They claim to be a socially moral company but continue to amass more and more cash for what reason? It stinks of exploitation.
I think their worst behaviour is their claim to be chartiable with ‘product Red’. If they really wanted to make money for charity they wouldnt wait 2 years to introduce the colour on a legacy iPhone, long after the bulk of the sales have happened.
I think you may have forgotten to add the "/sarcasm" tag.
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
One, credit cards are still needed to use ApplePay. Two, NFC-compatible contactless credit cards already exist -- perhaps the GS/Apple card will be one such.
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
One, credit cards are still needed to use ApplePay. Two, NFC-compatible contactless credit cards already exist -- perhaps the GS/Apple card will be one such.
But nearly all credit and debit cards that are issues will work for Apple Pay. Having Apple Pay on a physical card doesn't make it Apple Pay. You'll still have to go through the same setup process to add it to your Apple devices.
This will change the valuation of Apple from a iPhone company to a service company. Wallstreet will eat this up because of the GoldmanSachs partnership, more services and now banking. This also makes sense to be the lender for their own hardware, they keep more of the profits. Interesting move I say.
Soli said: But nearly all credit and debit cards that are issues will work for Apple Pay. Having Apple Pay on a physical card doesn't make it Apple Pay. You'll still have to go through the same setup process to add it to your Apple devices.
Or just use it as a chip or swipe type card and you probably get cash back just like the current Barclay Rewards card, which you can currently use with Apple Pay should you choose to. The Apple Pay branding is just advertising and fits into the ecosystem for Apple fans.
With this Apple holders can shop at Walmart and other holdouts. Goldman has several initiatives to branch out to more Main Street consumers. This one rides on Apple brand coat tails. Puzzles me. Just hope Apple got fantastic terms. (Of course Amazon offers card. And Synchrony specializes in offering branded cards, like Home Depot card. Lots of nuances. )
Personally, I'd like to Apple make deals with the financial institutions to make *Pay-based (Apple Pay, Android Pay, Samsung Pay) transactions a lower cost for merchants to help promote the *Pay services.
My comment assumes that *Pay is inherently more secure (read: less fraud) than cards with a physical number printed on them a there's a biometric (or PIN) required to access to use those cards in some fashion. Additionally, and to a much lesser extent, dissolving an *Pay card number on a device as stored in a server seems to cost the financial institution less money than creating a new card and mailing it to the customer.
If those things are true, a financial institution could offer a lower rate for *Pay which I believe would likely get merchants to start advertising *Pay on their windows, on their registers, and probably in their commercials since there's a financial gain to be had.
It's a pretty good card. If I have any complaints it's that, unlike most other rewards for credit cards, you can't cash out any time you wish; you have to wait for $25 to accumulate, at which time it's mailed out to you.
Personally, I wish it could accumulate so that, say, before the iPhone is to go on sale I can cash out a couple hundred dollars instead of having a bunch of $25 GCs to deal with. I'd also prefer if it could be sent immediately in a digital form, like email, or better yet, to Wallet.
There's also the greater risk of an Apple GC being lost or stolen, and I'm not sure if there's any recourse if, say, it were to be lost in the mail.
My cash back from Discover card goes directly in any increment as credit for my Amazon shopping. Very convenient and probably boosts my overall purchases with Amazon. Hope Any Apple/Goldman card allows same with Apple Goods and services.
My cash back from Discover card goes directly in any increment as credit for my Amazon shopping. Very convenient and probably boosts my overall purchases with Amazon. Hope Any Apple/Goldman card allows same with Apple Goods and services.
If you're a frequent Amazon shopper and have a Prime membership you might want to consider getting an Amazon CC as it has a 5% rewards on Amazon purchases.
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
You might want to learn about ApplePay. It does not replace any credit/debit card.
Quite so. You need a card for Apple Pay to be associated with.
This needs to be global. Endless negotiations with thousands of banks who want to monetise Apple Pay for themselves or preserve their internally produced clunky alternative some banking MBA built their career on needs to end. Apple just sets up a global partnership with a credit card provider and goes around the banks. Win. For Apple yes. But also consumers.
