The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
I have similar allowances between my Chase card and my Apple Card. But my first name is George. I doubt it was gender.
It’s just marketing. Apple Card isn’t different than other cards but of course Apple is going to market it as if it is.
Yes and no. I’ve never had a card make it so completely easy to see which parts of my balance payments cover and thus avoiding paying interest and also not paying the total credit used either. The wheel UI on payment calculations is super easy to understand and pay only what is needed to prevent interest.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
Nope, that’s silly nonsense. I worked in banking for years (what’s in your wallet) and wrote credit application software, we certainly do not have gender/name checks to dock your credit limit. That’s insane. FYI, I also received a crummy credit limit with AC, despite good credit. My female SO got a better limit despite far less income. There are many signals and factors that go into the decision, including it being a new card/business line for GS and their being more conservative in lending.
Give me a break. Goldman may be making the “financial” aspect decision regarding the Apple Card. The app design, user interface, intuitive user experience and creative aspect of the app, is all Apple.
To be honest, my Apple Card is the worst one of my cards to deal with. Basically a PIA. It's why I limit it to Apple transactions only -- to keep the volume down.
My other cards reconcile themselves automatically in Quicken -- the transactions download and then match themselves to the charges and payments with me doing almost nothing. The Apple Card is all manual -- like computers and computing didn't exist. Then instead of telling my bank to send them a check, I have to give them my checking account information so they can pull the money out themselves -- which I consider an unsafe practice.
I’ll tell you this every time you mention it — do you know what’s on the check you send? Your checking account information. That is, your bank account and routing numbers. On a piece of paper, sent in the mail. Which is opened, and keyed into an ACH system which then...pulls the money out. There is no added security feature of sending a check over doing it electronically. None.
So what you personally consider unsafe is completely irrelevant.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
I have similar allowances between my Chase card and my Apple Card. But my first name is George. I doubt it was gender.
So are you not curious to why?
You just moved the goalposts. Being curious why != “sexism!” There are lots of reasons why, and 0 of them are the illegal practice of gender discrimination. Trust me, you’re just a number. They really don’t give a shit.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
I have similar allowances between my Chase card and my Apple Card. But my first name is George. I doubt it was gender.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
I have similar allowances between my Chase card and my Apple Card. But my first name is George. I doubt it was gender.
So are you not curious to why?
You just moved the goalposts. Being curious why != “sexism!” There are lots of reasons why, and 0 of them are the illegal practice of gender discrimination. Trust me, you’re just a number. They really don’t give a shit.
StrangeDays, you and I must be speaking or reading different forms of the English language. Asking someone if they are curious to know why some people experience something while other don't is somehow "sexism"? Since you state there are lots of reasons why not inform the rest of us rather than insulting people. Big thanks for telling me I am just a number, talk about de-humanizing someone for no damn reason. Shame on you.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
I have similar allowances between my Chase card and my Apple Card. But my first name is George. I doubt it was gender.
So are you not curious to why?
What’s to be curious about? Different companies are willing to take different risks as well as look at different metrics when it comes to lending. This shouldn’t surprise anyone.
Companies are also very likely to adjust their lending options as they evaluate different metrics as to who is worth trusting. This isn’t a binary situation. They may even get it wrong and they have to reverse things, or swing the pendulum back the other way too far, or even have an algorithmic error.
All that is commonplace with all facets of business and with life. GS may have even been willing to offer higher limits and lower interest rates for early adopters, and/or cross-referenced with verified social media accounts and/or people with a certain number of followers because it would help increase chances of free marketing. That’s what I would’ve done.
The investment bank Goldman Sachs has reminded financial analysts that it developed and is making all the decisions about Apple Card.
None of the quotes from GS in this article seem to back up the second part of this statement by the author.
Unless I’m missing something it seems GS was simply reminding its investors that the financial liability of the card and the decisions on credit limits rests with GS. Which is something the investors would be more interested in.
