Apple is offering a service which has a cost to the bank that implements it. Some banks have chosen to pass the costs onto clients indirectly (Santander for example). Saying the system doesn't require an app seems strange as in this case iOS is the app. Some banks use a small sticker (which isn't very pretty but isn't a big issue if you use a case either) and doesn't need the phone even to be on.
OMG....what kind of screwed up mental gymnastics are you performing here? You're saying it's fair to say there's an "app" to launch, because iOS? That's absurd. There is no "app" because you don't need to launch a damn thing -- just wave the phone over the POST with your finger resting on Touch ID, and it's done. No need to unlock the phone or open a thing, thus there is no app, the argument is intellectually bankrupt.
But yeah, putting a fucking sticker on your phone is a much better solution. Cool story bro.
OMG! Which bit did you fail to understand?
It doesn't matter if there is an app or not! That was my point. Something is handling the process and it could be an app or the system itself. Again. Does it matter? I was replying to other comments and it wasn't even the main part of my post.
I don't use Wallet systems (with or without stickers) or Apple Pay or any other similar systems. I could use a whole bunch if I wanted but at the moment I'm passing because I really don't need anything more than a piece of plastic and a PIN code for transactions over 20€. No weight, no battery, just a piece of plastic. I never take my phone to the beach and if I pop down to the local supermarkets I don't need to either. Just a tiny piece of plastic. There are advantages to all the systems but each person will decide which one is better in each context.
Putting a sticker on your phone is a great solution if your phone doesn't support NFC or your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay.
Like I said, the sticker solution isn't pretty but if it's that or carrying a physical card around when you don't want to, it isn't a big deal when the sticker itself is often invisible on the back of the phone and under a case.
"screwed up mental gymnastics"? In a word: 'Nope'.
My post was centered on the attitude of the banks. I'm no fan of the banks but I can see why some are reluctant to get onboard phone payment systems from companies that want in on the deal. That isn't so hard to understand and let's be honest, Apple didn't design this for its users. It designed it as a revenue stream. The problem is that it will only work if you can convince the card issuing banks. Something identical happened with music sales. You have to negotiate.
It's all normal business.
Dear sir/madman,
that fucking dumb ass sticker on your phone/in your pass etc. secures your money as well as a sieve holds water.
You have totally missed the point of ApplePay if you can't wrap your head around that.
I had one of those shitty bank cases, and then a sticker. If you lose or have your phone stolen you have no security on it. With ApplePay they need your fingerprint to pay for things still. Oh and as a bonus, if you lose your actual card the bank can instantly issue a new one to your phone via ApplePay.
As as an aside, doing groceries today - $140 - no pin required from Woolworths.
So we go from OMG to Madman.
I wonder if you can wrap your head around this: If you don't have an iPhone: No Apple Pay. If you do not have NFC: No wallet payments. If your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay: No go.
As I said, the sticker solution is not elegant but it is a solution.
As for security. Don't compare Apple Pay security to any other system if Apple Pay isn't available to you - for whatever the reason. Even if you have the latest iPhone, you are dead in the water if your bank doesn't support it. That, without getting into contactless availability on the POS terminal itself. Also, sticker security is exactly the same as card security.
And as I said to the previous poster, my post was centered on the attitude nof the banks.
I (and my wife) get notified of all transactions. We can suspend our cards or cancel them at will (by phone/tablet app, internet or via a call to the bank) If we wanted to we could leave them deactivated until whenever we used them. Sieves? Well no. Not even with stickers.
I sincerely hope you can get your head around all this.
Doesn't the article more or less assume that you have the equipment but not a cooperative bank, and to get on the AP train you might have to switch banks?
your arguments, while generally valid, are not in line with the basic idea of the article.
Roger Fingas, please update the article to note that in Australia Amex credit cards also work with ApplePay (on those terminals that accept them).
Market pressure will eventually make this happen. Certainly, on a recent visit, every time I paid with my AppleWatch I had an admiring audience. If 1 in 100 of them buy an apple watch and get an ANZ CC, and then 1% of the people who see them use it do the same it won't take long for the big three to give in.
Apple is offering a service which has a cost to the bank that implements it. Some banks have chosen to pass the costs onto clients indirectly (Santander for example). Saying the system doesn't require an app seems strange as in this case iOS is the app. Some banks use a small sticker (which isn't very pretty but isn't a big issue if you use a case either) and doesn't need the phone even to be on.