Not happy about Apple getting into bed with Bankster #1, Government Sachs. I'll spare you the details, but the info is out there for anyone interested.
There are better outfits to deal with.
I would rather Apple set up a Bank as a separate but wholly owned subsidiary. They can then hire people who share the values of the company.
Just decided to pull some random nonsense out of your hat?
Goldman Sachs is a fine company. (And no, I don't work for them).
(This is post also doubles as a response to @SpamSandwich above.)
Actually, I don't have a problem with Goldman Sachs either, except for the fact that their stock hasn't performed very well as of late. I think Lloyd Blankfein needs to go. And I should note that I own their stock.
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
You might want to learn about ApplePay. It does not replace any credit/debit card.
Quite so. You need a card for Apple Pay to be associated with.
This needs to be global. Endless negotiations with thousands of banks who want to monetise Apple Pay for themselves or preserve their internally produced clunky alternative some banking MBA built their career on needs to end. Apple just sets up a global partnership with a credit card provider and goes around the banks. Win. For Apple yes. But also consumers.
I'm leaning toward wholeheartedly disagreeing, but I admit to not understanding how Apple could create a global system where there are no banks, no credit unions, and no multinational financial institutions (e.g.: MC, Visa) in the mix. While I trust Apple, I don't want them to control all the financial transactions going through all Apple devices. I like that their system puts the banks/credit cards in control of creating and storing your aliased card number with cryptogram on their servers. I'd also think there would be some antitrust issues if Apple Pay was killed so that no card could be used except by Apple and through Apple. Could you elaborate on your concept?
This will change the valuation of Apple from a iPhone company to a service company. Wallstreet will eat this up because of the GoldmanSachs partnership, more services and now banking. This also makes sense to be the lender for their own hardware, they keep more of the profits. Interesting move I say.
So is this about improving the customer experience or getting Wall Street to value Apple differently?
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
You might want to learn about ApplePay. It does not replace any credit/debit card.
As per my statement, I said physical card, not that it is meant to replace any credit/debit card. I use ApplePay daily, I am very aware of how it works.
Soli said: While I trust Apple, I don't want them to control all the financial transactions going through all Apple devices. I like that their system puts the banks/credit cards in control of creating and storing your aliased card number with cryptogram on their servers.
While the consumer doesn't usually pay a percentage of a transaction, the retailer does pay their bank a fee and the bank pays some of that to Apple for Apple Pay. If Apple contracted directly with Visa they would end up paying them a percentage which would most likely result in reducing Apple's transaction profits to about the level they are now just using the current banking system, but with way more hassles. So there is really no net gain for Apple to work around the banks. Banks don't make the bulk of their profits from credit card transactions. They make money partnering with retailers, financial services, loans, and investing the funds deposited by their customers. It is simply not worth it for Apple to become a bank.
Not happy about Apple getting into bed with Bankster #1, Government Sachs. I'll spare you the details, but the info is out there for anyone interested.
There are better outfits to deal with.
I would rather Apple set up a Bank as a separate but wholly owned subsidiary. They can then hire people who share the values of the company.
If Apple created their own bank they would have to deal with lots of regulators like FDIC, OCC and Fed Reserve.
Apple could create a stand alone company that operates independently after setting it up in the fashion they desire. Then IPO it with supershares that give themselves voting control. This means Apple is not the majority stockholder, yet controls the company which is a separate entity.
Supershares has long been used to exercise control after a founder or owner has divested most of the ownership. The Ford family did it when the took Ford public in the 1950s and any number of tech Billionaires have done it since.
By controlling but not owning the company, Apple avoids a lot of headaches.
I thought Apple Pay was an safer alternative to using credit cards?
My thoughts exactly. Doesn't having a physical card defeat the sole purpose of ApplePay?
You might want to learn about ApplePay. It does not replace any credit/debit card.
Quite so. You need a card for Apple Pay to be associated with.
This needs to be global. Endless negotiations with thousands of banks who want to monetise Apple Pay for themselves or preserve their internally produced clunky alternative some banking MBA built their career on needs to end. Apple just sets up a global partnership with a credit card provider and goes around the banks. Win. For Apple yes. But also consumers.
