The HfP chat thread – Sunday 31st January

Links on Head for Points may pay us an affiliate commission. A list of partners is here.

We have decided to run this daily chat thread on Head for Points during the coronavirus outbreak.

Historically, the daily ‘Bits’ articles were the de facto repository for random comments and questions. With the news flow being lighter, we are running fewer ‘Bits’ articles.

The comments under this article are where you should post questions about travel and, indeed, anything else on your mind. At this tricky time, and given that many of you are at home, we want the HfP community to have a place to chat.

Please only comment under the main articles on the site if your comment is directly related to the topic of the article. This has long-term benefits as it keeps the commentary relevant for people who read those articles in the future.

Old chat threads are hidden from the HfP home page. If you want to look for something in an old thread, click here. This brings up all the articles in our ‘General’ category which includes the chat threads.

Category

General

This article is closed to new posts. Discussion continues in the HfP Forums.

Crispr says:

31 Jan31 January 02:14

Please can people let me know what retention offers are being offered by amex for harrods card (if any) and platinum card?

I’ve had 2 lumps of MR points last year, I’m indifferent about keeping the card open and would like to know if they’re offering double points etc
- kitten says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 03:49
  
  I would suggest you just read the past 1-3 days this same thread. Everything is there.
  
  click in last paragraph of the article above to access them.
- Andrew says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 06:01
  
  Retention offers are entirely personal – honestly the only way to find out what’s available to you is to ring and ask. Some Platinums have been offered a further lump sum of MR, most haven’t, with seemingly no logic (although there must be some) so call and find out if you’re one of the lucky ones. Not heard of double points being offered to Platinum as a retention other than the blanket double points period last year.
  - BJ says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 06:39
    
    Luck has lottle to do with it, the best retention offers are driven not primarily by spend but by the number of genuine new customers you introduce to amex (or so they told me). Retention offers on platinum are, in real terms, whatever you have managed to generate from amex during the past year minus £575 minus what you would normally return from platinum in an average year. On this basis some HfP readers have still done very well (certainly in comparison to card holders who do not follow the likes of HfP) but not well enough to justify the excitement the issue has generated iover the past Keighley months but then that is no surprise as some HfP readers get so excited at even a 100 avios bonus that they would run to h*ll and back to get it.
    - Andrew says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 07:23
      
      That’s interesting it’s about how many new customers you have brought to Amex – I knew there must be some logic – not that I think there’s anyone else I know who doesn’t have an Amex in some form. And you’re right I’ve generated more than enough over the past year to justify keeping the card again this year in a hope to do the same, despite probably not travelling.
      - Crafty says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 07:27
        
        I keep bringing my wife to Amex, sounds like I ought to continue…
      - Andrew says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 07:39
        
        But if you keep bringing her, she isn’t a new customer. Sounds like they want us to bring actual new customers.
    - TGLoyalty says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 07:45
      
      Still not letting everyone know what that actually was though, so those that do refer lots have a benchmark.
      
      Anyway 50k for me having taken out the card again in September and asked for a retention offer in late December when Tier 4 was sweeping across the country.
      
      I’d take that over double points any day as I would never be spending £50k in 3 months.
      - Crafty says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 08:43
        
        Hi Andrew – I am going by recent evidence, which is that my wife and I have amassed quite a few points from retention offers. If it’s really based in introductions, I think they should upgrade their algorithm.
      - BJ says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 14:20
        
        You must have missed it @TGL, I reported I took the c@sh-b@ck card. Not unusual in any way except in relation to the duration of the promotional period 🙂 Worked for me as I need neither points or miles in short to medium term and can continue collecting them elsewhere. Also, amex did not know where or for what purposed I planned to use the card (although some Edinburgh motoring enthusiasts might guess). It is for a year only but by then I will have only another year to wait until I can start with BAPP and Plat again. My partners card got rolled into discussion too, he was upgraded from blue to BAPP so we can continue earning 241. We both have one card each and one supp on each others cards.
      - Harry T says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 17:03
        
