Report IKEA Goes Cashless at Key Thai Stores Amid Mixed Reactions

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

As am I  - I'm also for using balanced well through out arguments in support or against an option and find many of the anti-digital payment arguments quite broken and flawed thats all, they can be countered so easily that they weaken a point rather than strengthen it.

 

 

Seems you just want to be pedantic. 

 

So how about the biggest argument of all?

 

If we go cashless you can be turned off at the push of a button. This isn't a loony conspiracy. It already happened in Canada to the truckers. Protest against the government and get turned off. If that doesn't open your eyes then nothing will. But hey, it might save you a couple of seconds at the checkout. 

 

Reminds me of the title of the album "Give me convenience or give me death".

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

7 minutes ago, Airalee said:

Yes.  Read the whole thread.  We are being called dinosaurs.  Told we are incapable of assembling a simple piece of furniture (I prefer quality furniture myself), and expected to have some sort of argument as to why we prefer cash.

 

Ah yes... that did tickle me....  Perhaps add 'thin skinned to that then'... 

 

To be honest... If someone 'can't adapt to a cashless system' it might highlight a certain 'aged nature' or at least a stubbornness not to adapt.

 

That said - I've already highlighted that its anyone's right to have their preference and not need to justify it with flawed, weak and broken arguments.

 

7 minutes ago, Airalee said:

I’ll let you read up on the studies of those who pay cash vs cashless.

 

You'll let me ???....   erm... thanks I think !!... 

Its rather an empty statement, it actually says nothing at all...     

 

IF there are studies for Thailand, what do they show ? - do you have a link for this study that I have your permission to read ??? - any that would benefit the discussion ?

 

It would be interesting to know - especially in a country such as Thailand how many use digital vs cash payments (and what sort of digital) - I quoted a guess of 90% cashless earlier, but could be way off... it could be 99% or 50% I have no idea.

 

[josephbloggs]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Seems you just want to be pedantic. 

 

So how about the biggest argument of all?

 

If we go cashless you can be turned off at the push of a button. This isn't a loony conspiracy. It already happened in Canada to the truckers. Protest against the government and get turned off. If that doesn't open your eyes then nothing will. But hey, it might save you a couple of seconds at the checkout. 

 

Reminds me of the title of the album "Give me convenience or give me death".

 

 

 

 

So do you sleep with all of your hard earned cash in a bag under your bed?  Or do you keep it in a bank?

If it is kept in a bank then you can be "turned off" just as easily so that argument is nonsense. (And often I wish someone would turn you off, but that's another story).

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

22 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

As am I  - I'm also for using balanced well through out arguments in support or against an option and find many of the anti-digital payment arguments quite broken and flawed thats all, they can be countered so easily that they weaken a point rather than strengthen it.

 

 

Seems you just want to be pedantic. 

 

So how about the biggest argument of all?

 

If we go cashless you can be turned off at the push of a button. This isn't a loony conspiracy. It already happened in Canada to the truckers. Protest against the government and get turned off. If that doesn't open your eyes then nothing will. But hey, it might save you a couple of seconds at the checkout. 

 

Reminds me of the title of the album "Give me convenience or give me death".

 

 

Might I suggest you consider my points with a deeper understanding?

 

I am not opposed to the cashless system; rather, I question the flawed arguments often put forward. I fully support the availability of all options - cash and cashless.

 

The challenge with discussions on topics like this is the tendency towards binary thinking.

 

People often struggle to embrace nuance and instead seek to label others as either fully for or against, neglecting the possibility of a balanced perspective.

 

I find myself neither strictly pro-cash nor anti-cashless; I simply believe in a more measured approach that both options always remain available. 

 

I'm pro both cash and digital payments and have repeated through-out this thread that both should be available options.

 

[Airalee]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Ah yes... that did tickle me....  Perhaps add 'think skinned to that then'... 

 

To be honest... If someone 'cant adapt to a cashless system' it might highlight a certain 'aged nature' or at least a stubbornness not to adapt.

