First alternative to Apple Wallet is ready to launch in EU

AppleInsider

The UK firm Curve claims it will be the first complete Apple Wallet alternative once Apple fully complies with the EU's requirement to allow rivals use of its iPhone NFC technology.

Apple could have to make additional changes to its NFC APIs

Alongside the law changes that meant Apple had to allow rival iPhone App Stores in the EU, the region's Digital Markets Act also saw the company forced to support rival contactless payment systems. Apple is in the process or adding APIs to allow rivals to utilize NFC in their banking and wallet apps.

According to The Times, Apple is still finalizing technical details. Once that's done, UK-based firm Curve says it will be able to immediately launch its rival Wallet.

While operating out of London, Curve's digital wallet will only be available to its customers in Europe.

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Users will be able to completely replace Apple Wallet. That extends even to how double-pressing the iPhone's side button will bring up Curve instead of Apple's system.

While Curve claims it will be the first to launch its Apple Wallet alternative, reportedly other firms are working to launch. They include the Nordic firm Vipps MobilePay.

Curve is not especially well known in the UK, but it reportedly does have over four million customers. Currently it acts as an aggregator for bank and loyalty cards, and claims that users spent approximately $4 billion through the platform in 2022.

Separately, the European Central Bank has complained to the European Commission about Apple's support for rivals to use NFC. It says that Apple is still denying rivals use of its Secure Element of its NFC technology, which means alternatives to Apple Pay will be slower and more cumbersome for users.



Read on AppleInsider

harrykatsaros

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

dewme

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

rob53

I read Apple might get 0.15% of Apple Pay charges. The bank holding the credit card used by Apple Pay probably gets somewhere around 2-3%. The only way Apple would get millions of Euros would be if UK customers spent 10's of billions of Euros, not just a measly $4 Billion Euros. Yes, Apple makes money on Apple Pay but nowhere near the amount of money the greedy banks do. I am counting the days before the first exploit of Curve is blamed on Apple.

BGnATC

The only people who want this are banks. 

supadav03

What is really going to suck is when these banks decide to force us to use their wallets and drop support for Apple Pay altogether. They want control of the fees, information, tracking, etc that comes along with using these digital wallets. Now that they have an in into the iPhone customer base, they WILL exploit it for their benefit even if it means a detrimental experience for the users. 

avon b7

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

avon b7

supadav03 said:

What is really going to suck is when these banks decide to force us to use their wallets and drop support for Apple Pay altogether. They want control of the fees, information, tracking, etc that comes along with using these digital wallets. Now that they have an in into the iPhone customer base, they WILL exploit it for their benefit even if it means a detrimental experience for the users. 

Not unlike what Apple is doing right now. The only Wallet option outside the EU is the Apple option. 

foregoneconclusion

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Your bank has its own Android wallet app? 

ihatescreennames

I have asked before and never gotten sn answer, but what is the benefit to having multiple wallets? What is better about having a separate wallet for each bank? How is this good for the consumer?

avon b7

foregoneconclusion said:

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Your bank has its own Android wallet app? 

Yes. BBVA Pay. 

I can choose to link my card to different options, one of them is obviously Google Pay. 

jvm156

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

avon b7

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

ihatescreennames

avon b7 said:

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

So, this is about protecting banks so they can earn more money and isn’t about consumer harm. 

avon b7

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

So, this is about protecting banks so they can earn more money and isn’t about consumer harm. 

The second Apple restricted competition, the consumer was harmed. 

That is now changing (at least in the EU). 

ihatescreennames

avon b7 said:

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

So, this is about protecting banks so they can earn more money and isn’t about consumer harm. 

The second Apple restricted competition, the consumer was harmed. 

That is now changing (at least in the EU). 

I don’t understand what your wife was complaining about. What harm came to her not having the option to install a wallet from your bank?  Here’s what I asked above that has yet to be answered no matter how many times I have asked: ”I have asked before and never gotten an answer, but what is the benefit to having multiple wallets? What is better about having a separate wallet for each bank? How is this good for the consumer?” (Typo fixed)

ctt_zh

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

So, this is about protecting banks so they can earn more money and isn’t about consumer harm. 

The second Apple restricted competition, the consumer was harmed. 

That is now changing (at least in the EU). 

