6 ms·

> They're all still very upset about this, and would drop Apple Pay in a second if the NFC chip were forced open by a regulator Not if the users have anything

> They're all still very upset about this, and would drop Apple Pay in a second if the NFC chip were forced open by a regulator Not if the users have anything to say about that. Canadian banks tried to do their own contactless payment on Android (TD Pay, lol), but nobody wants it. In the end they caved and finally offered Google Pay. I predict it's gonna be similar. Even if Apple opens up NFC payment, nobody will use them and prefer 1st party support like Apple Pay or Google Pay. Just see how many people actually use Samsung pay vs Google Pay.

Xeamek 3y ago
To be fair, samsung pay is only avaible in like 10(?) countries. But yeah, point still stands
- wkat4242 3y ago
  I use Samsung Pay in Spain. I like it because it's better integrated on my phone and more importantly I don't need a Google account for it. I don't even have one set up on my phone. Of course Samsung does see my data this way but they have less info to correlate with. Also I don't use many of their services. I do wish there was a truly open payment solution though that doesn't require me to trust a big tech party.
  - lstamour 3y ago
    > I do wish there was a truly open payment solution though that doesn't require me to trust a big tech party. Cash? Everything else needs a relying party of some kind in order to facilitate the transaction. If it's a credit card or digital wallet, the transaction passes through the credit card or debit card networks, and your info is logged and, depending on laws, potentially re-sold. Don't get me wrong, I sometimes feel like Google shouldn't know my location either, but if my cell carrier already knows my location, I actually trust Google to not resell my location more than my cell carrier - it's worth more to Google if they're the only ones with that information and the same applies to Apple. Another way of putting it, rules and regulations, strictly enforced and updated, is probably the only way to prevent tracking and abuse by legitimate big actors.
    - wkat4242 3y ago
      > If it's a credit card or digital wallet, the transaction passes through the credit card or debit card networks, and your info is logged and, depending on laws, potentially re-sold. The reliance on credit card networks is part of the problem. There's no way to avoid them. And they're all from the US. This causes privacy issues but also moral problems because they tend to block sexually oriented products and services. In Europe a lot of countries are way more progressive than the US. I was hoping bitcoin would become this system but obviously it's been completely hijacked by speculators and its original purpose of control of ones own money has been perverted. There really should be a digital alternative for cash though. It's really silly that we still have to drag around pieces of linen and metal. And no, I don't trust Google for anything at all. I don't want them making money off of me. I also block a lot of ads of course.
      - astrange 3y ago
        Debit cards don't all have to be processed through credit card networks, it's easier to do it that way. Websites could also take direct bank transfer payments if they felt like it, but it would hard internationally.
      - toast0 3y ago
        > The reliance on credit card networks is part of the problem. There's no way to avoid them. And they're all from the US. JCB is Japanese, not sure what countries it has issuing banks in; it no longer issues in the US, and US acceptance is through Discover. There's also a lot of country specific debit/atm networks (including several in the US), if you are ok with debit over credit.
  - ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago
    You should read Samsung's privacy policy.
- tadfisher 3y ago
  Samsung isn't even interested in Samsung Pay. I work at an FI, and have submitted an application repeatedly to integrate the SDK. We have yet to receive a response.
simondotau 3y ago
It should be assumed that if the banks get an opportunity to implement their own NFC payment system on iPhone, they’ll switch off Apple Pay. Otherwise no customer would have any incentive to migrate over. And the incremental cost of Apple Pay is too little to be redirected towards some customer incentive program. (Of course that doesn’t preclude a bank from making an irrational decision.)
jpgvm 3y ago
Eh, maybe not in Australia. Remember Australia doesn't have like 5 million banks, we have essentially 4 big ones and they already are pretty cutting edge vs US/Canadian banks. i.e instant transfers are normalized, NFC is the norm, apps and Internet banking have been very good for about 10 years. If the NFC chips were opened up through regulation I have zero doubt Australian banks would just say "we support contactless with our first party app" and that would be the end of that until Apple asked for a more reasonable cut. When all your banks suck and Apple seems to be the only people with their shit together, sure but Australia doesn't live in that world.
- xvaier 3y ago
  Canada has essentially 6 big banks, instant transfers using Interac has been the most common way of transferring money for years (it launched in 2003) and payment using NFC has been the norm for a decade.
  - jpgvm 3y ago
    Heh ok, sorry for assuming Canada would be as bad as the US.
    - tonyarkles 3y ago
      The mobile phone apps are probably just as bad, but e-transfers (Interac, EMT, whatever you want to call it) generally work pretty well. And they're still somewhat of a hassle compared to I guess Venmo or Cashapp or... I've never used those but they seem pretty slick in comparison to having to go into a banking app, set up an EMT Payee using email/phone number, set a password on the transaction, hope that they remember to cash the EMT before it expires, etc.
- FridgeSeal 3y ago