 

Thats said - I've already highlighted that its anyone right to have their preference and not need to justify it with flawed, weak and broken arguments.

 

 

You'll let me ???....   erm... thanks I think !!... 

 

Its rather an empty statement, it actually says nothing at all...       IF there are studies, what do they show - have a link ?? - that would benefit the discussion ?

 

It would be interesting to know - especially in a country such as Thailand how many use digital vs cash payments (and what sort of digital) - I quoted a guess of 90% cashless earlier, but could be way off... it could be 99% or 50% I have no idea.

 

Thin skinned because someone wants to flex about shopping at IKEA?

 

Hilarious.  You just demonstrated the same thing that you previously denied.
 

Nobody needs to justify themselves for paying however they want.

 

Enjoy IKEA

[JonnyF]

Just now, josephbloggs said:

So do you sleep with all of your hard earned cash in a bag under your bed?  Or do you keep it in a bank?

 

I don't keep large sums in the bank earning a pittance that's for sure. You'd have to be pretty dumb to do that. In the unlikely event you ever lucked yourself into a large sum I'd bet that's exactly where we'd find it though.  😃

 

 

Just now, josephbloggs said:

If it is kept in a bank then you can be "turned off" just as easily so that argument is nonsense.

 

If it was, eventually, yes. But not overnight if cash still exists. If someone froze my bank accounts right now I could survive several months quite easily. 

 

Just now, josephbloggs said:

(And often I wish someone would turn you off, but that's another story).

 

Well it would have to be someone else since you'd have no chance. 😆

[JonnyF]

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I find myself neither strictly pro-cash nor anti-cashless; I simply believe in a more measured approach that both options always remain available. 

 

I'm pro both cash and digital payments and have repeated through-out this thread that both should be available options.

 

So you are not anti-cashless, but you are pro both cash and digital? 😆

 

Quite the position...

 

[richard_smith237]

 

 

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

16 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I find myself neither strictly pro-cash nor anti-cashless; I simply believe in a more measured approach that both options always remain available. 

 

I'm pro both cash and digital payments and have repeated through-out this thread that both should be available options.

 

So you are not anti-cashless, but you are pro both cash and digital? 😆

 

Quite the position...

 

Why ??? 

 

....are you only capable of a binary approach ???  are you one of those who struggle with a nuane and neglect a balanced perspective instead seeking to label others as either fully for or against ???

 

What is wrong with suggesting that both cashless and digital payments should be an option ????

 

Did you give your response any thought at all ?

[Packer]

13 hours ago, JoseThailand said:

I hope 7-11 can go cashless one day

 

I hope the world can go Ikea-less one day. 

[richard_smith237]

25 minutes ago, Airalee said:

Thin skinned because someone wants to flex about shopping at IKEA?

If you think shopping at IKEA is a flex - thats your ridiculous notion, no one else's !!

 

25 minutes ago, Airalee said:

Hilarious.  You just demonstrated the same thing that you previously denied.
 

Nobody needs to justify themselves for paying however they want.

 

What have I previously denied exactly ?

 

Throughout this thread, from the second comment on this thread - I've stated both options (cash and digital payment) should be available for all customers.

 

If you can't read the comments and draw flawed assumptions, thats your failing.

 

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

 

Why ??? 

 

....are you only capable of a binary approach ???  are you one of those who struggle with a nuane and neglect a balanced perspective instead seeking to label others as either fully for or against ???

 

What is wrong with suggesting that both cashless and digital payments should be an option ????

 

Did you give your response any thought at all ?

 

On one hand you say you are not anti-cashless (i.e. you think getting rid of cash is OK).

 

Then you say both cash and digital should be an option (which BTW is my stance since I am very much anti-cashless).  

 

So which is it? Because if you want both options available like I do, then by definition you are very much anti-cashless.  

[richard_smith237]

13 hours ago, JoseThailand said:

I hope 7-11 can go cashless one day

 

Why ?..... 

 

You want everyone to have the inconvenience of not having choice ?

 

 

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Throughout this thread, from the second comment on this thread - I've stated both options (cash and digital payment) should be available for all customers.