OMG....what kind of screwed up mental gymnastics are you performing here? You're saying it's fair to say there's an "app" to launch, because iOS? That's absurd. There is no "app" because you don't need to launch a damn thing -- just wave the phone over the POST with your finger resting on Touch ID, and it's done. No need to unlock the phone or open a thing, thus there is no app, the argument is intellectually bankrupt.
But yeah, putting a fucking sticker on your phone is a much better solution. Cool story bro.
OMG! Which bit did you fail to understand?
It doesn't matter if there is an app or not! That was my point. Something is handling the process and it could be an app or the system itself. Again. Does it matter? I was replying to other comments and it wasn't even the main part of my post.
I don't use Wallet systems (with or without stickers) or Apple Pay or any other similar systems. I could use a whole bunch if I wanted but at the moment I'm passing because I really don't need anything more than a piece of plastic and a PIN code for transactions over 20€. No weight, no battery, just a piece of plastic. I never take my phone to the beach and if I pop down to the local supermarkets I don't need to either. Just a tiny piece of plastic. There are advantages to all the systems but each person will decide which one is better in each context.
Putting a sticker on your phone is a great solution if your phone doesn't support NFC or your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay.
Like I said, the sticker solution isn't pretty but if it's that or carrying a physical card around when you don't want to, it isn't a big deal when the sticker itself is often invisible on the back of the phone and under a case.
"screwed up mental gymnastics"? In a word: 'Nope'.
My post was centered on the attitude of the banks. I'm no fan of the banks but I can see why some are reluctant to get onboard phone payment systems from companies that want in on the deal. That isn't so hard to understand and let's be honest, Apple didn't design this for its users. It designed it as a revenue stream. The problem is that it will only work if you can convince the card issuing banks. Something identical happened with music sales. You have to negotiate.
It's all normal business.
Dear sir/madman,
that fucking dumb ass sticker on your phone/in your pass etc. secures your money as well as a sieve holds water.
You have totally missed the point of ApplePay if you can't wrap your head around that.
I had one of those shitty bank cases, and then a sticker. If you lose or have your phone stolen you have no security on it. With ApplePay they need your fingerprint to pay for things still. Oh and as a bonus, if you lose your actual card the bank can instantly issue a new one to your phone via ApplePay.
As as an aside, doing groceries today - $140 - no pin required from Woolworths.
So we go from OMG to Madman.
I wonder if you can wrap your head around this: If you don't have an iPhone: No Apple Pay. If you do not have NFC: No wallet payments. If your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay: No go.
As I said, the sticker solution is not elegant but it is a solution.
As for security. Don't compare Apple Pay security to any other system if Apple Pay isn't available to you - for whatever the reason. Even if you have the latest iPhone, you are dead in the water if your bank doesn't support it. That, without getting into contactless availability on the POS terminal itself. Also, sticker security is exactly the same as card security.
And as I said to the previous poster, my post was centered on the attitude nof the banks.
I (and my wife) get notified of all transactions. We can suspend our cards or cancel them at will (by phone/tablet app, internet or via a call to the bank) If we wanted to we could leave them deactivated until whenever we used them. Sieves? Well no. Not even with stickers.
I sincerely hope you can get your head around all this.
Doesn't the article more or less assume that you have the equipment but not a cooperative bank, and to get on the AP train you might have to switch banks?
your arguments, while generally valid, are not in line with the basic idea of the article.
And that is what I said. Or Apple sweetens the deal or the user switches banks. Either way, criticising the banks for wanting to protect their interests doesn't make too much sense. Better to criticise them for not implementing Apple Pay and just switch banks to one that does support it. Apple is complaining about a lack of negotiation but the banks don't have to negotiate anything with anyone who demands a cut in return for a service (contactless) that they already provide. Apple knew this before it designed the system. It just has to accept it.
Apple is offering a service which has a cost to the bank that implements it. Some banks have chosen to pass the costs onto clients indirectly (Santander for example). Saying the system doesn't require an app seems strange as in this case iOS is the app. Some banks use a small sticker (which isn't very pretty but isn't a big issue if you use a case either) and doesn't need the phone even to be on.
