or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by plovell

I've seen reports (Bank Innovations, for one) that said that Apple would pick up some of the fraud liability. Not all, but some, as part of the deal. Of course, the banks are ultimately on the hook for fraud. But the deal might include some contribution from Apple (hold back part of the fee). But we don't know - either way could be right.
This is the problem of the record labels. They control the copyrights, country by country. This is part of the reason EU has pushed for EU-wide licensing but it hasn't happened yet.
Apple gets a portion of the fee and, in return, accepts some of the liability for fraud.   Because the security is good, fraud should be quite low. Hopefully zero.    But what this does is create a competitive weapon against Samsung which so far doesn't have a decent fingerprint reader of secure enclave. If Samsung wants to copy this then they will have to do a much better job than they've done so far. Even then it will take time. Or Samsung could copy the deal Apple...
You're right - banks and FIs will not pay twice. But it does seem that Apple has a deal, if this is to be believed ... For the sake of discussion, let's assume it's accurate. This might be incorrect and we'll find out on Tuesday. For this discussion I'm accepting it. The number of CC transactions to be done by iPhone may be a minority but it'll be non-trivial. Reducing fraud...
Providing security and reducing fraud, that's what. Banks and FIs aren't going to pay for a different conduit - that's true. But they will pay for reduction in fraud, and increased security. One very visible example of this is that new cards have chips, and virtually all POS terminals will be replaced by this time next year. Very expensive. So why? Just 'cos chips look cool? No - because they reduce card-cloning which is much of the fraud today. Banks and FIs are paying to...
A new crowd of wall-huggers. Too funny for words !
 Yep - you don't know what to say.
 Apple will probably be more than a little unhappy about this. 
 The reports I have seen suggest three things:1. the fee is lower - merchants will love that2. Apple gets to keep a piece of that fee, and assumes some of the fraud risk3. card-present and not-present (i.e. on-line) transactions have the same fee, not different (as happens today) Merchants in the U.S. do not check signatures (when I recently used my U.S. card in England and Germany - it worked OK and the merchants checked every time). And so there's fraud but the fee is...
Apple will not be a bank but might well buy one. That way the bank gets regulated but Apple does not.   The important thing to remember is that banking is not Apple's business, and the banking business can be treacherous (you can ask GE about that). Apple would probably prefer not to do banking, but will do it if it's the only way to get where they want to be.    With regard to Apple getting a better deal but accepting part of the risk - my guess is that Apple would...
New Posts  All Forums: