Nets fee hike revisited

About a year ago or so, I wrote 2 articles pertaining to the NETS fee hike. Links below.
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2007/07/lets-call-spade-spade.html
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2007/07/fee-hike-for-nets-part-2.html

All along, many believe that one way or another, these costs will be passed down to customers – be it legally or illegally.

Excerpts from Straits Times 30 July 2008
http://www.straitstimes.com/Free/Story/STIStory_262613.html

Heartland shoppers hit hardest by Nets fee hike

Store owners, who have trouble affording the system, pass the fees on to consumers
SOME mom-and-pop stores in the heartland are passing on an increase in Nets fees to consumers, despite being barred from doing so.

A Straits Times check with 80 retailers - ranging from provision shops to second-hand cellphone stores - found that one in three either charges customers to use Nets or place a minimum sum on their purchases.

The stores' contracts with Nets, Singapore's dominant player in the cashless transaction game, forbid those practices.

Store owners, however, said they are having trouble affording the system and have little choice but to pass the fees on to consumers.

Last September, the Network for Electronic Transfers (Nets) roughly quadrupled its fees. Store owners now pay the company up to 1.9 per cent of an item's purchase price. This is on top of the cost to rent the Nets machine, which is between $40 and $80 per month, depending on the individual agreements.

NETS is a dominant player, and as I have argued before, is pulling its weight as a monopolist. (read my 2 earlier posts)

In my opinion, there really is no reason for NETS to increase the fees. Unlike other services, their overhead costs is minimal. Unfortunately, like so many other players very closely linked to the government, NETS will just keep bleeding retailers and consumers to poverty.

Time for consumers to boycott NETS?