MCX merchants restricted to CurrentC payment system, using Apple Pay incurs fines

1246789

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 163
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,354member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    MCX is doing nothing illegal by finding partners who willingly agree to a contract.



    Not according to Amazon supporters who seemed to think publishers illegally colluded to develop a better model for their emerging ebook industry. 

  • Reply 62 of 163

    I prefer and use debit card much more than credit card. My debit card (also has visa logo on it) provides for fraud protection just the same. I don't need the free month float, and i don't have to remember to pay off my cc ever.

    ...and what is your credit score?
  • Reply 63 of 163

    Hey guys. Not hating or anything. But the talk of boycotts and anti-trust/collusion lawsuits do not make any sense. It is no different from a retailer (or chain) deciding to accept Visa and MasterCard but not Discover and American Express (and many do). Also, these guys would be grandfathered in. They would be covered by the fact that their agreement was made years before anyone knew that there would be a viable competing system. (Anti-trust, collusion etc. require willful attempts to restrict activity; there was nothing to restrict at the time.) You would also not be able to demonstrate any harm to the consumer. The consumer would not be forced to use CurrentC. The consumer could still use their credit cards, checks, cash etc. And any arguments on convenience, security, privacy and other benefits to the consumer are unsustainable because only people who own a new iPhone - a tiny percentage of the population - will benefit from it. That is why any attempt to claim that this is to benefit the population at large or stand up for the little guy will quickly be rebutted: iPhone owners make on average $81,000 a year.

     

    Another thing: these companies have just as much responsibility to look out for their interests as Apple does. Apple Pay does not benefit them. They get the business of the Apple customers? They get that already. Security and privacy? Their system will be no worse than what exists now, and again only iPhone owners will benefit from Apple Pay. And despite the talk of mobilization and what not, the vast majority of Apple customers will still continue to shop at these retailers. However, these retailers will benefit from MCX to the tune of billions even if only a fraction of their customers actually use it.

     

    Also, we need to keep in mind what is going on here: a battle between the banks/credit card companies and the retailers over MONEY. Apple cast their lot with the credit card companies/banks in this battle. That's their prerogative, and it is one of the major reasons why their effort is a lot more successful than Google Wallet, as Google tried to go it alone and didn't seek any backing. But if Apple tries to make a major push here, MCX will immediately start letting everyone know as loud as they can: "Apple claims to be on the side of the customer but they are REALLY on the side of the credit card companies and the banks with their interest rates and fees and hidden charges that get passed onto the customer." Who is going to win that PR war? Right now Apple is enjoying the upper hand because Wal-Mart, CVS and a bunch of other retailers that people don't much like anyway are blocking new, interesting technology. But if a real confrontation comes out over this, it will be "middle America retailers against Apple, Apple's well-heeled customers used to getting whatever they want, and the big banks."

     

    Tim Cook is a sharp guy folks. He already knew about MCX. He already knew about the retailer/credit card company war AND PICKED SIDES. Yes, he chose the credit card companies over Wal-Mart, Seven Eleven and Wendys because of his affluent customer base because it was a smart business decision. If Google has to pick sides (and I bet they won't by the way) because the Android customer base is less affluent than the Apple one AND they are just as interested in consumer data as MCX and - oh yes - APPLE IS THEIR NUMBER ONE COMPETITOR - it will not be yours. Why should they help Apple out after all the fighting and back and forth for years?

     

    But there is a a reason why Google is being silent right now: either way they win. If Apple wins, then Android phone owners will piggyback on those same NFC terminals. If MCX wins, Android phones will carry the CurrentC app and get the metadata whenever it is used. So why take a side and anger either the retailers or the banks? (And again why help Apple?)

     

    But the main thing: just relax, OK? The exclusive deal only lasts 3-4 years. Most retailers signed up in 2012. The rest signed up in 2013. So by 2015 and especially by 2016, most of the retailers will support both CurentC and Apple Pay. Until then, MCX gets a year without competition to implement the solution that they have spent years and billions working on.

