Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Good. I mean, one of the things this "cartel" wants to do is charge people to use Apple Pay. (I imagine their own app would be free to use if Apple was forced to allow access to the NFC chip.)

From a consumer standpoint (which is usually totally ignored in situations like this), this is a whole bunch of nothing. Apple Pay isn't all that. It's hard to keep track of places that accept it. But every store accepts credit cards.

Found the American. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Douglas B
I live in Melbourne, I'm a nerd, and there's absolutely no way that I would go through the hassle and risk of changing banks simply for Apple Pay. I'm with NAB and I really don't have any complaints.

I am strongly against electronic payment systems though, I really like to use cash. Cash == Freedom. If I use Apple Pay, that brings us one step closer to the elimination of cash and an all electronic monetary system, which means no more freedom. Brothels charge extra if you pay by card.

I also never want to worry about my cash/card running of out battery. I just don't understand the appeal of Apple Pay.

I'm entirely with you. I'm with ANZ and wont use Apple Pay for the same reasons. No plans to easily acquiesce to a future cashless monetary system, even though I'm sure it cant be stopped.
 
Using a fingerprint on your phone to secure a piddling $100 or so is overkill. The existing contactless system that is very commonly used now is fine.

I'm not sure you understand the purpose of the high security on even a small transaction. It has nothing to do with that specific transaction. It's so when that transaction occurs, someone cannot steal or hack the card number, leaving the consumer with a compromised checking account if using a debit card, or the bank/retailer out potentially thousands of dollars in credit card fraud. A 'piddling' unsecure $5 transaction could lead to the loss of thousands of dollars for the consumer, bank and/or retailer.
 
No knowing anything about Australian banks, or the economy, I can't say that I blame those banks for not wanting to forgo millions of dollars.
So do you think no bank or credit card should support Pay because Apple gets a tiny fee? Or Apple should offer Pay without collecting any fee?
 
  • Like
Reactions: upnorth85
Its a duplication of effort. Apple has to maintain the NFC anyway. Why wouldn't the banks use what is already there instead of trying to build their own with the same tool. Secondly, what are the security implications of multiple party access to the NFC Chip in this case.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hamado
Thanks for the info. If you didn't a card with that number how did they do the refund?
Could they refund to that card number then Apple somehow sends the money to your card. I have wondered how returns would work with Apple Pay.

You actually have a "card number" on your device (the Device Account Number) - this is why on receipts that show the last 4 digits of the card, the number will be different on each Apple Pay device versus your physical card. This number doesn't change unless you remove and re-add your card from your device.

Typically when I have had to do refunds, the merchant either just refunds it "back to the card" without any intervention from me, but if they would typically swipe/tap the card to issue the refund, I just put my phone on the terminal and let it read the Apple Pay card like when I'm paying. The only time I don't know how this would work is if you'd delete and re-add your Apple Pay card, creating a new Device Account Number, but that would probably be no different than if your issuer sent you a new card with a different number.
 
So do you think no bank or credit card should support Pay because Apple gets a tiny fee? Or Apple should offer Pay without collecting any fee?
No, but I can understand why any business being reluctant to lose (or reduce) a revenue stream.
 
How is "greedy"?

Apple offer a bullet-proof service deeply rooted in the hardware they sell, can Aussie banks claim a similar degree of security and ease of use?
I dunno, CBA let me buy a tiny credit card sticker for the back of my phone that literally no pin-pad has ever picked up.
 
Apple had nothing to do with developing NFC. The banks want access to the NFC chip in the phone nothing to do with Apple pay and any security features associated with it. They have full access to the NFC chip in Android phones.

He's not talking about NFC. He is talking about the payment technology that Apple developed that is vastly superior to NFC. NFC is just the technology that's used for transmitting the tokenized payment data. Commbank want access to the NFC so they can use Mastercards version of tokenized payment.

Also the Android transaction process is crap with Commbank. You need to open the app with a pin, pay and put your card pin in again for the transaction. No fingerprint reader, just PIN. Cumbersome and stupid.

Anyway read this for a better understanding http://www.kirklennon.com/a/applepay.html
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: upnorth85
The banks are short sided. Any fee they pay is minimal compared to how much they will make by promoting Apple users to use their credit card via Apple Pay. They get a fee from the retailers anyway so what's the big brouhaha?
Do we know that this is true? Do we know how many people currently are exclusively willing to use Apple Pay?

I don't have the answer to those questions, but I do know that I still almost never see anyone laying with their phones. I've read of some die hard son the forums refusing to shop at stores that don't accept Apple Pay, but I suspect it's an on issue for the vast majority of shoppers.
 
Ahh the old "Apple should just give me free stuff" and "who cares if Apple would get blamed for an app compromising security" stance. No. Commbank is perfectly able to use the same secure system with no fuss and weird third party nonsense that the rest of the world uses. It's up to them, and if you lose out, then that's your choice to bank there.

Oh the old "it's fine for apple to be greedy but not for others to be" stance.
Lol no one is asking Apple to provide anything free, as a consumer who has purchased an iPhone (this I own the NFC chip) I am asking for apple to allow 3rd parties to access it so I can use municipal very good banking app to pay for stuff.
[doublepost=1471616674][/doublepost]
Surely Apple's 30% markup on in app purchases could apply here? Apple could open up NFC and stipulate a 5% fee for every transaction outside of ApplePay as a condition of its use. Win-win for Apple.
Why should they charge? Just allow third parties to use the NFC chip, works fine for my android friends.
[doublepost=1471616831][/doublepost]
They would not be were they are now if they weren't what you call "greedy"

That's irrelevant, because as a consumer I loose out due to the combined greed of the stupid banks and apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hamado and kdarling
So do you think no bank or credit card should support Pay because Apple gets a tiny fee?


see that's the thing it's only a small thing when it comes to other company's profit margins BUT not when it's additive to Apple's margins then it's what's the big deal ... NOPE ... attacks against Apple are not allowed.

