9 ms·

I am 100% more likely to buy from your online store if you have a simple checkout process that lets me use Apple Pay. And if you want an email to send the confi

I am 100% more likely to buy from your online store if you have a simple checkout process that lets me use Apple Pay. And if you want an email to send the confirmation to use Sign In with Apple and I will default to buying from you over another provider. It’s as simple as that: I get far less spam, I know my privacy is being secured, and I get to support a company that supports the easiest checkout process ever.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
I would pay more to a website that offers Apple Pay just for the convenience.
- fireattack 7y ago
  People don't seem to like the additional "convenience fee" when they're paying their bill online, though :P (which to be fair, is indeed more convenient than paying it in-person.)
  - techsupporter 7y ago
    I don't like the "convenience fee" for two reasons: 1) I object to being charged to give someone money. If you tell me I owe you $90 and that you accept this list of methods to pay and I go to use one of those methods and you reply "oh to use that method I will charge you an extra $3.95," I am going to use the method that costs me an extra $0 because I already agreed to give you $90; you can work out how to collect that $90 in a way that only costs me the $90 I owe you. 2) It is an outdated fee. When it first started, electronic payments were new, novel, and cost actual money to put into a workflow. Now, physically handling checks and cash often have more cost to the merchant than paying electronically because the cost and logistics of electronic payments have been so streamlined. This fee has turned into a cash grab. (That first point is why I still use paper checks. My apartment complex charges almost $50 to pay rent with a credit card and $10 to use a debit card. But walking the check three minutes from my front door to the night drop the day I get paid is entirely free since my credit union gives me a box of checks every year and I go through far fewer than one box per year. If my apartment complex finds that taking paper checks costs them money but electronic payments don't, they can adjust their pricing to reflect that.)
    - sidlls 7y ago
      Seems to me they did adjust their pricing, and in a way that is both transparent and fair, i.e., that doesn't force check paying tenants to subsidize card paying tenants by raising overall rents for everyone.
    - p10_user 7y ago
      I think you're missing the point of the fee. The company (Visa, Discover, Apple) that processes the transaction charges a fee (flat or percentage) for each purchase. This is why they add the fee. Of course apartments charge high fees for rent - they want to ensure they collect the full amount of their monthly rent according to the contract. A $50 fee on say 1000 dollar rent is 5%, ensuring they cover whatever Visa is going to charge them on the transaction. And if they get a little extra income for themselves - then all the better for then as you got some convenience out of it by not having to write a check!
      - p1necone 7y ago
        Yeah, I don't really have a problem with merchants passing card processing fees onto customers. I feel like those fees being hidden to consumers/spread out evenly amongst all payment options is probably somewhat distorting the market.
      - lotsofpulp 7y ago
        Merchants do not pay Apple anything for Apple Pay: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204274 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204274
    - joshvm 7y ago
      Surprising that you can pay with a credit card to begin with. You could probably turn a profit by using a reward/cashback card (in a lot of cities that's easily $10k+ a year in spend). Though presumably that's $50 a month.. So perhaps not.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      They still have to pay the merchant fee which can easily be 3%. My rent before we moved was $1700 and some apartments rented for $2100.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    I would only pay more to invective adoption of Apple Pay. Hopefully others see and adopt it too and try to win back business with a lower price with Apple Pay. I won’t pay extra convenience fees just for online ACH. I’ll just use my bank’s free bill pay service to mail them a check and they can deal with having to deposit paper.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
p1necone 7y ago
As long as it also supports regular credit card payment. Being locked into a single companies proprietary payment service doesn't sound like a good thing to me.
- scarface74 7y ago
  There is nothing proprietary about Apple Pay on the web. It’s an implementation W3C Payments API.
  - p1necone 7y ago
    As far as I can tell the W3C Payments API standardises the path from payment provider to merchant, but the customer to payment provider interaction is the proprietary part. I.e as a merchant I can easily integrate Apple Pay as an available payment option in the same way as others, but as a customer I can't use Apple Pay unless I'm using Apple sanctioned devices/software and have an Apple account. Other commenters mentioned it only working in Safari, and according to Wikipedia it only works on Apple devices.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      You can only use Apple Pay in Safari. But if you use the standard W3C Payments API, a Chrome browser running on an Android device with suitable security will use Android Pay just like an Apple device running Safari will use Apple Pay. Apple Pay is Safari’s implementation of the standard. Apple stores your payment information and uses the Secure Enclave for authorization. How could Apple ensure a secure path on non Apple browsers or on non Apple hardware? What’s the use case where you would use Apple Pay as opposed to your hardware vendors implementation on a non Apple device? Just a snippet from the standard. https://www.w3.org/TR/payment-request/ https://www.w3.org/TR/payment-request/ This specification standardizes an API to allow merchants (i.e. web sites selling physical or digital goods) to utilize one or more payment methods with minimal integration. User agents (e.g., browsers) facilitate the payment flow between merchant and user.
      - 7y ago
lttlrck 7y ago
The best non-Amazon experience I had recently was with Butter Cloth. No sign up, no need to enter my name and address, supports Apple Pay (amongst others). If more companies did this I’d be more inclined to shop around than default to Amazon.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

