Intermediate currency
Gem bundle hides an item’s real-money cost
A fictional game prices an item at 1,350 gems but sells gems only in uneven bundles, with no Australian-dollar equivalent near the purchase action.
Individual HTML example · Obstruction
Unused tokens remain after a service booking
A fictional marketplace sells 100 tokens for $10 while a booking costs 84 tokens and no service costs a multiple that uses the remaining balance.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real business and is not a regulator finding, statutory category or legal safe harbour.
Unused tokens remain after a service booking
A fictional marketplace sells 100 tokens for $10 while a booking costs 84 tokens and no service costs a multiple that uses the remaining balance.
Book for 84 tokens. Only a 100-token bundle can be purchased and the $ value is remote.. Buy 100 tokens. Pay exact amount
Book for $8.40. Direct payment is available; token use shows conversion and remaining balance.. Pay exact amount. Buy 100 tokens. Price, period and commitment, expanded: The price and material terms associated with “Pay exact amount” remain beside this choice.
Why the first version can mislead: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this creator marketplace example, the obstacle is: “Only a 100-token bundle can be purchased and the $ value is remote.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “Pay exact amount” reaches the represented state. The customer may spend more than the service price and retain value that is difficult to use or recover.
What a fairer design does: Allow direct currency payment or explain conversion, residual value and refund options beside the token offer.
Show annotated differences (4)
Potentially problematic version
- Only a 100-token bundle can be purchased and the $ value is remote.Why this state matters: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this creator marketplace example, the obstacle is: “Only a 100-token bundle can be purchased and the $ value is remote.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “Pay exact amount” reaches the represented state. The customer may spend more than the service price and retain value that is difficult to use or recover.
- Pay exact amountReview prompt: How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “Buy 100 tokens” from the completed creator marketplace outcome?
Neutral alternative
- Direct payment is available; token use shows conversion and remaining balance.Fairer design: Allow direct currency payment or explain conversion, residual value and refund options beside the token offer.
- Price, period and commitment, expanded: The price and material terms associated with “Pay exact amount” remain beside this choice.Review prompt: Place the compared prices, billing periods and material terms on one evidence sheet; where does it support “The current real-money equivalent is not shown clearly at the purchase decision”?
Review questions (3)
- How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “Buy 100 tokens” from the completed creator marketplace outcome?
- Place the compared prices, billing periods and material terms on one evidence sheet; where does it support “The current real-money equivalent is not shown clearly at the purchase decision”?
- Measure the same task through the clearest available route: does the effort difference persist once “currency conversion required by international payment with total displayed” is accounted for?
Complete practice context
How this example relates to Intermediate currency
A proprietary currency makes the real monetary cost or remaining value unnecessarily hard to understand. This is a design and research taxonomy for learning and evidence review, not a statutory offence label or an automatic finding that an interface is unlawful.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, potential harms, fairer design, evidence questions and separate Australian legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
Continue comparing
Related examples
Open this example
Account deletion obstruction
Deactivation presented as deletion
A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.
Account deletion obstruction
Deletion buried behind an unsupported ticket
A fictional retailer places account deletion behind six help pages and requires a support ticket containing an order number even for users who never ordered.
Sources and provenance for this example
Evidence base
Sources
- Dark commercial patternsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 336
- Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Act 2026Federal Register of Legislation · Primary · checked 2026-09-14 · C2026A00064