In countries that have had contactless pay for years and years, CC fraud is a fraction of a percent, therefore Apple Pay doesn't bring much more than snob appeal by the cult of Apple.

In Canada CC fees charged to merchants are capped so that's a ding to the bank's fees; and if I read correctly Australian banks have the ability to add some fees to the fees already charged merchants and / or consumers, so that's a hit to their respective costs.

Apple ain't saints or saviours, they're in it to make money . period.
 
Last edited:
Both sides clearly looking after their own back, but only one can say they're also doing so for their customers' benefit too.
 
He's not talking about NFC. He is talking about the payment technology that Apple developed that is vastly superior to NFC. NFC is just the technology that's used for transmitting the token payment data.

What technology are you talking about?

Apple didn't develop the EMV tokenization, NFC payments, terminals or backend systems. The credit card companies and banks did.

For contactless payments, Apple simply did a little UI app that asks for a passcode or fingerprint. The same action that any other wallet app could do if it had access to NFC.

Apple may one day open NFC further. It took a year before they allowed TouchID to work for apps.

However, when you currently hold your iPhone to an active payment terminal, the Apple Wallet app opens. Are these banks expecting that their app should open with priority over Apple Wallet? Dreamers.

Yet that's exactly how NFC is supposed to work... open the app registered for that NFC transaction (whether it's a payment or bus ticket or whatever).

If Apple gave access and the banks developed their apps, when something goes wrong do the banks blame Apple and Apple blame the banks? This is why end-to-end is better, Apple takes responsibility.

Apple does not take responsibility if the transaction is stolen. The merchant, credit card companies and banks do.

That's because Apple did not write nor does it own the transaction code, nor any of the backend systems used during a contactless transaction.

The actual NFC payment itself is all done by the Java applets in the Secure Element, which are EMV compliant applets written by the credit card companies.

If Apple wants to upgrade their software do they have to ask these banks if it's ok? Like if all these banks have their apps ready to upgrade?

That's no different than the situation now:

Of course Apple doesn't have to do that now so why would they put themselves in that situation?

Remember when Discover came onboard after a year? It required an iOS update to install the Discover applet in the Secure Element. That's because Apple wanted to control access.

Maybe these banks think they set up all these eftpos terminals and shouldn't be paying Apple for transactions through them? Well maybe. (But actually the retailer pays for the terminals.)

Exactly. The banks see no reason to pay Apple even a fee for doing nothing during a transaction, much less a percentage.

OTOH, acquirers, networks and banks actually do something to earn their percentage.

But next month all this changes. Because next month ApplePay comes to web for Mac and iOS and then Apple has many more million 'terminals' than the banks.

Now, web based is a different animal. If Apple's servers are involved, then yes they then deserve at least a flat fee.

And yet even then, banks have their own web based authentication methods now, so again they would see no reason to be forced to pay Apple.

Good. I mean, one of the things this "cartel" wants to do is charge people to use Apple Pay. (I imagine their own app would be free to use if Apple was forced to allow access to the NFC chip.)

True, they want the option to pass on the extra cost of paying Apple if one of their customers wishes to use Apple Pay. Then consumers would easily see why banks don't love it.

The choice is, do you let your local bank use the transaction fee so it can do things like give you awards? Or do you give Apple the money to take out of country and stash away? Over time, Apple Pay would siphon millions out of Australia.
 
I hate the Australian banks, but its hilarious, Apple is just as greedy as the banks are in this case.

True, but Apple is not demanding access to the proprietary products that Australian banks have created.
 
What technology are you talking about?

Apple didn't develop the EMV tokenization, NFC payments, terminals or backend systems. The credit card companies and banks did.

For contactless payments, Apple simply did a little UI app that asks for a passcode or fingerprint. The same action that any other wallet app could do if it had access to NFC.

Banks should develop their own phone and release an App Store to distribute their app.



Apple does not take responsibility if the transaction is stolen. The merchant, credit card companies and banks do.

That's not the business model behind Apple Pay. The business model is Apple offering banks reduced risk for a fee. What Apple is trying to pitch is that it'll save them more money in the end.
 
What Apple is trying to pitch is that it'll save them more money in the end.


Banks still need to issue the physical cards and fraud using contactless pay credit cards is negligible ... so, again, what's in it for the banks except having to pay Apple a fee?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hamado
Banks still need to issue the physical cards and fraud using contactless pay credit cards is negligible ... so, again, what's in it for the banks except having to pay Apple a fee?

People leaving for other banks using Apple Pay. Convenience costs money.
 
I really doubt people are going to spend more just because they have Apple pay.

I've caught myself buying things before using Apple Pay when I didn't intend to buy anything and therefore didn't carry my wallet.

I think carrying around the convenience of Apple Pay anywhere you go can lead to spending more. At least it removes a "barrier" to spending.

Would be interesting to see some research into this!
 
People leaving for other banks using Apple Pay. Convenience costs money.


Hard to quantify the "leaving for other banks" particularly when there is pretty low penetration of iPhone models able to use Apple Pay.

From the Globe and Mail newspaper

"Apple Pay usage totalled $10.9-billion last year, the vast majority of that in the United States. That is less than the annual volume of transactions in Kenya, a mobile payments pioneer, according to research firm Timetric."

"There are 28.5 million adults with Interac debit cards issued by Canada’s banks, and about 70 million credit cards. But only about 38 per cent of Canadian smartphone users have iPhones, and among them only some are Apple Pay ready (guessing from the global trends, a significant number are likely too old)."
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.