  > When all your banks suck and Apple seems to be the only people with their shit together, sure but Australia doesn't live in that world. ANZ was too busy charging dead people to bother implementing it. God only knows what westpac was up too, NAB had an implementation on Android, and having used it a bunch, it was _awful_ and I was glad when they gave up and just accepted the alternative. Combank did their own thing, and seemed the furthest along, but support seemed patchy and they ended up junking their solution anyways and going to Android/Apple pay anyways IIRC. These places can hardly manage to maintain their own apps, I have about zero confidence in them deciding to wander off into the wilderness and trying again. Not to mention, all the non-big-4, and all the smaller banks probably won’t bother with reimplementing NFC pay as they either don’t have the resources, or can’t rely on institutional-inertia to foist useless changes onto their customers.
m463 3y ago
What if an alternative is cheaper? customers end up paying in the end. edit: in the end. I guess the place I notice it is paying for gas - see the cash vs credit price always shown on the sign. It is pretty easy to add up when you're spending $100+ on gasoline. but this affects everything we buy, just hidden.
- FridgeSeal 3y ago
  I don’t get charged for using Apple Pay, I get charged for the processing fee for the card I used (which is an entirely separate discussion), and given the option between “just continue using Apple Pay” or “download several janky apps just because the bank wants its own wallet impl”, I’m going to stick with Apple Pay.
- jdminhbg 3y ago
  The Apple Pay take is 15 bps, which is not a difference customers care about enough to change behavior even slightly.
- icehawk 3y ago
  I don't pay anything extra for using Apple Pay, as a customer, how could it be cheaper?
  - toast0 3y ago
    If Apple is getting 0.15% as stated in a sibling, it's coming from somewhere. Maybe it's added on top of the fees the merchant pays, and like other payment fees gets kind of mixed into the price of everything you buy. Maybe it comes out of the fees your bank gets on purchases, which will reduce their income and then they'll need to increase fees, reduce benefits for depositors, or reduce dividends to investors.
- tonyarkles 3y ago
  > customers end up paying in the end. Not in a transparent way, generally speaking. And at least in Canada you couldn't even (as a business) add a credit card surcharge to a purchase price. Now you can, so long as you're simultaneously complying with the legislation (https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/merchants/credit-fees-merchant.html https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/...) and your contract with your payment processor (e.g. https://www.visa.ca/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/canada/Support/Documents/surcharging-faq-businesses-en.pdf https://www.visa.ca/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/canada/Supp...). Apparently, too, merchants aren't actually charged for Apple Pay, it's the banks themselves that are. Merchants apparently pay the regular charge to their payment processor whether I use my Visa-through-Apple Pay or my Visa as a physical card. https://paymentdepot.com/blog/apple-pay-fees-for-merchants/ https://paymentdepot.com/blog/apple-pay-fees-for-merchants/ At any rate, Apple Pay is ridiculously convenient compared to anything my bank has ever come up with. The last time there was a Pay With Bank $X thing on a website that I tried, I ended up getting directed through some kind of Verified by Visa thing where they were asking for some kind of security code that I don't recall ever setting up. Or... I can double-tap the power button on my phone to verify a payment I'm making on my laptop. If the banks are unhappy about giving a cut to Apple, my recommendation to them would be: Suck Less.
troad 3y ago
To be part of Apple Pay, banks have to enter into an agreement with Apple. Though the details of this agreement are generally confidential, it's fairly well known that there is an Apple cut, and that that cut is rather high. (It's Apple!) The moment a bank has the option to extract itself from this arrangement, it will. Not just because there's absolutely no reason to give Apple a cut of the bank's own business if the bank doesn't need to, but also because the bad blood between Aus banks and Apple is very real at this point. > Even if Apple opens up NFC payment, nobody will use them and prefer 1st party support like Apple Pay or Google Pay. And since that costs the bank money, it won't be an option. Also, I think the bank would think of itself as a first party in a payment made using their card, and Apple as a parasitic third party. I'm not saying people won't grumble, but there is no way - unless Apple actually makes Apple Pay somewhat attractive to banks - that the banks will continue to support it if they don't absolutely have to. (I'm not siding with the banks on this, I'm just trying to lay out their logic.)
- bigyikes 3y ago
  Apple should buy a bank and compete on their own turf
  - gessha 3y ago
    They probably won’t do that in the current antitrust climate. I hope the DOJ and the EU continue probing the big companies because I’m sick and tired of my non-ecosystem device choices not working well together.
  - astrange 3y ago
    Owning a bank is an extreme regulatory headache. You always want someone else to be the bank. Or even better multiple someone elses - in the US, small banks are allowed to do things large ones aren't, so you sometimes gather up a bunch of them and become a single proxy for them.
  - rswail 3y ago
    Why would they want to be involved in a highly competitive and low margin business like consumer credit?
jwells89 3y ago
Yeah, I have no interest in keeping 15 digital wallet apps, even if they offer incentives, for the same reason I don’t carry a physical wallet for each physical card. Now I could see an argument for wallet apps being generic so e.g. the apps for Chase, BofA, SoFi, etc could carry all the user’s cards like Apple/Google wallet should the user want that, but I doubt banks would have much interest in that (at least if it’s privacy respecting and not skimming transaction history) because it’s not prying mindspace away like per-provider apps do.
zilti 3y ago
In Switzerland, the banks' own system, Twint, has been and still is a massive success.
newsclues 3y ago
Banks want another Interact.

