I'm inclined to agree...
Report: Apple and Goldman Sachs are breaking up over money-losing Apple Card — Ars Technica
Goldman Sachs has lost billions of dollars on its consumer-focused businesses.apple.news
So, a little confused. Was reading this article and it seems the issue was people not paying on their bills. Ah, how does that work - pretty sure that would kill your credit, among other things.
For me, I think the bigger issue is, to many people probably paid their bills in full each month and didn’t have any interest build up… at least that’s what I did. Apple Card made it so much easier to pay my bill.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ending Apple Card Partnership With Goldman Sachs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What will happen to Apple Cash balances?"Job opening hints at Brazilian fintech replacing Goldman Sachs as Apple Card issuer"
A fintech might replace Goldman Sachs as Apple Card issuer
A recent report from The Wall Street Journal revealed that Apple and Goldman Sachs are ending the partnership they made...9to5mac.com
It’s not an “either/or” but a “both/and.” But this is an Apple forum and this thread is about the Apple Card, which is an Apple product first. So, Apple’s approach is the most relevant to the discussion.
I’m a “transactor” in industry parlance (I pay in full every month and just use cards for the convenience and the rewards). Goldman made nothing off me the last 4 years. That’s on them for negotiating a bad deal.
I have accounts at Synchrony at various companies because of their rewards. B&H offers sales tax rebates (10.25% for me!) and I got an interest free loan when I replaced the wood flooring in my condo. I’m fine if they take over the card.
Oh, sushi!!1!
urhm, where dost one getteth dbl-digit returns?
13-month CD rates are -13%+ where they were two decades-ago . . . .
They may have been caught in a worst of both worlds. Apple customers may be skewed toward good credits who always pay in full (giving away the interchange was a bad idea) and wannabes who spend more than they can afford. So they got nothing from us transactors who pay off every month but still got stung by those who had no intention of paying off.
Nope! And this even works with paid Google Workspace accounts lmfao. Didn't have to change my Apple Card address or even Google address. IIRC the billing info is YouTube-specific and still doesn't mess up your language settings or anything like that.
I don't get why this was an issue with this card though. Were the requirements just way more lax than the typical card?
Why?
The issue here is that Apple was making the purchase better for their customers, by shielding their customers from the usual aggressive credit-card company arrangements.
And that is why this discussion has turned to the question of which bank will step up to take GS's place.
It may be that no bank is willing to do so.
MC and Visa are just networking companies, that charge a little bit to pay for the convenience of connecting a card to a bank in near real-time.
Apple clearly wanted its customers to have that option.
It might turn out that the world of finance just can't deal with Apple's demands.
In that case, perhaps Apple sets up its own financial company, not a bank, to offer on-site loans (for web and physical Apple Stores) like the auto companies did way back early in the 20th century.
The customer won't have the convenience of having a card with an Apple logo and a MC-enabled card, but will still be able to have quick-turnaround loans available from the store.
There was no transition for the Barclays accounts. When their agreement with Apple expired, they just reissued the cards as a generic Barclaycard. Anyone who wanted the new Apple Card had to apply for it as a new account.
Debt doesn't just get "dissolved". You currently owe the money to Goldman and will continue to do so until otherwise instructed.
Goldman's agreement with Apple likely specifies what happens, but there are a few possible scenarios:
- Goldman keeps the accounts open and transitions them to a non-Apple branded product. This is what Barclaycard did when their agreement with Apple ended.
- Goldman could close all of the their Apple Card accounts. When a credit card account is closed, no new charges are permitted, but the cardholder continues to make payments per the cardholder agreement until the balance is paid off. In conjunction with this, they could sell the debt to a third-party servicer.
- Goldman could sell the accounts to whoever the future Apple Card issuer is, or to a third party issuer unrelated to any deal with Apple. Cardholders would continue to make payments per the cardholder agreement.
- Goldman could sell the accounts to Apple itself, who would collect any balance remaining due. Apple currently owns and services the Apple Pay Later accounts through its Apple Financing LLC subsidiary, so that isn't entirely out of the question. If this happens, it's likely because Apple brings the whole Apple Card operation in-house.
‘I will bet anything that if Amex takes the Apple Card over, it will not be with the same perks it has now.
Do not be an idiot and do not follow this advice. These are not school loans!
Thank you for the detailed response. That clarifies things for me.
This will be a dark time... I hate subscriptions with a passion, I really do.... It irks me that most apps converted to a subscription based model.... I am the type of person who likes to pay everything off up front and detest having monthly payments on anything.
What fees are you talking about? Consumers don't pay any fees that go to Apple as far as I can tell.
Or are you just trying to stick up for poor, little Goldman Sachs and how Apple was so unfair to them?
I think the "GS was losing money" narrative is overblown. They were losing money on their whole consumer business because it takes a lot of money to start a consumer banking business. They're getting out of consumer banking altogether, so they simply don't have the patience for the Apple Card to start showing a profit.
It still pays more than my money sitting in Apple Cash. Since that’s all I use it for, it’s not worth hassling with moving that money out.
In my experience, pretty much everywhere that accepts touchless payments works with Apple Pay.
From the article:
"The bank does not get a cut of the fee that merchants pay to Apple to accept the Apple Card, nor is it able to collect annual fees, late fees, or foreign transaction fees."
I'm not sticking up for anybody here, I am not a GS employee, I do not own GS stock and quite frankly don't care about them... I am simply stating facts. Why are you sticking up for poor little Apple?
I agree. They probably took Apple's aggressive terms because it was a huge jumpstart to their consumer business. Without Apple, what would they have offered? ANOTHER rewards card? Try to compete with AMEX on customer service? Being the bank behind Apple Card was a large, instant customer base for them.