        @BJ what did they offer you as a promotion on the c@shb@ack card? And how did you maximise it?
      - BJ says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 17:44
        
        @Hatry R, just spelled it out into reply to TG, just cross reference the card details from amex versus my comment and you’ll have your answer.
    - Super Secret Stuff says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 11:01
      
      That is a load of rubbish BJ. I’ve never done reffer a friend to anyone but have received 2 retention offers in the last year on my gold
      - Ken says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 14:11
        
        In fairness a paid Gold has probably been worse value than platinum over the last year. 3 months of double points as a retentions isn’t world beating.
      - BJ says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 14:35
        
        I never said spend had nothing to do with it, I only passed on that they told me genuine new introductions were a key factor and was the reason they cited for me to remain a customer. They had the information immediately to hand. It was an unusual year for me as both my partner and I maxed out our referrals in the first two months of the year due to getting family and friends referred for BA cards to get avios for flights to attend a wedding. The retention offers you and others received over the last right months are not normal retention offers, it was an exceptional year and clearly other factors are in play. You would never have gotten them two years ago and they may dry up going forward.
- Harry T says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 10:24
  
  I was given 40k MR to keep the Platinum card in September. I called again this month and was told I was therefore not eligible for a further retention offer.
  - Hotelier says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 10:49
    
    Quick question as I’ve never had the Platinum card. These retentions offers of 40k/50k MR straight away, is there an agreement that you need to keep it for certain amount of type or there is nothing stopping you from just cancelling the following day? Just asking as all retention offers I have always got on Gold/BA/BAPP are bonus points for certain spend or double points for certain time.
    - Andrew says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 10:53
      
      You can cancel the next day
    - Ken says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 14:17
      
      The retention offers you see here on Platinum sound great, but not everyone is offered them. I asked twice early part of last year & didn’t get offered anything so cancelled. Well I got offered monthly payments which I though was as valuable as a chocolate teapot at the time (in hindsight an extra month or so membership would have paid for itself, but who’s to know).
      
      Think it’s a mix of algorithm, what’s being offered this month, who you speak to and blind luck.
      I suspect very few have offered 2 significant retention bonuses in the same card year.
Frenske says:

31 Jan31 January 07:04

There’s an article on The Guardian / The Observer that Airlines still must give cash refund for FTVs even if they are expired. Possibly this has something to do with the recent BA end date extension.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2021/jan/31/airlines-wrong-to-refuse-refund-on-out-of-date-flight-vouchers
- Andrew says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 07:24
  
  It’s exactly why BA keep extending them.
  - Dave says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 10:45
    
    Don’t think this applies to all vouchers. For example, if a FTV was taken for a non-refundable flight that actually flew but the customer didn’t want to go.
- BS says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:05
  
  Of note it is different if you voluntarily accept a voucher. A new contract is formed discharging BA of their old obligations. You could make an argument you were forced to take a voucher as the ‘refund’ option on BA webpage only takes you to a voucher page, and cash is not mentioned – i believe EC261 requires a free choice, and a swift cash refund if required. I feel this has some merit, but you would have to fight for it.
- kitten says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 17:24
  
  Yes Rob said so. Possibly “below the line” ie in comments.
Jack says:

31 Jan31 January 08:09

Curve card expiring today, the new still not arrived. Has somebody else the same problem please?
- G says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:19
  
  Had the same at the end of December. Had to contact them via the app to get a new card sent out
  - Jack says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 08:27
    
    Thank you. I will do as well.
- Jay says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 17:28
  
  My wife’s expires today and still no card. Mine expired end of December and new card came 2 weeks early.
Michael C says:

31 Jan31 January 08:17

Loving the new look.
In contrast, my stay at the Sheraton Tribeca a couple of years ago was like something out of Barton Fink!
- Michael C says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:18
  
  (oops! that’s for the Sheraton article!!)
Craig says:

31 Jan31 January 08:29

For anyone interested, the vaccination clinics continue at my wife’s surgery and we merry band of volunteers continue our endeavours, mostly now shepherding key workers and septuagenarians. Supply has eased off a little bit because they have done almost all the over 80s and the vast majority of the over 70s, Thursday should see most of those who want the jab in these groups to have received it.
Some interesting snippets, firstly my wife has been told for every 200 jabs they administer they save a life, she did 120 yesterday. She also seems to be suffering from a new ailment of vaccinators thumb, drawing the last few doses from a vial when it has a partial vacuum in it is quite difficult apparently. It appears numerous G&Ts help with this new condition. Finally, following my first two weeks of standing in the cold I have an uncomfortable case of ‘frost nip’, it’s slowly improving but I have huge respect now for those who do it week after week.
- Grant says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:52
  
  Keep up the great work 🙌🏻
- Anna says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:56
  
  Hi Craig, this is great news. it’s quite awe-inspiring to watch the rate of vaccinations being given and immensely comforting that this is being managed and achieved so effectively. Because of you and your wife and the others involved in the program we really can see the light at the end of the tunnel!
  - Callum says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 12:45
    
    Agreed. The dark cloud hanging over everyone on my ward is definitely slowly beginning to lift. Our admissions are (very slowly) starting to drop, most of the hospital has been vaccinated and with 1/8th of the population now (partially) vaccinated it certainly feels less endless than it did before.
  - kitten says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 17:30
    
    Thank you Craig.
- Peter K says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:57
  
  Great work!
- Claire says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 08:58
  
  I can sympathise. I’m off to do a shift this afternoon. Will add your snipet about lives saved to my pep talk! I am amazed at how many vaccines have been given in such a short time. It is such a complex process in comparison to a flu jab in terms of planning and giving but I am very proud of the way the nhs has responded. Not helped by media trying to pounce on any negative stories. Good luck to you and your wife for today. Keep up the good work.
- Brian says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 09:00
  
  ‘for every 200 jabs they administer they save a life’ – lovely bit of propaganda there. How can they possibly quantify these things? Statistics are meaningless in the real world of life and death.
  - Wally1976 says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 09:04
    
    I wondered how they came up with that statistic, I guess it’s based on one in every 200 people who get covid dying from it.
    
    Great work though Craig + wife. My own wife will hopefully be vaccinating soon too once she’s completed the seemingly endless training she has to do!
    - Wally1976 says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 09:05
      
      I also think the government should be getting more credit for the vaccination programme (and I am very critical of the way they’ve managed other aspects of the pandemic).
      - Andrew says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:43
        
        Absolutely! Our government have done a great job with the vaccination programme – of course it was about time we did something right in this pandemic – but it’s great to see the progress we are making week on week.
  - TGLoyalty says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 09:18
    
    The number of lives saved with each vaccine will be different by age group.
    
    I believe care homes is something like 1 in 35 of known infected cases die and that slowly reduces to basically nil as you get younger.
    
    Obviously that’s assuming everyone who has the vaccine would have caught it with no restrictions in place and ignoring that there were many more asymptomatic and undetected cases as not everyone got a test in the first wave and not everyone gets one now either.
    
    It’s probably really 1 life for every 400-500 across the whole population. But the c25 getting the vaccine in phase 1 are at much higher risk than the c40m that aren’t getting it in phase 1.
    - Brian says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 09:28
      
      My point exactly – there are so many different factors involved that trying to make a soundbite out of it is fine for the media and the gullible, but doesn’t really work for anybody who has half a brain. It’s a bit like with the vaccine itself – we’re told that it has 90% efficacy (or whatever), which sounds great. But when you realise how this percentage is arrived at, you see how meaningless it is. It simply means that 90% of the people in the trial group who got coronavirus came from the placebo group. It takes no account of things like immune systems of differing effectiveness, differing levels of exposure among the trial participants etc etc. Unfortunately, society is fixated on numbers.
      - Christopher says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:35
        
        Brian, it’s comparative. 90% efficacy rate is extremely important if comparing against 89% for example.
        In the real world, which you seem fond of, multiplied by many millions of people, these statistics become real.
      - Brian says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:43
        