Xeamek 3y ago

To be fair, samsung pay is only avaible in like 10(?) countries. But yeah, point still stands

wkat4242 3y ago
I use Samsung Pay in Spain. I like it because it's better integrated on my phone and more importantly I don't need a Google account for it. I don't even have one set up on my phone. Of course Samsung does see my data this way but they have less info to correlate with. Also I don't use many of their services. I do wish there was a truly open payment solution though that doesn't require me to trust a big tech party.
- lstamour 3y ago
  > I do wish there was a truly open payment solution though that doesn't require me to trust a big tech party. Cash? Everything else needs a relying party of some kind in order to facilitate the transaction. If it's a credit card or digital wallet, the transaction passes through the credit card or debit card networks, and your info is logged and, depending on laws, potentially re-sold. Don't get me wrong, I sometimes feel like Google shouldn't know my location either, but if my cell carrier already knows my location, I actually trust Google to not resell my location more than my cell carrier - it's worth more to Google if they're the only ones with that information and the same applies to Apple. Another way of putting it, rules and regulations, strictly enforced and updated, is probably the only way to prevent tracking and abuse by legitimate big actors.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    > If it's a credit card or digital wallet, the transaction passes through the credit card or debit card networks, and your info is logged and, depending on laws, potentially re-sold. The reliance on credit card networks is part of the problem. There's no way to avoid them. And they're all from the US. This causes privacy issues but also moral problems because they tend to block sexually oriented products and services. In Europe a lot of countries are way more progressive than the US. I was hoping bitcoin would become this system but obviously it's been completely hijacked by speculators and its original purpose of control of ones own money has been perverted. There really should be a digital alternative for cash though. It's really silly that we still have to drag around pieces of linen and metal. And no, I don't trust Google for anything at all. I don't want them making money off of me. I also block a lot of ads of course.
    - astrange 3y ago
      Debit cards don't all have to be processed through credit card networks, it's easier to do it that way. Websites could also take direct bank transfer payments if they felt like it, but it would hard internationally.
    - toast0 3y ago
      > The reliance on credit card networks is part of the problem. There's no way to avoid them. And they're all from the US. JCB is Japanese, not sure what countries it has issuing banks in; it no longer issues in the US, and US acceptance is through Discover. There's also a lot of country specific debit/atm networks (including several in the US), if you are ok with debit over credit.
- ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago
  You should read Samsung's privacy policy.
tadfisher 3y ago
Samsung isn't even interested in Samsung Pay. I work at an FI, and have submitted an application repeatedly to integrate the SDK. We have yet to receive a response.

