Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rob's avatar

I think the most likely explanation is something like the Panera Bread and Gavin Newsom thing in California. It's just cronyism. Aside from that most likely reason, perhaps keeping the money at the merchants who are local Brazilians is mostly better for their economy rather than having most of that fee go to a French public company. I don't know. But they aren't making merchants pass on the savings to customers. So that could be an explanation.

Any rational thoughts on why Pluxee believes this hurts them a lot less than Edenred?

Expand full comment
Rob's avatar

thanks for sharing your thoughts. Interesting re EDEN: "The President has delegated powers to reform the market by decree, meaning he doesn’t need congress to approve the changes. This is NOT the case with other major country that issues meal vouchers: France, Italy, Belgium, Austria, Romania, Mexico, etc. The rules for meal vouchers are typically tied into tax, labor, or social security laws and require congressional or parliamentary approval to make changes."

The market seems to pricing in risk that these Brazil changes could have implications for Governing bodies in other markets. You bring up a good counterpoint here....

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?