OMG....what kind of screwed up mental gymnastics are you performing here? You're saying it's fair to say there's an "app" to launch, because iOS? That's absurd. There is no "app" because you don't need to launch a damn thing -- just wave the phone over the POST with your finger resting on Touch ID, and it's done. No need to unlock the phone or open a thing, thus there is no app, the argument is intellectually bankrupt.
But yeah, putting a fucking sticker on your phone is a much better solution. Cool story bro.
OMG! Which bit did you fail to understand?
It doesn't matter if there is an app or not! That was my point. Something is handling the process and it could be an app or the system itself. Again. Does it matter? I was replying to other comments and it wasn't even the main part of my post.
I don't use Wallet systems (with or without stickers) or Apple Pay or any other similar systems. I could use a whole bunch if I wanted but at the moment I'm passing because I really don't need anything more than a piece of plastic and a PIN code for transactions over 20€. No weight, no battery, just a piece of plastic. I never take my phone to the beach and if I pop down to the local supermarkets I don't need to either. Just a tiny piece of plastic. There are advantages to all the systems but each person will decide which one is better in each context.
Putting a sticker on your phone is a great solution if your phone doesn't support NFC or your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay.
Like I said, the sticker solution isn't pretty but if it's that or carrying a physical card around when you don't want to, it isn't a big deal when the sticker itself is often invisible on the back of the phone and under a case.
"screwed up mental gymnastics"? In a word: 'Nope'.
My post was centered on the attitude of the banks. I'm no fan of the banks but I can see why some are reluctant to get onboard phone payment systems from companies that want in on the deal. That isn't so hard to understand and let's be honest, Apple didn't design this for its users. It designed it as a revenue stream. The problem is that it will only work if you can convince the card issuing banks. Something identical happened with music sales. You have to negotiate.
It's all normal business.
Dear sir/madman,
that fucking dumb ass sticker on your phone/in your pass etc. secures your money as well as a sieve holds water.
You have totally missed the point of ApplePay if you can't wrap your head around that.
I had one of those shitty bank cases, and then a sticker. If you lose or have your phone stolen you have no security on it. With ApplePay they need your fingerprint to pay for things still. Oh and as a bonus, if you lose your actual card the bank can instantly issue a new one to your phone via ApplePay.
As as an aside, doing groceries today - $140 - no pin required from Woolworths.
So we go from OMG to Madman.
I wonder if you can wrap your head around this: If you don't have an iPhone: No Apple Pay. If you do not have NFC: No wallet payments. If your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay: No go.
As I said, the sticker solution is not elegant but it is a solution.
As for security. Don't compare Apple Pay security to any other system if Apple Pay isn't available to you - for whatever the reason. Even if you have the latest iPhone, you are dead in the water if your bank doesn't support it. That, without getting into contactless availability on the POS terminal itself. Also, sticker security is exactly the same as card security.
And as I said to the previous poster, my post was centered on the attitude nof the banks.
I (and my wife) get notified of all transactions. We can suspend our cards or cancel them at will (by phone/tablet app, internet or via a call to the bank) If we wanted to we could leave them deactivated until whenever we used them. Sieves? Well no. Not even with stickers.
I sincerely hope you can get your head around all this.
Doesn't the article more or less assume that you have the equipment but not a cooperative bank, and to get on the AP train you might have to switch banks?
your arguments, while generally valid, are not in line with the basic idea of the article.
And that is what I said. Or Apple sweetens the deal or the user switches banks. Either way, criticising the banks for wanting to protect their interests doesn't make too much sense. Better to criticise them for not implementing Apple Pay and just switch banks to one that does support it. Apple is complaining about a lack of negotiation but the banks don't have to negotiate anything with anyone who demands a cut in return for a service (contactless) that they already provide. Apple knew this before it designed the system. It just has to accept it.
Which is all well and good, except that the banks have gone to the ACCC for permission to negotiate as a bloc to make Apple open up their NFC chip to systems other than Apple Pay. It's not a matter of Apple sweetening the deal, it's a matter of the banks trying to get Apple to do something they don't want to do. Something, by the way, that it seems most other banks are quite happy to go without. It's also not about the banks protecting their interests, it's about the banks protecting their interests at the expense of both Apple and the customer.