simondotau 3y ago

It should be assumed that if the banks get an opportunity to implement their own NFC payment system on iPhone, they’ll switch off Apple Pay. Otherwise no customer would have any incentive to migrate over. And the incremental cost of Apple Pay is too little to be redirected towards some customer incentive program. (Of course that doesn’t preclude a bank from making an irrational decision.)

jpgvm 3y ago

Eh, maybe not in Australia. Remember Australia doesn't have like 5 million banks, we have essentially 4 big ones and they already are pretty cutting edge vs US/Canadian banks. i.e instant transfers are normalized, NFC is the norm, apps and Internet banking have been very good for about 10 years. If the NFC chips were opened up through regulation I have zero doubt Australian banks would just say "we support contactless with our first party app" and that would be the end of that until Apple asked for a more reasonable cut. When all your banks suck and Apple seems to be the only people with their shit together, sure but Australia doesn't live in that world.

xvaier 3y ago
Canada has essentially 6 big banks, instant transfers using Interac has been the most common way of transferring money for years (it launched in 2003) and payment using NFC has been the norm for a decade.
- jpgvm 3y ago
  Heh ok, sorry for assuming Canada would be as bad as the US.
  - tonyarkles 3y ago
    The mobile phone apps are probably just as bad, but e-transfers (Interac, EMT, whatever you want to call it) generally work pretty well. And they're still somewhat of a hassle compared to I guess Venmo or Cashapp or... I've never used those but they seem pretty slick in comparison to having to go into a banking app, set up an EMT Payee using email/phone number, set a password on the transaction, hope that they remember to cash the EMT before it expires, etc.
FridgeSeal 3y ago
> When all your banks suck and Apple seems to be the only people with their shit together, sure but Australia doesn't live in that world. ANZ was too busy charging dead people to bother implementing it. God only knows what westpac was up too, NAB had an implementation on Android, and having used it a bunch, it was _awful_ and I was glad when they gave up and just accepted the alternative. Combank did their own thing, and seemed the furthest along, but support seemed patchy and they ended up junking their solution anyways and going to Android/Apple pay anyways IIRC. These places can hardly manage to maintain their own apps, I have about zero confidence in them deciding to wander off into the wilderness and trying again. Not to mention, all the non-big-4, and all the smaller banks probably won’t bother with reimplementing NFC pay as they either don’t have the resources, or can’t rely on institutional-inertia to foist useless changes onto their customers.

m463 3y ago

What if an alternative is cheaper? customers end up paying in the end. edit: in the end. I guess the place I notice it is paying for gas - see the cash vs credit price always shown on the sign. It is pretty easy to add up when you're spending $100+ on gasoline. but this affects everything we buy, just hidden.

