4 ms·

I mean you listed plenty of reasons the relationship is bad. But those are all pretty good reasons for GS to want to bail! Like "Apple is a PITA demanding all b

by rtpg 3y ago

I mean you listed plenty of reasons the relationship is bad. But those are all pretty good reasons for GS to want to bail! Like "Apple is a PITA demanding all bills come due on a specific day for everyone" does not lead to "Apple wants to terminate the relationship". As anyone who has dealt with vendor integrations would tell you, when one side has a list of demands about how something should work, you know it's going to be a headache. Though I am still legit confused as to how GS ended up being the partner (beyond the cynical "every other company laughed Apple out of the room", which is not a great sign for Apple either!) I have no inside info, but like you I know that GS is pulling out of consumer stuff in general. Let's just say that in a relationship where GS was constantly, constantly, constantly leaking complaints to the press, it's not a huge logical jump to think that GS would want to end such a relationship. This is all just gossip of course. None of this matters, and I have no horse in the race. It's just fun to think about.

georgespencer 3y ago
> I mean you listed plenty of reasons the relationship is bad. Perhaps we misunderstand each other. This is what you said: > Apple wants to save face because "the leads we brought GS have double the default rate of other cards" is a bad look for future partners. I believe that I demonstrated that this conspiracy theory – which is entirely unsubstantiated, and which seems to have been largely refuted given that the charge off data is public – cannot possibly be the reason. Do you still believe that Apple is somehow trying to conceal charge off rates, having read my post? > it's not a huge logical jump to think that GS would want to end such a relationship. This is a very reasonable point, but it is not the one you made. It's totally fine to not be au fait with the minutiae of consumer credit reporting at Goldman Sachs, but it would help me to calibrate what your contention is if you could address specific points instead of abstracting to generalisations when it appears to me that you are entirely misinformed.

by rtpg 3y ago

georgespencer 3y ago

> I mean you listed plenty of reasons the relationship is bad. Perhaps we misunderstand each other. This is what you said: > Apple wants to save face because "the leads we brought GS have double the default rate of other cards" is a bad look for future partners. I believe that I demonstrated that this conspiracy theory – which is entirely unsubstantiated, and which seems to have been largely refuted given that the charge off data is public – cannot possibly be the reason. Do you still believe that Apple is somehow trying to conceal charge off rates, having read my post? > it's not a huge logical jump to think that GS would want to end such a relationship. This is a very reasonable point, but it is not the one you made. It's totally fine to not be au fait with the minutiae of consumer credit reporting at Goldman Sachs, but it would help me to calibrate what your contention is if you could address specific points instead of abstracting to generalisations when it appears to me that you are entirely misinformed.