        Christopher – of course it’s comparative. It just isn’t comparing like with like. So it’s of limited value. You’re comparing two groups, one with the vaccine, one with the placebo. But there is no way of telling that those two groups are alike in terms of how often they are exposed to Covid, how easily they would catch it if exposed, etc etc. As a result, the trial results are fairly random and not at all ‘scientific’. They may give some indication of the vaccine working, but to quantify it as 90% or whatever is essentially guesswork. So I would certainly say that it makes little difference if the published efficacy rate is 90% or 89% – the margin of error is much greater than that, making the difference meaningless.
      - TGLoyalty says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:45
        
        The reality is they are meaningless in the real world and I don’t think 89 vs 90% is very important since most of the world will accept anything over 50%. The efficacy numbers aren’t even comparable as some tested everyone and some only tested those with symptoms.
        
        All that really matters is low hospitalisations in the vaccinated population and we can start getting back to normal life.
      - Jonathan says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:52
        
        It’s a fairly sound calculation to be fair. Numerator is however many deaths in a particular group & denominator is size of group. The assumption is no deaths if vaccinated which held true in all the trials but obviously there will be odd exceptions.
        
        Asymptomatic infection etc is irrelevant & actually the numbers will look more impressive as time goes by & the numerator increases. Could also do same calculation for hospital admissions, long Covid etc. It’s a good sound bite as it will encourage more people to come forward & get vaccinated.
      - Craig says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:54
        
        I don’t really think it’s a soundbite for the public, but can you imagine how motivating it is for the staff?
      - Yuff says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 09:58
        
        Bottom line is well done Craig, keep up the fantastic work and it’s something we as a country can be proud of……..👍🏻😄
      - Callum says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 12:40
        
        Anyone with “half a brain” understands the limitations of statistical modeling and can appreciate them for what they are instead of throwing a tantrum about them for no apparent reason…
  - Anna says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 09:50
    
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/30/older-groups-must-remain-top-priority-for-vaccines-warn-government-advisers
    
    A committee has apparently done some work on this and come up with the figures – there’s a reference to it in this article.
    - Anna says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 10:01
      
      Apologies, this was a reply to posts further up about calculating how many deaths are being prevented!
      - Tom1 says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 17:28
        
        @anna – that’s an interesting article about the vaccines for older vs younger people.
        
        What I can’t see if the JCVI take in to consideration is that older people are generally retired and can isolate more easily, than say a nurse/teacher/police officer etc.
        
        I suspect it would be true to say that generally the economy is less impacted by a pensioner staying at home, than 1 in X teachers becoming infected and therefore the whole class has to isolate causing a knock on effect on their parents?
        
        In theory, if we are doing over 0.5m vaccines daily, you could vaccinate the teachers in one day, delaying the vulnerable by one day also. In the meantime, kids go back to school.
        
        I’m glad I’m not making that call!
    - Brian says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 14:38
      
      They should speak to the Norwegians.
      
      https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2021-01-16/norway-vaccine-fatalities-among-people-75-and-older-rise-to-29
      - kitten says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 17:38
        
        There has been a slight increase in older deaths in the few days.following vaccination in a handful of countries.
        
        For now governments are saying it’s due to other reasons. It wouldn’t stop me getting the vaccination for anyone in my family right now as not getting the vaccination is far riskier but I was always a fan of that remark by Mandy Rice-Davies.
  - Anuj says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 12:32
    
    Propaganda ? It’s just a harmless vaccine stat. These people are working so hard for us, many at near minimum wage. Have a little respect
    - TGLoyalty says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 12:41
      
      I agree with this. Thanks to all volunteers and staff like Craig and his wife 🙏🏽
- Bs says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 09:05
  
  Great work! I believe the 200 jabs needed to save a life is based on average mortality rates. As you are vaccinating the high risk groups, it is probably less than this!
  @Brian – it is called the number needed to treat (NNT) and is a common statistic to analyse new interventions and their cost-effectiveness.
- Louie says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 10:04
  
  Well done to you and your wife, Craig. We are all (or should be) grateful to you.
  
