It's not another fee. The CC fees will remain the same. But the CC issuers (I.e. Banks) will kick back a portion of their current fees to Apple because their liability will be less due to less fraud. I'm thinking the banks will be happy to ensure that all transactions going through ApplePay will be fraud proof. They will save much more than they are returning to Apple.
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 Pay Details: Apple Gets 0.15% Cut of Purchases, Higher Rates for Bluetooth Payments
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not another fee. The CC fees will remain the same. But the CC issuers (I.e. Banks) will kick back a portion of their current fees to Apple because their liability will be less due to less fraud. I'm thinking the banks will be happy to ensure that all transactions going through ApplePay will be fraud proof. They will save much more than they are returning to Apple.
I suspect the banks are going to see a bigger earnings differential from the reduction in fraud than Apple will see with their transaction cut. You might want to take another sniff.
What? This doesn't add anything to the price you pay. This will come out if the card processors end.
I don't see anything in the article that suggests the payment networks won't be passing the charge along to the merchant. Do you have another article that better explains this?
Do you think
Pay for eCommerce is coming down the line, and used as possible leverage in the deal? Since there are a lot of overlaps between eCommerce and mobile commerce, I see a future that has shifted to smartphones and tablets eventually adopting Pay for online shopping. It would definitely quell the fraud from CNP transactions.From the article.....
"According to a new report from The Financial Times, Apple stands to make quite a bit of money from its payments service. Banks and payment networks will be forking over 0.15 percent of each purchase to Apple, which equates to 15 cents out of a $100 purchase.
Quote:
They are also paying hard cash for the privilege of being involved: 15 cents of a $100 purchase will go to the iPhone maker, according to two people familiar with the terms of the agreement, which are not public. That is an unprecedented deal, giving Apple a share of the payments' economics that rivals such as Google do not get for their services"
Banks and payment networks - now whether the CC issuers up their current cut we don't know. But if they do, it won't be 'another credit card fee'. I highly doubt it will be passed on either. The issuers agreed to give Apple a cut because it lessens their fraud expenses. Most likely it will save them more in fraud chagrin-backs than the Apple cut. And that's not even including the time and personal needed to handle fraud claims.
Entirely possible but wouldn't
Pay be DOA? No merchant is going to adopt a technology that they don't need that increases their processing fees. Pay would never get off the ground and it would have been a wasted effort in the end. My opinion at least.
Yeah, I'm a confused person today. Originally I had $3 on a $2000 purchase, changed it to 3 cents because I saw .0015% in the post I had quoted, and just changed to back to the original $3.... Maybe this is a sign I need sleep.
Do you think
True, that could be a factor. Internet payments are a big source of fraud (the biggest by far once chip cards are adopted in stores), and if Apple can get that down, then they'd deserve a cut of those online transactions for making them more profitable for the banks.
It actually doesn't. They very quietly went to the Justice Department and were flatly told no chance.
----------
That is exactly correct. It is the main reason they bought Beats and brought in their talent.
----------
Yes they pale in comparison, but keep it in context. If iPhone was its own corporation it would be the 9th largest corporation in the world all by itself.
If this is true it surprises me as Tim Cook spoke about how other payment systems failed due to self interest overriding the customer experience. But I guess good for me as an Apple stock holder.
He did say that at the beginning of the
Pay presentation. It's good the hear that Apple has no self interest in this.First off I am in Australia, not the US. NFC chips in credit card are very common here.
Q: While Apple Pay the shop doesn't see you details, Apple creates a one time use card number for each transaction?
What does the shop see? A VISA card ApplePay 123456?
On your credit card statement do you see ApplePay 0012, ApplePay 0013 etc or do you see where you spent your money?
Q: While Apple Pay the shop doesn't see you details, Apple creates a one time use card number for each transaction?
What does the shop see? A VISA card ApplePay 123456?
On your credit card statement do you see ApplePay 0012, ApplePay 0013 etc or do you see where you spent your money?
On Tuesday's keynote, Tim said the US makes $12 Billion worth of transactions per day, right?
So, if reports are correct Apple will be making $18 Million a day? We're looking at Pay turning over almost four and a half billion dollars per year?!
And this is US only?! Wow.
So, if reports are correct Apple will be making $18 Million a day? We're looking at Pay turning over almost four and a half billion dollars per year?!
And this is US only?! Wow.
That's actually a really good question. I'm also curious about how returns will be handled since there will be no record on Apple's side of any transaction.
One of the largest sources of Card Not Present fraud comes from the numbers being written down, photographed, or skimmed even if the cards have the secure chips.
These are just secure tokens. They have been used my ECommerce web sites for years so the merchant cannot see your card number. Your card issuer will still have the details of the transaction, just not Apple.
I was just about to make an edit, I suppose I should have said [potentially] too. I was trying to point out the fact of how big the number is, in just one territory.
With NFC really on the up in Europe, and it being in Japan for the best of 10 years now; this is going to be a big revenue stream for Apple.
Yep, things like this add up quite fast. For some kind of businesses I think Apple may even be willing to sponsor roll out of the needed tech simply because they will earn back that cost in a short time.
The records are handled by the card issuing bank as they are now. The only difference is neither the merchant, cashier or payment processor will store, receive or transmit your card number. Only the issuing bank has the ability to map the token to your card. So if bad guys get in the middle and steal the token there's nothing for them to use ( it's one time use). Nothing else will change in how you get billed or refunds etc.
Apple has no need to have any record of anything.
I've had my fair share of horrible and nightmarish experiences with Best Buy, that's why I say "good riddance" because even if they did support it, I wouldn't need to since I'd never shop there unless I was desperate for something that only they sold.
Yeah, I don't really care if I spend more money with them, in my experiences, even if they give me bad news tab out a repair or purchase they've been very cool and honest about it. Best buy was just a total cluster ******* of incompentent employees that have tried selling me things that I don't need. That's just my experience though.
So you guys in America are only just getting chip and pin cards (or EMV cards as I'm seeing it called a lot) so have therefore been having to sign every time you use your card in store and yet you still get NFC payments with
Blame the credit card companies. They found it cheaper to cover fraud charges than pay to issue a gazillion new cards with chip and pin. And also try to get the merchants on board.
So they waited until it became intolerable due to data breaches.