FridgeSeal 3y ago
I don’t get charged for using Apple Pay, I get charged for the processing fee for the card I used (which is an entirely separate discussion), and given the option between “just continue using Apple Pay” or “download several janky apps just because the bank wants its own wallet impl”, I’m going to stick with Apple Pay.
jdminhbg 3y ago
The Apple Pay take is 15 bps, which is not a difference customers care about enough to change behavior even slightly.
icehawk 3y ago
I don't pay anything extra for using Apple Pay, as a customer, how could it be cheaper?
- toast0 3y ago
  If Apple is getting 0.15% as stated in a sibling, it's coming from somewhere. Maybe it's added on top of the fees the merchant pays, and like other payment fees gets kind of mixed into the price of everything you buy. Maybe it comes out of the fees your bank gets on purchases, which will reduce their income and then they'll need to increase fees, reduce benefits for depositors, or reduce dividends to investors.
tonyarkles 3y ago
> customers end up paying in the end. Not in a transparent way, generally speaking. And at least in Canada you couldn't even (as a business) add a credit card surcharge to a purchase price. Now you can, so long as you're simultaneously complying with the legislation (https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/merchants/credit-fees-merchant.html https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/...) and your contract with your payment processor (e.g. https://www.visa.ca/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/canada/Support/Documents/surcharging-faq-businesses-en.pdf https://www.visa.ca/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/canada/Supp...). Apparently, too, merchants aren't actually charged for Apple Pay, it's the banks themselves that are. Merchants apparently pay the regular charge to their payment processor whether I use my Visa-through-Apple Pay or my Visa as a physical card. https://paymentdepot.com/blog/apple-pay-fees-for-merchants/ https://paymentdepot.com/blog/apple-pay-fees-for-merchants/ At any rate, Apple Pay is ridiculously convenient compared to anything my bank has ever come up with. The last time there was a Pay With Bank $X thing on a website that I tried, I ended up getting directed through some kind of Verified by Visa thing where they were asking for some kind of security code that I don't recall ever setting up. Or... I can double-tap the power button on my phone to verify a payment I'm making on my laptop. If the banks are unhappy about giving a cut to Apple, my recommendation to them would be: Suck Less.

troad 3y ago

To be part of Apple Pay, banks have to enter into an agreement with Apple. Though the details of this agreement are generally confidential, it's fairly well known that there is an Apple cut, and that that cut is rather high. (It's Apple!) The moment a bank has the option to extract itself from this arrangement, it will. Not just because there's absolutely no reason to give Apple a cut of the bank's own business if the bank doesn't need to, but also because the bad blood between Aus banks and Apple is very real at this point. > Even if Apple opens up NFC payment, nobody will use them and prefer 1st party support like Apple Pay or Google Pay. And since that costs the bank money, it won't be an option. Also, I think the bank would think of itself as a first party in a payment made using their card, and Apple as a parasitic third party. I'm not saying people won't grumble, but there is no way - unless Apple actually makes Apple Pay somewhat attractive to banks - that the banks will continue to support it if they don't absolutely have to. (I'm not siding with the banks on this, I'm just trying to lay out their logic.)

bigyikes 3y ago
Apple should buy a bank and compete on their own turf
- gessha 3y ago
  They probably won’t do that in the current antitrust climate. I hope the DOJ and the EU continue probing the big companies because I’m sick and tired of my non-ecosystem device choices not working well together.
- astrange 3y ago
  Owning a bank is an extreme regulatory headache. You always want someone else to be the bank. Or even better multiple someone elses - in the US, small banks are allowed to do things large ones aren't, so you sometimes gather up a bunch of them and become a single proxy for them.
- rswail 3y ago
  Why would they want to be involved in a highly competitive and low margin business like consumer credit?

jwells89 3y ago

Yeah, I have no interest in keeping 15 digital wallet apps, even if they offer incentives, for the same reason I don’t carry a physical wallet for each physical card. Now I could see an argument for wallet apps being generic so e.g. the apps for Chase, BofA, SoFi, etc could carry all the user’s cards like Apple/Google wallet should the user want that, but I doubt banks would have much interest in that (at least if it’s privacy respecting and not skimming transaction history) because it’s not prying mindspace away like per-provider apps do.

zilti 3y ago

In Switzerland, the banks' own system, Twint, has been and still is a massive success.

newsclues 3y ago

Banks want another Interact.