It appears the author then tries to make a bigger deal out of this by stating that GS claimed they “Developed” the Apple Card. I can’t see any such claim by GS in the quotes attributed to them.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
Didn't we learn that Goldman was overwhelmed with requests when the card first came out and defaulted to a standard/low credit line of $2500 for many applicants?
Give me a break. Goldman may be making the “financial” aspect decision regarding the Apple Card. The app design, user interface, intuitive user experience and creative aspect of the app, is all Apple.
To be honest, my Apple Card is the worst one of my cards to deal with. Basically a PIA. It's why I limit it to Apple transactions only -- to keep the volume down.
My other cards reconcile themselves automatically in Quicken -- the transactions download and then match themselves to the charges and payments with me doing almost nothing. The Apple Card is all manual -- like computers and computing didn't exist. Then instead of telling my bank to send them a check, I have to give them my checking account information so they can pull the money out themselves -- which I consider an unsafe practice.
I’ll tell you this every time you mention it — do you know what’s on the check you send? Your checking account information. That is, your bank account and routing numbers. On a piece of paper, sent in the mail. Which is opened, and keyed into an ACH system which then...pulls the money out. There is no added security feature of sending a check over doing it electronically. None.
So what you personally consider unsafe is completely irrelevant.
Except it’s the banking institution that has access to your checking account, not some business. When you set up an automatic draft to be made by a business, they can “oops” and clean you out. Even when you can get that sorted, it could result in a pile of other problems in the mean time.
The company's policies for determining credit limits has come under attack from politicians.
That bit makes me laugh and disgusted at the same time. A guy screams sexism and without any information or substantiation other than a differing lines of credit issued, out come the torches and pitchforks. Based on an unverified claim of 'they found out my wife was a woman and based on her gender, gave her a lower limit'. That's all it took.
Nobody checks its merit and Apple gets the blame. G-S didn't help when they immediately boosted the guy's wife's credit limit. People called that an admission of guilt.
Gov't officials, here to help, couldn't resist the rush to hitch their teams to the MeToo bandwagon and call for an 'immediate' investigation of Apple and G-S.
I'd like to have seen G-S reply with 'We've examined the credit history of both Mr. and Mrs. Important Developer and are ready and willing to go on record for the as to why she got a lower credit limit. Just give us the word, Mr. Important Dev. Hint: nothing in our code and algorithms says reduce females' credit limit by 40%' and 'Ignore Woz's blathering'. The Govt has yet to tell us that Apple and G-S were caught lowering the glass sealing.
My Chase credit card has a limit of $17,000, I was offered a credit limit of $2,500 from the Apple Card-Goldman Sachs. My first name is non-gender and when I correspond with strangers 9 out of 10 assume I am female.
I doubt you would believe that big institutions have bias in regards to gender or race because it has never happened to you therefore it does not exist and those that claim it does are liars.
Didn't we learn that Goldman was overwhelmed with requests when the card first came out and defaulted to a standard/low credit line of $2500 for many applicants?
Give me a break. Goldman may be making the “financial” aspect decision regarding the Apple Card. The app design, user interface, intuitive user experience and creative aspect of the app, is all Apple.
To be honest, my Apple Card is the worst one of my cards to deal with. Basically a PIA. It's why I limit it to Apple transactions only -- to keep the volume down.
My other cards reconcile themselves automatically in Quicken -- the transactions download and then match themselves to the charges and payments with me doing almost nothing. The Apple Card is all manual -- like computers and computing didn't exist. Then instead of telling my bank to send them a check, I have to give them my checking account information so they can pull the money out themselves -- which I consider an unsafe practice.
I’ll tell you this every time you mention it — do you know what’s on the check you send? Your checking account information. That is, your bank account and routing numbers. On a piece of paper, sent in the mail. Which is opened, and keyed into an ACH system which then...pulls the money out. There is no added security feature of sending a check over doing it electronically. None.