     

    Amazing that a lot of you think that they should just throw all that investment and work away just to benefit Apple when it will provide no benefit to the retailers whatsoever. That is right: Apple Pay means that the retailers will still have to pay the credit card fees. Apple knows this ... it is just that they care as much about the retailers as the retailers care about Apple: not one bit. But a situation where the Apple customers use their credit cards (through Apple Pay) but a significant portion of their customer base uses their system instead of credit cards ... that is pretty much the maximum benefit to the retailers. (And it is something that doesn't require someone to own an iPhone to benefit from ... most people literally can't afford those things.) It is the arrangement that provides the most benefits to the most parties, and there are no real reasons to oppose it. You just have to be patient and wait for it to be put in place instead of having the attitude that it is the duty of everyone to accommodate Apple and its customers right now regardless of whether it is actually in their own interests to do so. MCX would rather the money go to THEM than to Apple and the banks. Their bottom line is more important to them than Apple's stock price. I know, big shock there, but Apple is more than capable of getting over it. Which is why Tim Cook is not going to file a lawsuit that would not even be resolved (they would lose by the way and Cook knows it) before the MCX exclusive contract expires anyway.

  • Reply 64 of 163
    Sounds like retailers are trying to bite the hand that feed them, aka the credit card companies, maybe they should just go back to accepting checks?
  • Reply 65 of 163
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,354member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by runbuh View Post





    Not that different from PayPal linking directly to your bank account? Seems like a lot of people took them up on that offer.



    And a lot of people have been burned or know someone who has been burned by that arrangement. They won't be so willing this time. The other part is, there are quite a few stores that are not apart of this as well. So next there will be more companies attempting to get into my bank account.  NO! I'm good.  I think Apple will remove the only advantage of MCX, auto-discounts. The thing is I have used my Apple Pay today and was still able to use my Walgreens card for discounts. If rumors of Apple moving up the Apple Pay 2.0 that includes loyalty points, cards and discounts, along with the ease of use, this conversation will be soon over.  

  • Reply 66 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    While true for many that is equally not true for many.

     

    A definite altruism. This is true for just about anything typed on the Internet! +1!

  • Reply 67 of 163
    I expect Apple would be happy to partner with MCX the same way they did with credit card companies, if MCX became popular and saved merchants money.

    But the merchants/MCX would have to give up their dastardly plots to track consumers.
  • Reply 68 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

     

     

    I guarantee you that Apple has already told MCX this.

     

    It wouldn't be Tim Cook calling up MCX and saying "we're going to block your App before CurrentC ever gets going and you'll be dead in the water." MCX could then turn around and claim Apple was threatening them which doesn't make Apple look good.

     

    I'd bet cold, hard cash that Apple lawyers have chatted with MCX lawyers and explained the situation to them in confidence. The "situation" being something like: "Do you expect Apple to host your CurrentC App in their App Store when you refuse to let Apple Pay in yours?"

     

    MCX would then very clearly understand that Apple controls their fate, but they would never be allowed to mention it to anyone or slag Apple in public.

     

    I firmly believe there are two possible outcomes:

     

    CurrentC dies before it ever gets off the ground because MCX is fully aware Apple will shut out their App from the App Store. Why spend even more money on something that requires Apples "permission" to even work?

     

    CurrentC makes it to market, AND Apple Pay gets turned back on, as this is a condition Apple requires before they will host the CurrentC App. Of course, this won't exist in writing anywhere, but will be understood by both parties.




    there are tonnes of android users who could get the app when this CurrentC ever takes off. Sure, no one really uses google wallet or whatever samsung was using, but there are more than just iPhone users out there.

  • Reply 69 of 163
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,354member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by simtub View Post

     

     

    Could CurrentC now utilise the TouchID API in it's app to provide an extra level of security? How would this then be different to ApplePay other than it's tokenization.  

     

    If it's an app-based solution Apple should just reject the CurrentC app in the App Store when it is launched LOL



    Also can this app based form of payment be classed as in-app purchasing thus allowing Apple to take a percentage per sale? 