I'm leaning toward wholeheartedly disagreeing, but I admit to not understanding how Apple could create a global system where there are no banks, no credit unions, and no multinational financial institutions (e.g.: MC, Visa) in the mix. While I trust Apple, I don't want them to control all the financial transactions going through all Apple devices. I like that their system puts the banks/credit cards in control of creating and storing your aliased card number with cryptogram on their servers. I'd also think there would be some antitrust issues if Apple Pay was killed so that no card could be used except by Apple and through Apple. Could you elaborate on your concept?
Piecemeal negotiation is like a thousand cuts. Apple Pay has developed with Apple controlling much of the security, while the card owner manages the infrastructure and regulatory requirements. From their perspective though, this means in Apple Pay the retailer and financial institution that controls the card does not get access to the amount of user information they currently do. They don’t like it as it reduces their ability to monetise information about you, in all their various ways. It is why in my country Apple Pay is limited to cards from minor institutions and only one of the majors, despite the ubiquitous access to tap and go terminals. So for Apple, which is monetising their customers in a different way, by charging for the hardware, it is beneficial to make a deal with a global player to activate Apple Pay with their card. The point is it would not be Apple that creates a global system. Visa, MasterCard et al, including in this rumour, Godlman Sachs already have that. This will speed up adoption. It also increases Apple’s bargaining hand with other institutions. If Apple lined up with a partner with global reach, they only need to do this once. The global partner will already have sorted out the regulatory requirements in each country for its card, so Apple doesn’t need to. The negative is that Apple has even greater control over your information, and has to deal with the card management, and I am pretty sure Apple would have preferred not having to do it, or they would have done it in the first place. But on the other hand it would greatly expand the usefulness of Apple Pay.
Comments
I think you may have forgotten to add the "/sarcasm" tag.
One, credit cards are still needed to use ApplePay. Two, NFC-compatible contactless credit cards already exist -- perhaps the GS/Apple card will be one such.
My comment assumes that *Pay is inherently more secure (read: less fraud) than cards with a physical number printed on them a there's a biometric (or PIN) required to access to use those cards in some fashion. Additionally, and to a much lesser extent, dissolving an *Pay card number on a device as stored in a server seems to cost the financial institution less money than creating a new card and mailing it to the customer.
If those things are true, a financial institution could offer a lower rate for *Pay which I believe would likely get merchants to start advertising *Pay on their windows, on their registers, and probably in their commercials since there's a financial gain to be had.
Personally, I wish it could accumulate so that, say, before the iPhone is to go on sale I can cash out a couple hundred dollars instead of having a bunch of $25 GCs to deal with. I'd also prefer if it could be sent immediately in a digital form, like email, or better yet, to Wallet.
There's also the greater risk of an Apple GC being lost or stolen, and I'm not sure if there's any recourse if, say, it were to be lost in the mail.
This needs to be global. Endless negotiations with thousands of banks who want to monetise Apple Pay for themselves or preserve their internally produced clunky alternative some banking MBA built their career on needs to end. Apple just sets up a global partnership with a credit card provider and goes around the banks. Win. For Apple yes. But also consumers.
This means Apple is not the majority stockholder, yet controls the company which is a separate entity.
Supershares has long been used to exercise control after a founder or owner has divested most of the ownership. The Ford family did it when the took Ford public in the 1950s and any number of tech Billionaires have done it since.
By controlling but not owning the company, Apple avoids a lot of headaches.
So for Apple, which is monetising their customers in a different way, by charging for the hardware, it is beneficial to make a deal with a global player to activate Apple Pay with their card. The point is it would not be Apple that creates a global system. Visa, MasterCard et al, including in this rumour, Godlman Sachs already have that. This will speed up adoption. It also increases Apple’s bargaining hand with other institutions.
If Apple lined up with a partner with global reach, they only need to do this once. The global partner will already have sorted out the regulatory requirements in each country for its card, so Apple doesn’t need to. The negative is that Apple has even greater control over your information, and has to deal with the card management, and I am pretty sure Apple would have preferred not having to do it, or they would have done it in the first place. But on the other hand it would greatly expand the usefulness of Apple Pay.