So what you personally consider unsafe is completely irrelevant.
Except it’s the banking institution that has access to your checking account, not some business. When you set up an automatic draft to be made by a business, they can “oops” and clean you out. Even when you can get that sorted, it could result in a pile of other problems in the mean time.
That is true.... But it goes beyond that. They could be hacked and the hackers now have free access to your bank accounts -- and since most organizations don't see a hack for months and don't report it for months after, it could be bad. But, there is another reason, from personal experience: once you give an organization access to your accounts the obligation is on you to stop them once you change your mind --- and they have no reason to make that easy. In fact, they have every reason to make it hard.
No, giving a third party direct access to your bank accounts can turn out badly. So unless there is some overwhelming benefit to you, its a good thing to avoid. And I resent being forced into it by Apple/Goldman.
Give me a break. Goldman may be making the “financial” aspect decision regarding the Apple Card. The app design, user interface, intuitive user experience and creative aspect of the app, is all Apple.
To be honest, my Apple Card is the worst one of my cards to deal with. Basically a PIA. It's why I limit it to Apple transactions only -- to keep the volume down.
My other cards reconcile themselves automatically in Quicken -- the transactions download and then match themselves to the charges and payments with me doing almost nothing. The Apple Card is all manual -- like computers and computing didn't exist. Then instead of telling my bank to send them a check, I have to give them my checking account information so they can pull the money out themselves -- which I consider an unsafe practice.
I’ll tell you this every time you mention it — do you know what’s on the check you send? Your checking account information. That is, your bank account and routing numbers. On a piece of paper, sent in the mail. Which is opened, and keyed into an ACH system which then...pulls the money out. There is no added security feature of sending a check over doing it electronically. None.
So what you personally consider unsafe is completely irrelevant.
Sorry that is not the same. False analogy. So you can say it till you turn blue -- or smarten up.
But, you do have a side point because that too is a possible concern (although a minor one) -- which is one reason why I have my bank pay most of my bills. I've cut my check writing down to about a tenth of what it used to be (most months I don't write even a single check). Aside being cheaper and easier (no stamps and no checks) as well as mostly automatic, the third party doesn't get to see (or store) my banking information.
And that's another one of the deficiencies in the Apple Card: For all of my other cards I have the bank automatically send a token amount (about a $100) once a month. That way if something happens (say I get hurt or lazy or just forget) and I miss the regular payment I don't get hit with late fees. Or, for the card I use for paying recurring charges, I set the automatic payment enough to cover the usual standard charges so the balance tends to hover around zero and all I have to do is reconcile the account each month.
In many ways the supposedly modern Apple Card is a step back from modern banking.
Did Goldman Sachs make other statements other than those concerning “underwriting”, as the quotes provided don’t support the statement “...developed and is making all the decisions about Apple Card”. One can underwrite (I.e manage the risk, provide the credit and make the decisions on who to provide credit to) without having control of many meaningful differentiating aspects of the service.
Comments
Nope, that’s silly nonsense. I worked in banking for years (what’s in your wallet) and wrote credit application software, we certainly do not have gender/name checks to dock your credit limit. That’s insane. FYI, I also received a crummy credit limit with AC, despite good credit. My female SO got a better limit despite far less income. There are many signals and factors that go into the decision, including it being a new card/business line for GS and their being more conservative in lending.
I’ll tell you this every time you mention it — do you know what’s on the check you send? Your checking account information. That is, your bank account and routing numbers. On a piece of paper, sent in the mail. Which is opened, and keyed into an ACH system which then...pulls the money out. There is no added security feature of sending a check over doing it electronically. None.
So what you personally consider unsafe is completely irrelevant.
Companies are also very likely to adjust their lending options as they evaluate different metrics as to who is worth trusting. This isn’t a binary situation. They may even get it wrong and they have to reverse things, or swing the pendulum back the other way too far, or even have an algorithmic error.
Did we? Sounds plausible. Where’s the link?