 

Yes, which makes you anti cashless.

[richard_smith237]

Just now, JonnyF said:

On one hand you say you are not anti-cashless (i.e. you think getting rid of cash is OK).

 

Try again...

 

Anti-cashless means I am not opposed to the use of cashless payment systems like cards, mobile payments, or digital wallets - but it doesn't necessarily mean I'm fully pro-cashless either.

 

Just now, JonnyF said:

Then you say both cash and digital should be an option (which BTW is my stance since I am very much anti-cashless).  

 

So which is it? Because if you want both options available like I do, then by definition you are very much anti-cashless.  

 

I want 'both options' to be available to everyone - I would have thought that was obvious from my comments throughout the thread...  from the very first page.

 

I think its the common sense approach.

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Throughout this thread, from the second comment on this thread - I've stated both options (cash and digital payment) should be available for all customers.

 

Yes, which makes you anti cashless.

 

If you say so - I'm not going to argue the semantics of the English Language and the meaning of a double-negative with you for the next two pages... 

 

 

I'll state this: 

 

The phrase "not anti-cashless" means that I'm is not opposed to the use of cashless payment systems like cards, mobile payments, or digital wallets -  but it doesn't necessarily mean I'm fully pro-cashless either.

 

In other words, I'm okay with cashless options being available and used, and I also believe that cash should still be accepted and remain an option.

 

I've worded my statements to present balanced or moderate stance on both options.

[JulesMad]

22 hours ago, BritManToo said:

You think people without smartphones shop at IKEA?

People without smartphones just do not shop. I always pay cash, so I know where the money goes ( I do have a smartphone, never paid with it though). Never been in IKEA Thailand either, way too far 😎

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

The phrase "not anti-cashless" means that I'm is not opposed to the use of cashless payment systems like cards, mobile payments, or digital wallets -  but it doesn't necessarily mean I'm fully pro-cashless either.

 

Anti cashless simply means you do not want to see cash disappear completely. 

 

That doesn't mean you are opposed to digital payments being available as well. Being anti cashless doesn't mean you think everything must be cash 100% of the time. 

 

So you are anti cashless. Just like me.

 

Welcome to the club. 

 

And you're welcome for the clarification of the terms you have been using. Now you can use them properly and stop contradicting yourself.  

 

 

[richard_smith237]

16 minutes ago, JulesMad said:

People without smartphones just do not shop. I always pay cash, so I know where the money goes ( I do have a smartphone, never paid with it though). Never been in IKEA Thailand either, way too far 😎

 

Rather an odd statement - "someone without a smartphone won't shop" - of course they will... They still have cards.... and cash... 

[JonnyF]

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I want 'both options' to be available to everyone

 

Me too.

 

Which makes us both anti-cashless.

 

It really isn't complicated.

 

Admitting to it doesn't make you a luddite. You don't need to sit in a room of a 20 people in a circle and stand up and say "I'm Richard and I'm anti cashless".    

[djayz]

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Its not slower than paying with cash, I find it faster.

Sometimes it can be a lot slower, not always obviously. 

[Purdey]

22 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

 

I prefer their chicken balls, Good value at Bt.650 a kg.

Chickens have balls? 

[Purdey]

While it is possible to steal your wallet and cash on the street, I think it is worse when they transfer your cash from 10 meters away.

[Ralf001]

5 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Chickens have balls? 

To be honest.. I have never looked.

[richard_smith237]

 

10 minutes ago, djayz said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Its not slower than paying with cash, I find it faster.

Sometimes it can be a lot slower, not always obviously. 

 

Thats the nuance of the discussion - sometimes people are slow either to get their phone out and use that, or to get their wallet and card or cash out...    disorganised slow people are going to be that way whatever payment system they are using... 

 

For me personally - IF you are behind me, your wait in the queue is slightly less if I'm paying by QR Code than if I am paying cash, only because I don't have to wait for change - thats a tiny difference.