What the big banks are doing with this joint ACCC application is no different from cartel behaviour. They are absolutely acting in their own collective interest and not the interest of the consumer. The banks want to control things they know Apple will never cede control over through negotiations. They want to force 'proprietary payment solutions' (e.g. bloatware) and avoid paying 0.15% per transaction to Apple.
ANZ broke ranks with them last year and now offers Apple Pay exactly as Apple intended. With ANZ the Apple Pay experience in Australia is amazing because contactless terminals are practially everywhere. I switched my transaction account to last year and could not be happier with the experience. I would encourage everyone to do the same.
Apple is offering a service which has a cost to the bank that implements it. Some banks have chosen to pass the costs onto clients indirectly (Santander for example). Saying the system doesn't require an app seems strange as in this case iOS is the app. Some banks use a small sticker (which isn't very pretty but isn't a big issue if you use a case either) and doesn't need the phone even to be on.
OMG....what kind of screwed up mental gymnastics are you performing here? You're saying it's fair to say there's an "app" to launch, because iOS? That's absurd. There is no "app" because you don't need to launch a damn thing -- just wave the phone over the POST with your finger resting on Touch ID, and it's done. No need to unlock the phone or open a thing, thus there is no app, the argument is intellectually bankrupt.
But yeah, putting a fucking sticker on your phone is a much better solution. Cool story bro.
OMG! Which bit did you fail to understand?
It doesn't matter if there is an app or not! That was my point. Something is handling the process and it could be an app or the system itself. Again. Does it matter? I was replying to other comments and it wasn't even the main part of my post.
I don't use Wallet systems (with or without stickers) or Apple Pay or any other similar systems. I could use a whole bunch if I wanted but at the moment I'm passing because I really don't need anything more than a piece of plastic and a PIN code for transactions over 20€. No weight, no battery, just a piece of plastic. I never take my phone to the beach and if I pop down to the local supermarkets I don't need to either. Just a tiny piece of plastic. There are advantages to all the systems but each person will decide which one is better in each context.
Putting a sticker on your phone is a great solution if your phone doesn't support NFC or your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay.
Like I said, the sticker solution isn't pretty but if it's that or carrying a physical card around when you don't want to, it isn't a big deal when the sticker itself is often invisible on the back of the phone and under a case.
"screwed up mental gymnastics"? In a word: 'Nope'.
My post was centered on the attitude of the banks. I'm no fan of the banks but I can see why some are reluctant to get onboard phone payment systems from companies that want in on the deal. That isn't so hard to understand and let's be honest, Apple didn't design this for its users. It designed it as a revenue stream. The problem is that it will only work if you can convince the card issuing banks. Something identical happened with music sales. You have to negotiate.
It's all normal business.
Dear sir/madman,
that fucking dumb ass sticker on your phone/in your pass etc. secures your money as well as a sieve holds water.
You have totally missed the point of ApplePay if you can't wrap your head around that.
I had one of those shitty bank cases, and then a sticker. If you lose or have your phone stolen you have no security on it. With ApplePay they need your fingerprint to pay for things still. Oh and as a bonus, if you lose your actual card the bank can instantly issue a new one to your phone via ApplePay.
As as an aside, doing groceries today - $140 - no pin required from Woolworths.
So we go from OMG to Madman.
I wonder if you can wrap your head around this: If you don't have an iPhone: No Apple Pay. If you do not have NFC: No wallet payments. If your card issuer doesn't support Apple Pay: No go.
As I said, the sticker solution is not elegant but it is a solution.
As for security. Don't compare Apple Pay security to any other system if Apple Pay isn't available to you - for whatever the reason. Even if you have the latest iPhone, you are dead in the water if your bank doesn't support it. That, without getting into contactless availability on the POS terminal itself. Also, sticker security is exactly the same as card security.
And as I said to the previous poster, my post was centered on the attitude nof the banks.
I (and my wife) get notified of all transactions. We can suspend our cards or cancel them at will (by phone/tablet app, internet or via a call to the bank) If we wanted to we could leave them deactivated until whenever we used them. Sieves? Well no. Not even with stickers.
I sincerely hope you can get your head around all this.
Doesn't the article more or less assume that you have the equipment but not a cooperative bank, and to get on the AP train you might have to switch banks?
your arguments, while generally valid, are not in line with the basic idea of the article.