I would pay more to a website that offers Apple Pay just for the convenience.

fireattack 7y ago
People don't seem to like the additional "convenience fee" when they're paying their bill online, though :P (which to be fair, is indeed more convenient than paying it in-person.)
- techsupporter 7y ago
  I don't like the "convenience fee" for two reasons: 1) I object to being charged to give someone money. If you tell me I owe you $90 and that you accept this list of methods to pay and I go to use one of those methods and you reply "oh to use that method I will charge you an extra $3.95," I am going to use the method that costs me an extra $0 because I already agreed to give you $90; you can work out how to collect that $90 in a way that only costs me the $90 I owe you. 2) It is an outdated fee. When it first started, electronic payments were new, novel, and cost actual money to put into a workflow. Now, physically handling checks and cash often have more cost to the merchant than paying electronically because the cost and logistics of electronic payments have been so streamlined. This fee has turned into a cash grab. (That first point is why I still use paper checks. My apartment complex charges almost $50 to pay rent with a credit card and $10 to use a debit card. But walking the check three minutes from my front door to the night drop the day I get paid is entirely free since my credit union gives me a box of checks every year and I go through far fewer than one box per year. If my apartment complex finds that taking paper checks costs them money but electronic payments don't, they can adjust their pricing to reflect that.)
  - sidlls 7y ago
    Seems to me they did adjust their pricing, and in a way that is both transparent and fair, i.e., that doesn't force check paying tenants to subsidize card paying tenants by raising overall rents for everyone.
  - p10_user 7y ago
    I think you're missing the point of the fee. The company (Visa, Discover, Apple) that processes the transaction charges a fee (flat or percentage) for each purchase. This is why they add the fee. Of course apartments charge high fees for rent - they want to ensure they collect the full amount of their monthly rent according to the contract. A $50 fee on say 1000 dollar rent is 5%, ensuring they cover whatever Visa is going to charge them on the transaction. And if they get a little extra income for themselves - then all the better for then as you got some convenience out of it by not having to write a check!
    - p1necone 7y ago
      Yeah, I don't really have a problem with merchants passing card processing fees onto customers. I feel like those fees being hidden to consumers/spread out evenly amongst all payment options is probably somewhat distorting the market.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      Merchants do not pay Apple anything for Apple Pay: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204274 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204274
  - joshvm 7y ago
    Surprising that you can pay with a credit card to begin with. You could probably turn a profit by using a reward/cashback card (in a lot of cities that's easily $10k+ a year in spend). Though presumably that's $50 a month.. So perhaps not.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    They still have to pay the merchant fee which can easily be 3%. My rent before we moved was $1700 and some apartments rented for $2100.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  I would only pay more to invective adoption of Apple Pay. Hopefully others see and adopt it too and try to win back business with a lower price with Apple Pay. I won’t pay extra convenience fees just for online ACH. I’ll just use my bank’s free bill pay service to mail them a check and they can deal with having to deposit paper.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

p1necone 7y ago

As long as it also supports regular credit card payment. Being locked into a single companies proprietary payment service doesn't sound like a good thing to me.

scarface74 7y ago
There is nothing proprietary about Apple Pay on the web. It’s an implementation W3C Payments API.
- p1necone 7y ago
  As far as I can tell the W3C Payments API standardises the path from payment provider to merchant, but the customer to payment provider interaction is the proprietary part. I.e as a merchant I can easily integrate Apple Pay as an available payment option in the same way as others, but as a customer I can't use Apple Pay unless I'm using Apple sanctioned devices/software and have an Apple account. Other commenters mentioned it only working in Safari, and according to Wikipedia it only works on Apple devices.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You can only use Apple Pay in Safari. But if you use the standard W3C Payments API, a Chrome browser running on an Android device with suitable security will use Android Pay just like an Apple device running Safari will use Apple Pay. Apple Pay is Safari’s implementation of the standard. Apple stores your payment information and uses the Secure Enclave for authorization. How could Apple ensure a secure path on non Apple browsers or on non Apple hardware? What’s the use case where you would use Apple Pay as opposed to your hardware vendors implementation on a non Apple device? Just a snippet from the standard. https://www.w3.org/TR/payment-request/ https://www.w3.org/TR/payment-request/ This specification standardizes an API to allow merchants (i.e. web sites selling physical or digital goods) to utilize one or more payment methods with minimal integration. User agents (e.g., browsers) facilitate the payment flow between merchant and user.
    - 7y ago

lttlrck 7y ago

The best non-Amazon experience I had recently was with Butter Cloth. No sign up, no need to enter my name and address, supports Apple Pay (amongst others). If more companies did this I’d be more inclined to shop around than default to Amazon.