  My 89 yo mum and dad are off for their jabs in an hour or so. Pretty much the last of the people they know of their generation.
- Craig says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 10:05
  
  Thanks for all the kind words everyone, Mrs S is very much enjoying ‘take you husband to work year’!
- Kevin says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 12:50
  
  Well done and keeping the great work for us
- John W says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 13:02
  
  Thanks to people like you we are getting out of this . I also agree that the government has done a great job on vaccine roll out. From what I understand a lady named Kate Bingham is to thank also
  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-uks-nimble-vaccine-task-force-has-left-rivals-trailing-in-its-wake-kpbqkpbrv
- The Lord says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 13:13
  
  Great job all round, keep up the good work. Positive numbers starting to come through in new hospital cases last few days which fits with the vaccination timeline
  - The Lord says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 13:14
    
    Ps out of interest where in the country are you?
    - Craig says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 13:25
      
      Lincs.
      - Tom1 says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 14:49
        
        Nice one craig 👏
        
        I saw your post a few days ago and went off to google to find my local pharmacy is opening a clinic this week – I start my volunteering next weekend.
        
        I am sure there are still more clinics being started, even now if people are still tempted to volunteer.
        
        My motives aren’t entirely selfless – I want my parents to get their vaccines ASAP and of course the quicker we vaccinate the most vulnerable, the sooner we can travel and spend our ever increasing points stash.
      - Craig says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 16:22
        
        Me too Tom, the main motivation is obviously to save lives. Beyond that I work in the travel industry so have a vested interest to help us move towards normality.
Wally1976 says:

31 Jan31 January 09:08

A couple of weeks ago I asked on here if transferring points from my wife’s Amex MR account to MY Marriott account (same surname and address) would work. I can’t remember who but someone replied that it would work. Thank you, you were correct!
Josh O says:

31 Jan31 January 09:10

Good morning everyone, and I hope you are all keeping safe/well.
If I have understood previous comments correctly, it is possible to take out the Blue BA Amex, spend £9900, upgrade to Black, spend £100+, and then trigger the (better) 2-4-1 voucher.
However I have a couple of questions (feel free to also correct the above point if I have misunderstood)
1. If I have already spent £13k on the blue, would I automatically/instantly trigger the 2-4-1 on the black by upgrading?
2. If so, would I then be able to remain as black for a month (or similar short period), wait for the voucher to hit my BA Exec account, and then downgrade back to blue? (To obtain a pro-rata refund of the £195 fee)
Many thanks in advance for any help/advice!
- TGLoyalty says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 09:21
  
  1. Yes but highly likely to receive the 1 year one so will need to contact Amex to get that fixed.
  
  2. You can downgrade back to blue but don’t see the point if you have another Amex. just cancel then sign back up to blue/BAPP in the future.
  - Josh O says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 18:07
    
    Thank you, really appreciate it
Save East Coast Rewards says:

31 Jan31 January 09:20

Italy came up with a novel way to encourage more people to switch away from cash (cash is still used significantly more than cards here). The government will give you 10% back on card transactions conducted in person if you register your card for the scheme. Max amount earned per transaction €15, total earnings cap €150. I earned €115 back at Christmas. Obviously you also get any rewards the card itself offers.

It’s one of the ways the government is trying to reduce tax evasion via cash in hand payments. I don’t know if it’s a success though. Still many people pay with cash and some people don’t like the thought the government can track your spending
- A says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 09:32
  
  There are other novel ways we might incentivise moving away from cash. They involve increasing the “cost” of holding cash (in terms of the, currently derisory, interest foregone). One option is to in-build what you might call a “burn rate” in crypto into paper-based currency. It’s hard to administer, but theoretically possible – so that either [X]% of paper currency becomes invalid (you’d have a lottery that randomly chose serial numbers and invalidated those) – this is obviously clumpy and could lead to unfairness if the £20 notes you got from your gran for Christmas are the ‘lucky winners’ – or instead such that once a year all notes decline in value by a specified percentage (so notes that were worth £20 are worth £19, which then reduces the following year). The reference date would be the date/year on the note when issued.
  
