that's assuming that most of their chargebacks were simply because people didn't recognize the charge. how many were because they didn't like the service, didn't get support, or some other reason?

with most credit cards, you don't really need to have a good reason to do a chargeback. especially with american express, they side with the customer rather than the vendor.

american express sent me some paperwork when i signed up for a merchant account and it basically said when a customer does a chargeback, they refund the money immediately and i would have little or no recourse to debate it.

If people didn't like their service, wouldn't most of them ask for a refund (which would not be classified as a chargeback)? I believe chargebacks are usually intended for charges that the customer thinks are fraudulent.

a refund would have to go through 37signals, and they don't give refunds (http://www.37signals.com/refund). a chargeback just avoids the middleman and gets the customer his money back.

A lot of companies say they have no refund policy in public, but will refund if a customer complains enough or threatens a chargeback (just because it's so annoying to deal with).

A company like 37signals needs to say they don't give refunds to deflect complaints regarding if you close your account half way through a month.. "Why don't we get half this month's payment back?" etc, which would be an administrative nightmare.

If prorating your service is an "administrative nightmare" you have issues.

Amex is actually the only one who settled a dispute in our favor, but that probably doesn't mean much since I usually don't bother to contest chargebacks.

When you say "in our favor," are you speaking as a vendor or a buyer?

Vendor, I guess. Why would he contest a chargeback as a buyer.