<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.11" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Where There’s Smoke, There’s Fire?</title>
	<link>http://www.thecatalystcode.com/theconversation/blog/2010/04/21/where-there%e2%80%99s-smoke-there%e2%80%99s-fire/</link>
	<description>The Catalyst Code</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 21:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Miller Abel</title>
		<link>http://www.thecatalystcode.com/theconversation/blog/2010/04/21/where-there%e2%80%99s-smoke-there%e2%80%99s-fire/#comment-23774</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.thecatalystcode.com/theconversation/blog/2010/04/21/where-there%e2%80%99s-smoke-there%e2%80%99s-fire/#comment-23774</guid>
					<description>Interesting post. It got me thinking about that "affinity" is too broad a term to describe what are two very different forms of co-branding: issuer co-branding (sports team+Visa, e.g.) and acquirer co-branding (Target+Visa). In the latter case, it feels much more like closed-loop prepaid and gift cards or a throw-back to the days of store cards (pre-Discover "Sears" card, e.g.) I think you're right about the reasons for Target making this move...in equal parts trying something for the sake of being bold and different and recognizing the unbalanced value that the co-brand relationship was based on. Not so for other forms of affinity co-marketing. These programs are hot and will stay hot. But perhaps the acquirer affinity programs will disappear as other retailers figure out they are carrying too much of the load.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting post. It got me thinking about that &#8220;affinity&#8221; is too broad a term to describe what are two very different forms of co-branding: issuer co-branding (sports team+Visa, e.g.) and acquirer co-branding (Target+Visa). In the latter case, it feels much more like closed-loop prepaid and gift cards or a throw-back to the days of store cards (pre-Discover &#8220;Sears&#8221; card, e.g.) I think you&#8217;re right about the reasons for Target making this move&#8230;in equal parts trying something for the sake of being bold and different and recognizing the unbalanced value that the co-brand relationship was based on. Not so for other forms of affinity co-marketing. These programs are hot and will stay hot. But perhaps the acquirer affinity programs will disappear as other retailers figure out they are carrying too much of the load.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

