Why is that outfitter suddenly going to start mitigating or avoiding a risk, that has proven to have an extremely low probability and historically has had no consequential impact on the business?

Sometimes its worth eating a 3% cost on your CC customers.. in order to have more customers.. have happier and more satisfied customers.. etc..

Not all outfitters are as stupid or as "terrible at business" as you might assume..

One I am thinking about right now has an advanced business degree, and runs two large (multi-million dollars in annual revenue) businesses in addition to his hunting business... and.. doesn't charge a credit card fee...

You're using an ad hominem attack to suggest I don't know as much as MBAs or risk managers except I'm A.) an MBA, and B.) a CRO of the Fortune 500 ilk.

Businesses in Africa cannot last long accepting excess risk, particularly in places with extraordinary costs against revenue(e.g. wilderness area countries where hard-costs are gigantic)

A firm can certainly accept risk rather than mitigate, avoid or transfer it, but there is a cost. In Africa, particularly in "emerging markets" (is that polite for 3rd world?) there are significant costs associated with accepting the risk of credit cards even if it goes perfectly every single time. At minimum, they are accepting the payments so they have to claim those payments on taxes in full. Since its Africa and cheating on taxes is the norm in many countries, it means they will be in the minority declaring all their income, thus they incur more costs that make them non-competitive. Then there are issues of the Africa one-way valve where getting money into the bank is easy, getting it out in a useful currency may be all but impossible thereafter.

Africa is complicated. Everywhere outside of RSA in the SADC is extra complicated. I'm sure there's an outfitter that will give concierge service and payment accommodation of all types but those costs must get passed on to the consumer if it is indeed a business rather than a charity or hobby.

 

[mdwest]

theres no ad hominem attack.. my post is fact based.. the facts don't lie..

I am also an MBA.. I also hold an MS in Strategic Management... Im 2/3 the way complete with a Doctorate of Business Administration as well... I also hold (held) a Certified Risk Manager (CRM) certification, have worked for a 2x organizations in the Fortune 500, and am a current CEO...

So what?

None of that has anything to do with the facts, any more than your resume does..

Businesses (not just in Africa, but anywhere) wont survive long accepting excess risk.. we agree on that

but.. once again, so what? clearly if outfitters in Africa have survived for decades that have not charged their clients CC fees are surviving, the risk is not excessive..

the point about a cost being associated with accepting risk.. we completely agree on that.. I addressed that in my earlier post... its clear that many outfitters are willing to pay that cost, because they see the risk as low, and they see the reward (more clients, happier clients, etc) as greater than the risk and the associated cost..

I also agree with you that Africa is complicated.. Ive been doing business across the continent for more than 20 years and have ongoing projects being executed in 2 different African countries now..

No one thinks or has claimed that a CC fee is a charity.. your MBA program would however have taught you that there are things like "value add" propositions and certain business costs that do indeed get eaten very purposefully.. no one does "value add" as charity.. it gets done (when done properly) because the cost associated with enhancements or features provided in the service or product being delivered make the seller (and product or service) more appealing to customers, which ultimately leads to more revenue and/or profits because of improved relationships, additional sales, etc..

 

[BWB]

O