  Not suggesting I’m in favour of these ideas, but noting they exist.
  - Callum says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 12:54
    
    I know you’re not saying you’re in favour of those ideas/you didn’t come up with them, but they’re some of the most absurd suggestions I’ve ever heard!
    
    How on earth are people meant to check the serial numbers of every note they accept in shops to discover whether it’s now a “deleted note” (another absurd suggestion) or not, and to calculate whether it’s worth £20, £19 or £18? That’s completely unworkable.
    
    Plus changing interest rates (you mean make it negative?) literally only affects cashless money anyway – physical money is unaffected by interest rates.
    
    If you want to financially penalise people for using cash then the far more logical thing to do is place a tax/charge on cash purchases or subsidise card purchases.
    - A says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 14:01
      
      I guess one would implement by having a machine that you run notes through, at the till, that checks the serial number (or year). Doesn’t seem like very difficult tech to invent – but agree it’s a bit challenging for a car boot salesperson or similar to check! One could imagine notes with QR codes, and a mobile phone scan telling you the value instantly – so definitely doable. The added rigmarole also helps achieve the policy goal – as it makes cash transactions a lot more painful, so shops may just stop accepting cash.
      
      The point on interest rates is that you’re only looking to penalise cash (ie physical money) transactions. In non-QE times, if you keep money on a bank you receive interest on it. So the effective penalty for holding money in cash is the interest that you could have obtained by placing that cash on deposit, but chose not to. So right now, the effective penalty is the corollary of the base rate – but the base rate is (rightly) adjusted with broader monetary policy aims in mind.
      
      Placing a tax on cash purchases isn’t as effective (but is significantly administratively easier I admit) because cash would still change hands in the black/grey markets unaffected by the tax, and only be subject to it when it hit the legal market (so after say 5 years in the black market, £100 is subject to say a 5% tax). If it were 5% per year say, then even if held in the black market for 5 years, when it came to be spent after 5 years, the £100 has been subject to a cumulative decline of c£23 and is worth only c£77 (100 x .95 x .95 x .95 x .95 x .95).
      
      And bear in mind the decline in value of the notes is functionally accounted for as income at central government level.
      
      Anyway, it’s really just a theoretical idea but it’s a fun thought experiment
    - The real John says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 16:05
      
      You declare that all tenners need to be banked within 3 months and that you only get £9 into your bank account when you bank them.
      
      The BOE (and all British note issuers, of which I think there are 13, reducing to 12 soon as First Trust Bank is ceasing this) would have to change its policy of banknotes being valid forever though.
      
      Several African countries have imposed confiscatory measures in the past.
      
      India recently did this too – but it had a low maximum limit on the cash that could be banked per person rather than confiscating 10%.
      - A says:
        
        31 Jan31 January 19:16
        
        Yes, the Indian example was an interesting one. Of course these measures can produce hardship (there were plenty of stories of Indian individuals in hospital with no one who could deposit cash for them), and are one-offs so don’t have the recurring benefit of individuals knowing forever that their cash is a wasting asset.
        
        Much much easier to administer than the systems I outlined above though!
  - kitten says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 16:53
    
    Why not when we’ve had the government sabre-rattling since last year that they are quite prepared to put the UK into negative interest rates…. this means you’ll be paying the bank to look after your money.
    
    Has been happening in Switzerland for a while now. As good as happening with shorter-date govt debt for a few months too.
    
    Struggling with why would you put your money in a bank or make it digital then.
    - A says:
      
      31 Jan31 January 19:14
      
      Theft / fire risk, for one. Storing large chunks of wealth under the bed is…high risk
- Amy says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 09:42
  
  MC have always advocated to becoming a cashless society..
- The real John says:
  
  31 Jan31 January 16:00
  
  So won’t people just spend €1500 and then go back to cash? If they preferred using card already they wouldn’t need any incentive.
  - kitten says:
    
    31 Jan31 January 16:56
    
    Yes.
    Italy runs like that.