I don’t understand what your wife was complaining about. What harm came to her not having the option to install a wallet from your bank?  Here’s what I asked above that has yet to be answered no matter how many times I have asked: ”I have asked before and never gotten an answer, but what is the benefit to having multiple wallets? What is better about having a separate wallet for each bank? How is this good for the consumer?” (Typo fixed)

Of course I can't speak for Avon B7 but I also prefer Apple not to take a cut from every transaction. I'm British but spent most of my working life in Switzerland. I'd far prefer to support local Swiss banks than have Apple take a cut (as the banks provide hundreds of thousands of jobs etc.). 

phillyfanatic09

Although I see a few commenters who want to support their banks, I suspect that there will be downsides that detract from the user experience overall. For example, if I have multiple credit and banking cards issued by different companies, do I now need multiple wallets to store them? If so, how do I efficiently use tap-to-pay? A physical card might be easier.

What about tickets, boarding passes and other non-financial uses for wallets and NFC? Again, I suppose those can go in the Apple Wallet but now I have to ensure the correct wallet is being used.

This reminds me of WalmartPay and CurrentC where I subpar customer experience is being pushed to benefit another party.

phillyfanatic09

Also, I’m American but I can use Apple Pay in Europe or Asia. I’m fairly confident that many European banks wallets will not work in the US unless they tie into Visa or MasterCard - who will take a cut so there goes the whole support your giant banking conglomerate argument.

JinTech

ctt_zh said:

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

ihatescreennames said:

avon b7 said:

jvm156 said:

That makes no sense. It’s not like she can’t use any type of card within apple wallet. It affects the consumer not in the slightest.

avon b7 said:

dewme said:

harrykatsaros said:

"The newly competitive market for digital wallets is about to experience genuine customer-first innovation," Curve founder Shachar Bialick said. A Curve spokesperson also claimed that switching to its service will save banks "millions of euros" that currently go to Apple.

Just me or were these two statements completely contradictory to one another? What do I care how much money the banks save? 

It’s never been about customers. They were never the ones complaining unless it was about their lack of access to Apple’s services due to local restrictions. 

It’s always been about the app vendors and the companies and investors behind them who have always wanted a cut or bigger cut of the transactional fees. 

To the customers who are ultimately paying the transactional fees and service charges indirectly it doesn’t matter, unless they have some sort of personal connection to the entities now collecting the fees, like a brother in law who works at the bank in question. 

Finally, what’s innovative about one fee collector getting paid over another fee collector getting paid? Can’t innovate? Absolutely!

Ever since my wife found out the she only had Apple as an option on her phone she has complained. 

It is one of the choice restrictions that Apple imposes and never communicates to users prior to purchase. 

She wants to use our banks Wallet system as I do on my phone. 

Competing systems should bring prices down for consumers in the long run. Unless Apple tries to apply a, cough, 'core technology fee' on competing systems. 

The problem isn't with the cards but the wallet. 

It is why Apple has been forced to open up. Apple takes a cut from every single transaction and doesn't allow competing wallets to exist. That is changing in the EU. 

So, this is about protecting banks so they can earn more money and isn’t about consumer harm. 

The second Apple restricted competition, the consumer was harmed. 

That is now changing (at least in the EU). 

I don’t understand what your wife was complaining about. What harm came to her not having the option to install a wallet from your bank?  Here’s what I asked above that has yet to be answered no matter how many times I have asked: ”I have asked before and never gotten an answer, but what is the benefit to having multiple wallets? What is better about having a separate wallet for each bank? How is this good for the consumer?” (Typo fixed)

Of course I can't speak for Avon B7 but I also prefer Apple not to take a cut from every transaction. I'm British but spent most of my working life in Switzerland. I'd far prefer to support local Swiss banks than have Apple take a cut (as the banks provide hundreds of thousands of jobs etc.). 

So you don't support Apple? Why do you buy their products? Apple has to pay their engineers, upkeep their servers, etc. It's a company's job to operate and make money and they can't do this for free.

ctt_zh

phillyfanatic09 said:

Also, I’m American but I can use Apple Pay in Europe or Asia. I’m fairly confident that many European banks wallets will not work in the US unless they tie into Visa or MasterCard - who will take a cut so there goes the whole support your giant banking conglomerate argument.

Completely agree, though if you're spending 95% of your time in your home country this isn't so much of an issue over a yearly period. Of course if you often live overseas for work / pleasure then the situation isn't quite so clear-cut, though this isn't so common.