Actually the banks I know of take the perks if you cancel but let you keep the card. It might be an extra fee to pay if you cancel early but you keep the card. Which is how it should be. Revolut for example let’s you keep the metal card and take away the perks. Yes you might need to pay a fee to cancel but you keep the card. Automating waste is just awful. Also if I have let’s say Monzo plus for a year, and I want that card , then fine. Let’s say I have It for 2 years. But then I cancel. No one is benefitting from sending out an automatic downgraded card. It cost money to Monzo, it’s wasteful , plus what’s the point ? As previously it’s been said it’s petty and it has no real benefit to ANYONE.
2 Likes
As I said, they can do more yes. But it’s just the fact that this is one of the core benefits of their (re)new launch of their premium product that’s growing.
So it might change in the future once it’s more popular, however right now it’s suppose to be one of the things you’re paying for.
Also, Revolut are also the company that do limited edition based cards where they launch different cards in limited quantities for people to buy.
Nationwide do this with their accounts,
HSBC like I said do that with their premier accounts,
Lloyds does it with Club Lloyds.
American Express technically can just let you keep a BA Premium card but only give you 1 avios to 1 point instead of 1.5 to 1
Starling offers those cards that you can load money on and give to others, what if you don’t need to do that anymore, what if someone just orders multiple for their own usage etc.
But it’s part of the branding and in fairness to those banks (and other companies) why should they let people walk around using a product that that person doesn’t pay for anymore or hasn’t earn’t it.
I’d like to see more done about the environment yes, but maybe the companies can focus on carbon offsetting or greener energy for card production to shifting their offices to be run on greener energy.
At the end of the day, Monzo are still giving you the option to not order a new card if you are that worried about the plastic waste. So use that to your advantage and not get a new card even if you go to a premium account, because they could easily say “you have to use the nee Plus card so you can be a walking advertisement every time you whip it out to pay”.
The fact that that isn’t the case and you can still get the Plus benefits without doing so is already better than other banks in terms of card waste 
2 Likes
Ethical and purposefully wasteful are different things.
As an investor, are you happy that £100k a year could be spent on replacing cards that don’t need to be replaced?
I genuinely think the cancellation part has come for this reason:
A future plan will have a Metal card.
They don’t want people to sign up for a Metal Card and cancel Plus after receipt.
And keep the metal card for ~5 years.
It keeps the terms aligned and neat.
But on other points made in this thread:
- It is more environmentally friendly to not produce unnecesary stickers regardless of how their cards are replaced
- It is more environmentally friendly to not have an expensive presentation box regardless of how their cards are replaced
- Monzo still need to protect their assets, revenue, etc and everything has to be balanced.
- The most environmentally friendly thing Monzo could do is to shut up shop and not have any environmental impact at all.
The thing that irks me the most - I’ve never seen any one question how energy efficient the rest of Monzo’s operation is? Do they use Green Energy, how are their data centres run? How do they ensure their servers are green, etc.
It’s always about the cards.
1 Like
Got to disagree there, those topics have been done in the past.
2 Likes
OK fair point, I’ve not neccesarily seen those topics as frequently / commonly as the plastic card point then. But I still think Cards get a disporportionate amount of feedback in comparison to the overall ‘energy effeciency’ of Monzo.
Example thread - Monzo and the Environment
Quote from a member of staff ‘we don’t normally send you letters and our card carrying envelopes don’t have plastic windows so it’s easy to recycle everything once you receive your card’
Kind of goes against sending out additional cards for no particular reason. I think that is what is irking some people - it is hypocritical as opposed to being concerned about plastic wastage.
1 Like
As tesco says ‘Every Little Help’, if everyone in the UK thought ‘I won’t recycle that coke can as it won’t make a difference’, I wonder where we would be…
3 Likes
That’s probably true but I’m not sending the metal/Plus card back, it’s not being melted down or reused by Monzo. By force replacing it, all they are doing is costing themselves money and causing hassle for the customer.
I have my card details saved on countless websites, when my card expires naturally, it will be a pain to update everywhere but I’ll do it. If I upgrade to Plus, I’ll go through that pain.