And that is what I said. Or Apple sweetens the deal or the user switches banks. Either way, criticising the banks for wanting to protect their interests doesn't make too much sense. Better to criticise them for not implementing Apple Pay and just switch banks to one that does support it. Apple is complaining about a lack of negotiation but the banks don't have to negotiate anything with anyone who demands a cut in return for a service (contactless) that they already provide. Apple knew this before it designed the system. It just has to accept it.
Which is all well and good, except that the banks have gone to the ACCC for permission to negotiate as a bloc to make Apple open up their NFC chip to systems other than Apple Pay. It's not a matter of Apple sweetening the deal, it's a matter of the banks trying to get Apple to do something they don't want to do. Something, by the way, that it seems most other banks are quite happy to go without. It's also not about the banks protecting their interests, it's about the banks protecting their interests at the expense of both Apple and the customer.
Don't confuse him with facts. He never has anything positive to say about Apple.
Apple is offering a service which has a cost to the bank that implements it. Some banks have chosen to pass the costs onto clients indirectly (Santander for example). Saying the system doesn't require an app seems strange as in this case iOS is the app. Some banks use a small sticker (which isn't very pretty but isn't a big issue if you use a case either) and doesn't need the phone even to be on.
OMG....what kind of screwed up mental gymnastics are you performing here? You're saying it's fair to say there's an "app" to launch, because iOS? That's absurd. There is no "app" because you don't need to launch a damn thing -- just wave the phone over the POST with your finger resting on Touch ID, and it's done. No need to unlock the phone or open a thing, thus there is no app, the argument is intellectually bankrupt.
But yeah, putting a fucking sticker on your phone is a much better solution. Cool story bro.
Obviously a fan of CBA, as far as I am aware the only Australian bank which offers this.
Ever tried to remove the sticker when you switch phones and want to pass the old one on?
I did, what a horrible idea. Never again.
ApplePay is the most elegant solution, ever. There are others who tried to imitate, but never achieved the level of ApplePay: security, integration, convenience.
What a load of crap, im an Aussie, just about every single bank card and store uses pay wave NFC style payments, it's absolutely everywhere. soon as Apple Pay comes in, can use it in 95% of the shops
Roger Fingas, please update the article to note that in Australia Amex credit cards also work with ApplePay (on those terminals that accept them).
Market pressure will eventually make this happen. Certainly, on a recent visit, every time I paid with my AppleWatch I had an admiring audience. If 1 in 100 of them buy an apple watch and get an ANZ CC, and then 1% of the people who see them use it do the same it won't take long for the big three to give in.
Only if they are not issued by the banks involved.
Tap and go with my card works well enough for me. Quicker and easier than pulling a phone out and starting the app etc, etc.
So you have your card in your hand at all times? Never in your wallet?
::smh::
Also, you don't understand ApplePay. There. Is. No. App. To. Launch.
Jeez some people are daft.
I swapped bank. Would recommend everyone that wants ApplePay does, as the big four have no desire at all.
My phone is in my pocket, it's bigger and substantially heavier than my wallet so it takes longer to get out. My wallet is a slim louis vuitton card holder that has my ID on one side and my single Curve card on the other. NFC works without me even having to take the card out of the wallet, I just tap the wallet on the card reader. So this is faster and more convenient for me.
The curve card btw is a linked card that can use any of my debit or credit cards, so I only need to carry the single card with my ID. Apple Pay with the Watch would be quicker as it's already out and activated - with the phone however, for me, not so much.
What the big banks are doing with this joint ACCC application is no different from cartel behaviour. They are absolutely acting in their own collective interest and not the interest of the consumer. The banks want to control things they know Apple will never cede control over through negotiations. They want to force 'proprietary payment solutions' (e.g. bloatware) and avoid paying 0.15% per transaction to Apple.
ANZ broke ranks with them last year and now offers Apple Pay exactly as Apple intended. With ANZ the Apple Pay experience in Australia is amazing because contactless terminals are practially everywhere. I switched my transaction account to last year and could not be happier with the experience. I would encourage everyone to do the same.
It's not cartel behaviour. If it were you wouldn't be asking a consumer body for permission to negotiate with one voice. Is the EU a cartel?
It's an option they have and have decided to pursue. Apple (according to the article) is complaining that the big banks are side stepping negotiations, as if the banks had to negotiate anything in the first place. The banks can side step, refuse to negotiate or negotiate. Apple should not be complaining about that. They developed a system that absolutely needed the active participation of the banks. If some banks refuse. Hard luck.