 

But, if you are waiting behind my Mother in Law...  you'll have to wait while she asks how much, 3 times, then decided she want's one more item, then ask again how much, then, get out her purse, ask again how much, open her purse, dig around for change, then realise she doesn't have the right change, then pay with a larger note, then wait for change, then take her time putting the change in the purse and purse back in her handbag, then take the shopping and leave....   She'd be even slower if trying to use a QR code !!!.. 

 

Now - because speed is often quoted as an issue depending on which side of the debate we wish to present our argument from... 

.....   bigger picture - does waiting an extra few minutes however the person in front wants to pay really matter ???

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

21 minutes ago, Purdey said:

While it is possible to steal your wallet and cash on the street, I think it is worse when they transfer your cash from 10 meters away.

 

How can someone steel your (digital) money from 10 meters away ?

 

I think you are referring to 'skimming'...      i.e. someone brushing past you with a reading device and 'skimming' your card in the same manner as a 'tap & go' payment...  which needs to be in 'touching proximity'... 

...  & thats protected against simply with RFID blocking wallets or card sleeves.. so its not a concern.

 

 

[impulse]

5 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

I was using hyperbole. Of course it takes nothing like 15 minutes, just as it doesn't take someone five minutes to pay for a bar of chocolate electronically, just as people don't have to tell their phone number three times etc.

There's very little difference in time between cash and no cash, just the "cash is king" brigade always use these ridiculous exaggerations to justify their position.

 

 

And the QR fans call us out as luddites and technophobes. 

 

Personally, I have nothing against people who prefer cashless payments.  Some of them are decent people.  That's just not my preference.

[impulse]

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

& thats protected against simply with RFID blocking wallets or card sleeves.. so its not a concern.

 

It's a concern if you don't have a blocking wallet or card sleeve.  And I'd bet that a show of hands would reveal that most of us don't.

 

Don't even get me started about putting my smartphone in my pocket inside a bulky faraday pouch.

 

[richard_smith237]

Just now, impulse said:

It's a concern if you don't have a blocking wallet or card sleeve.  And I'd bet that a show of hands would reveal that most of us don't.

 

Really ??  I've had RFID blocking wallets for well over a decade already.

 

Its possible your wallet is RFID blocking and you don't know it ???

 

That said, I do agree...  It is a concern, and if you don't have such a wallet, I'd recommend getting one as if you keep your bank card in your wallet and it has the 'fan symbol' on it, then you are already part of the digital 'tap & go' payment system and could get 'RFID Skimmed' - though not from 10meters away.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

11 minutes ago, impulse said:

5 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

I was using hyperbole. Of course it takes nothing like 15 minutes, just as it doesn't take someone five minutes to pay for a bar of chocolate electronically, just as people don't have to tell their phone number three times etc.

There's very little difference in time between cash and no cash, just the "cash is king" brigade always use these ridiculous exaggerations to justify their position.

 

 

And the QR fans call us out as luddites and technophobes. 

 

I think thats the issue with both sides of the debate - that some feel 'sides need to be taken' on a "you are either against me or with me" approach...  

... when in reality - both options, cashless and cash are as good as each other, each have their pro's and con's, conveniences and risks - ultimately, its better to have both... 

 

I'd bet the vast majority of us on this forum use both regularly... 

 

I use cash at least once per week and could get by without it, but wouldn't want to... 

Equally, so, I use digital for 99% of my transactions, but could get by with cash, but wouldn't want to...

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

23 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Its still a flawed business model to potentially turn anyone away.

 

As a retailer in Thailand, land of spiraling consumer debts, IKEA ought to be happy to get consumers' business and money in whatever forms it's offered....

 

And beyond that, what's the sense of going to a policy that has 3 IKEA stores in Thailand now refusing cash purchases, but having 2 other still accepting them, including their Emsphere branch, which isn't exactly a slumming locale!!!

 

And as referenced in the OP report, Thailand's mobile banking apps and systems aren't exactly known for being the most secure and reliable... I certainly wouldn't want to be putting all my purchasing eggs in THEIR basket!

 

Another head-scratching move by a Thailand retailer.....