But if I cancel, I don’t want to change it to the Plus numbers, then change it back again and have the Plus card go in the bin.
1 Like
I know it’s only ever going to be hypothesising until something comes up to confirm that theory - but I guess it’s trying to get the barrier to entry low enough (“I don’t want to be tied in for 12 months”) to encourage people to try it out, and also keeping terms as simple as possible for all products.
Not easy to get that right balance, and I think how Monzo have done it is a very good way. I nearly signed up to the N26 premium but didn’t want to be tied to it for a year.
And I think this is where it stands. Maybe not “bragging rights” per say, but there is definitely a huge number of people who just want the premium card, not the premium account… And if Monzo don’t cancel the card, people take advantage.
2 Likes
That’s why it could be a term that you can keep your card after 12 months for example. What I mean that it’s ok to find a work around and maybe discourage people from subscribing only for the card, but in the same time there should be a balance between inconveniencing everyone, creating automated waste and stop people abusing the system ( aka subscribing only for the card).
I guess this is the crux of the matter. There is a reason, it’s just that some people don’t agree or see the value in that reason.
At the end of the day the card is an optional part of Plus. Monzo have given the power of choice to the customer, it’s not about whether monzo are ethical or not and forcing it upon their customers.
It’s the customer’s decision if they want to sign up to Plus, it’s their choice if they want the Plus card, it’s their decision if they then cancel and lose the things that comes with Plus membersip, and that includes the the card if they’ve opted for it.
4 Likes
True. But would as many people have signed up if the card was the same? I think we all know the answer to that.
(For the sake of argument, the Plus card costs the same as Coral. £4 has been quoted by Monzo before as the cost of card replacements)
Cost of Plus card - £4
Cost of Plus - £15
“Profit” - £11
But the way Monzo are doing it now
Cost of Plus card - £4
Cost of Plus - £15
Cost of replacement Coral card - £4
Profit - £7
I totally understand turning off virtual cards, open banking, categories, discounts etc etc. These are all done at the flick of a toggle. Nobody would expect to keep those.
But why cause more expense, more hassle and more waste by forcing someone to no longer be able to use the Plus card?
2 Likes
To protect the brand. Sure there might be slightly less profit for mozno due to the cost of replacing the card but it’s probably worth it. They are still making a profit albiet a smaller margin but profit all the same.
I don’t agree with mozo forcing more waste though as it’s still the customer’s decision as I see it as the customer’s waste.
When someone goes out to a bar (Plus) they don’t get to keep the pint/wine/cocktail glass (Plus card) to use at home (regular monzo). For your drinks at home you back to using your regular glasswear (hot coral card).
The bar isn’t being unethical because you can’t keep using their glasses at home and thus more glasses have to be made.
That isn’t anywhere close to the same.
To use your analogy, when you said you didn’t want another drink, the bar would spend money to stop you using the glass (that you’re drinking from) and make you pour it into a plastic one. But you still keep the glass on the table, you just can’t use it again.
Sounds even more ridiculous now doesn’t it?
2 Likes
Bunq lets one have up to 3 cards with different features.
When you cancel the extra 2 cards are frozen. But they ask you to keep them.
If you choose to re-enable membership, the extra cards come back to life.
Think of it as they are selling you the drink you are taking home, sure they make less money on the tins/bottles you are taking home. (Switching you back to the hotcoral card)
Sure it means the margins they have made from customer is less but the overall it was profitable.
To correct analogy is : that after you had your soft drink , the bar would come around the table , smash your glass and then replace it with a plastic one at their expense so you can use the free unlimited water refill option they have available . 
1 Like
I get that they still make money and they want to protect Plus. I also see your point that it’s on the customer in a way.
Maybe they’ll reconsider if lots of people cancel after 3 months or maybe not. I guess we’ll find out.
I also get you point too, it’s a rule that costs money to enforce. If they ignored it he customer would probably appreciate it and monzo would have more profit.
However I also see how they want to protect the notion of if you want it you have to pay for it, ergo if you stop paying you can’t keep it regardless of whether its a physical item or a software perk.
For those that are concerned about waste, great news you don’t have to claim the card in the first place.