Talk:Buy Now, Pay Later
Add topicLatest comment: Thursday at 13:29 by Beanie Bo in topic Relevance?
Relevance?[edit source]
As a completely opt-in service, I don't believe this violates any consumer rights Illerfish2 (talk) 04:07, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- Look at it this way, gambling is proven to be anticonsumer despite it being it is opt-in as well, because it is using dark patterns to entice consumers into using it. The same falls under here, you are gambling on having enough money in the future to use this system, but these systems are rewarded through your debt to not educate you on the risks involved with using it.
- However, the article itself does severely need to be reworked, zero refs, not a lot of development in general.
- If we can include some data listed through these sources I found in a quick search, it might be brought to the standard of quality the wiki is in search of:
- https://thehustle.co/01272022-buy-now-pay-later
- https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesfinancecouncil/2025/02/04/buy-now-pay-later-hidden-credit-risks-in-the-digital-payment-revolution/
- https://www.wired.com/story/hidden-dangers-buy-now-pay-later-apps/ (https://archive.is/z3eSh)
- https://defendernetwork.com/news/opinion/buy-now-pay-later-loans-debt/
- https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/credit-cards/the-hidden-danger-of-buy-now-pay-later-plans-revealed/ar-AA1G6cE5
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUDWC6rCwhI JamesTDG (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- Lack of citations is definitely an issue, but more broadly speaking wiki scope focuses on issues of new issues in consumer rights, specifically those that are anti-ownership and reduce consumer's privacy and/or ability to consent. (Mission statement#Consumer protection has changed) While definitely ethically questionable, this seems to fall outside of the scope of the wiki as we don't aim to address psychological issues and these systems do inform the user of exactly what they are consenting to. Illerfish2 (talk) 04:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- I agree. The article is more fit for somewhere else than here. — Sojourna (talk) 05:46, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- Predatory lending through a convenient little button right next to checkout of Amazon and other online retailers seems pretty relevant to me. More specifically, BNPL's act like tech companies rather than credit lenders and they have very few of the safeguards that banks have, meaning they get away with much more. The controversies surrounding them are very notable, and I don't think this issue is outside the scope of the wiki at all. It's an issue that is only possible via Big Tech. Beanie Bo (talk) 13:29, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- Lack of citations is definitely an issue, but more broadly speaking wiki scope focuses on issues of new issues in consumer rights, specifically those that are anti-ownership and reduce consumer's privacy and/or ability to consent. (Mission statement#Consumer protection has changed) While definitely ethically questionable, this seems to fall outside of the scope of the wiki as we don't aim to address psychological issues and these systems do inform the user of exactly what they are consenting to. Illerfish2 (talk) 04:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)