As for 'why' the banks haven't jumped on board, I'm sure Apple taking a cut is one of the reasons. It doesn't matter how much (or little) is taken. It all adds up to a healthy amount. Many banks are also possibly reluctant to give up perceived control of the transaction. If Apple were to take no cut and offer the service for free, I'm sure things would change but that would be like the banks rolling over and accepting AP. Not going to happen as is.
I don't think that Apple should be forced to open up the system itself but Apple has already done its users a disservice by not implementing a full NFC solution. NFC itself goes beyond Apple Pay and Apple cut its users off from those other options.
There is also the 'competition' aspect. If a competition body were to rule that all bank customers should have access to the same hardware platforms it would spell trouble for Apple. That, though is very unlikely for a few reasons and the article itself claims that the request by the banks had been possibly shot down in a draft resolution.
So what's left? Exactly what I said before. The banks are defending their own interests (be they honorable or evil). Or Apple sweetens the deal or users switch banks.
Tap and go with my card works well enough for me. Quicker and easier than pulling a phone out and starting the app etc, etc.
So you have your card in your hand at all times? Never in your wallet?
::smh::
Also, you don't understand ApplePay. There. Is. No. App. To. Launch.
Jeez some people are daft.
I swapped bank. Would recommend everyone that wants ApplePay does, as the big four have no desire at all.
My phone is in my pocket, it's bigger and substantially heavier than my wallet so it takes longer to get out. My wallet is a slim louis vuitton card holder that has my ID on one side and my single Curve card on the other. NFC works without me even having to take the card out of the wallet, I just tap the wallet on the card reader. So this is faster and more convenient for me.
The curve card btw is a linked card that can use any of my debit or credit cards, so I only need to carry the single card with my ID. Apple Pay with the Watch would be quicker as it's already out and activated - with the phone however, for me, not so much.
Imagine. Someone stole your wallet, every single cards you have will be happily tap stolen to dry. Now, imagine. Someone stole your iPhone. They don't have your fingerprint, it's a dead brick for them. What you need to do just to block the IMEI and mark the theft location, done
Comments
your arguments, while generally valid, are not in line with the basic idea of the article.
Which is all well and good, except that the banks have gone to the ACCC for permission to negotiate as a bloc to make Apple open up their NFC chip to systems other than Apple Pay. It's not a matter of Apple sweetening the deal, it's a matter of the banks trying to get Apple to do something they don't want to do. Something, by the way, that it seems most other banks are quite happy to go without. It's also not about the banks protecting their interests, it's about the banks protecting their interests at the expense of both Apple and the customer.
ApplePay is the most elegant solution, ever. There are others who tried to imitate, but never achieved the level of ApplePay: security, integration, convenience.
soon as Apple Pay comes in, can use it in 95% of the shops
The curve card btw is a linked card that can use any of my debit or credit cards, so I only need to carry the single card with my ID. Apple Pay with the Watch would be quicker as it's already out and activated - with the phone however, for me, not so much.
It's an option they have and have decided to pursue. Apple (according to the article) is complaining that the big banks are side stepping negotiations, as if the banks had to negotiate anything in the first place. The banks can side step, refuse to negotiate or negotiate. Apple should not be complaining about that. They developed a system that absolutely needed the active participation of the banks. If some banks refuse. Hard luck.
As for 'why' the banks haven't jumped on board, I'm sure Apple taking a cut is one of the reasons. It doesn't matter how much (or little) is taken. It all adds up to a healthy amount. Many banks are also possibly reluctant to give up perceived control of the transaction. If Apple were to take no cut and offer the service for free, I'm sure things would change but that would be like the banks rolling over and accepting AP. Not going to happen as is.
I don't think that Apple should be forced to open up the system itself but Apple has already done its users a disservice by not implementing a full NFC solution. NFC itself goes beyond Apple Pay and Apple cut its users off from those other options.
There is also the 'competition' aspect. If a competition body were to rule that all bank customers should have access to the same hardware platforms it would spell trouble for Apple. That, though is very unlikely for a few reasons and the article itself claims that the request by the banks had been possibly shot down in a draft resolution.
So what's left? Exactly what I said before. The banks are defending their own interests (be they honorable or evil). Or Apple sweetens the deal or users switch banks.