     


    There is no security when your name, bank account number, social security number, and drivers license number, in addition to you cell phone number and address is stored on their servers in the cloud. Considering the fact that 3 of the major players in this group have had major breaches this year speaks to the security concern. 

  • Reply 70 of 163
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,354member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by revenant View Post

     



    there are tonnes of android users who could get the app when this CurrentC ever takes off. Sure, no one really uses google wallet or whatever samsung was using, but there are more than just iPhone users out there.


    The system is just as cumbersome and insecure for them

  • Reply 71 of 163

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by revenant View Post

     



    there are tonnes of android users who could get the app when this CurrentC ever takes off. Sure, no one really uses google wallet or whatever samsung was using, but there are more than just iPhone users out there.

     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

     

    The system is just as cumbersome and insecure for them


    but android has always been cumbersome- they are surely used to it by now.

  • Reply 72 of 163
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,774member
    genovelle wrote: »
    The system is just as cumbersome and insecure for them
    those users dont care that much. So its unlikely theyd use anything different than they already have. If its too inconvenient then theyll say screw it and pull out their cash and cards. Remember these are people who dont care that much.

    Just because people like or tolerate Android doesnt mean theyll tolerate CurrentC.
  • Reply 73 of 163
    solipsismx wrote: »
    MCX is doing nothing illegal by finding partners who willingly agree to a contract.

    Many a contract has been found to be illegal....
  • Reply 74 of 163
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,774member
    I think people should complain to their banks and credit unions. If enough people raise a stink to their banks, the banks will cave in and block access to CurrentC because of security and privacy concerns. Plus the banks are all to eager because they pay the fees on debit transactions and fraud.
  • Reply 75 of 163
    paul94544paul94544 Posts: 1,027member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    MCX is doing nothing illegal by finding partners who willingly agree to a contract.



    YOU obviously don't understand the law, just because someones signs a contract does not make it legal. 

  • Reply 76 of 163
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    adonissmu wrote: »
    I think people should complain to their banks and credit unions. If enough people raise a stink to their banks, the banks will cave in and block access to CurrentC because of security and privacy concerns. Plus the banks are all to eager because they pay the fees on debit transactions and fraud.

    The banks can't block CurrentC.
  • Reply 77 of 163
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    paul94544 wrote: »

    YOU obviously don't understand the law, just because someones signs a contract does not make it legal. 

    I do understand the law, which is why I'm saying it's not illegal to find partners that agree to sign a contract. I made no mention of the legality of the specific contracts, based on what we know there is no criminal activity involved. If there is, let CVS, Rite-Aid and the several other dozen partners first decide their contracts shouldn't be legally binding. Not you. Not a tech forum. Not the DoJ.

    If you are going to say it's illegal then one can say that Apple's actions with ?Pay or GTAT are also illegal. Do you really want to say they are inherently illegal because they have partners that signed a contract? Of course not.
  • Reply 78 of 163

    So what they are doing is not allowing the retail stores to use a competing service. So MCX is admitting that they are providing a service in direct competition with Apple. Doesn’t that violate the TOS of writing Apps for the App Store? 

     

    I guess Apple is waiting until just the right time to pull the plug. I can’t imagine Google not following suit.



    With the two major platforms for the app basically giving the finger to MCX, it will implode.  That is unless
     MCX designs a very secure web app <rolls eyes> that does the same thing, adding a layer to the long customer process that is CurrentC, which is unlikely.  

     

    If their app can't get out there to their customers, the retail companies will revolt and will probably get out of their contract that way.

  • Reply 79 of 163
    I don't care what MCX members are doing. I'm taking my business elsewhere. While I'm not entitled to use Apple Pay everywhere, merchants are not entitled to my business. It's all about consumer choice.
  • Reply 80 of 163

    Is Apple being compelled to allow MCX apps in the app store if MCX is denying the use of Apple Pay with it's partners?

     

      

Sign In or Register to comment.