Dee Hock, who founded VISA, tells a bit of the story
like this:
"In the strict legal sense, VISA was a non-stock,
for-profit membership corporation. In another sense,
it was an inside-out holding company in that it did
not hold, but was held by its functioning parts. The
financial institutions that create its products were,
at one and the same time, its owners, its members,
its suppliers, its customers, its subjects, and its
superiors.
"It could not be bought, raided, traded, or sold,
since ownership was in the form of perpetual,
nontransferable rights of participation.
"VISA espoused no political, economic, social, or
legal theory, thus transcending language, race, custom,
and culture to successfully bring together people and
institutions of every political, social, and religious
persuasion.
"It went through a number of wars and revolutions, the
belligerents continuing to share common ownership and
never ceasing reciprocal acceptance of products, even
though they were killing one another."
! Dee Hock estimates that if equitable ownership had
been extended to merchants and card-holders, (all users),
Visa would today be *four times* more successful today. !
Something to consider when deciding whether "for profit" or "non profit".. Neither And Both =)
a better way to distribute ownership: chaorganize (Score:1)
[chaordic.org]
http://www.chaordic.org/chaordic/what_des.html
http://www.partnershipway.org/unesco.html [partnershipway.org]
http://technocrat.net/947223068/index_html [technocrat.net]
Huh? Believe it or not, a *shared ownership* model organizes the most successful global enterprise on earth: VISA International.
http://www.chaordic.org/chaordic/res_choasgood.ht
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/05/deehock.html [fastcompany.com]
http://visa.com/av/who/main.html [visa.com]
Dee Hock, who founded VISA, tells a bit of the story like this:
"In the strict legal sense, VISA was a non-stock, for-profit membership corporation. In another sense, it was an inside-out holding company in that it did not hold, but was held by its functioning parts. The financial institutions that create its products were, at one and the same time, its owners, its members, its suppliers, its customers, its subjects, and its superiors.
"It could not be bought, raided, traded, or sold, since ownership was in the form of perpetual, nontransferable rights of participation.
"VISA espoused no political, economic, social, or legal theory, thus transcending language, race, custom, and culture to successfully bring together people and institutions of every political, social, and religious persuasion.
"It went through a number of wars and revolutions, the belligerents continuing to share common ownership and never ceasing reciprocal acceptance of products, even though they were killing one another."
! Dee Hock estimates that if equitable ownership had been extended to merchants and card-holders, (all users), Visa would today be *four times* more successful today. !
Something to consider when deciding whether "for profit" or "non profit".. Neither And Both =)