CVS Stores Reportedly Disabling NFC to Shut Down Apple Pay and Google Wallet

[Naimfan]

this is a non issue.

What, pray tell, is not an issue?

It seems incontrovertible that Apple Pay is more secure and more private than CurrenC. Given a choice, I, and many others, will take the more secure and more private option.

 

[rdlink]

Can we use Google Wallet over NFC in the iPhone? No, Apple is not likely to allow a competing NFC wallet.

Can we use PayPal in the Apple Pay wallet? No, Apple changed their mind, reportedly out of spite over PayPal doing a Samsung fingerprint sensor app.

By blocking other payment methods themselves, especially while taking a percentage of each Apple Pay transaction, Apple has removed any chance of having some kind of moral high ground about payment choices or "non core" business.

Apple is pushing Apple Pay for reasons similar to why the merchants are pushing their own payment system. They see us as a resource for their own financial gain.

--

Cold business logic aside, I agree that it's not nice to take away something some people already had. I think MCX will fail, and we'll end up back with NFC, just unfortunately delayed.

Apple Pay will do much better in countries where a lot more people are used to contactless payments already. So right now I'm more interested in finding out if Apple Pay works at things like Oyster card readers, where payment speed can really count (versus a pharmacy counter, where it's not that big a deal, especially compared to now).

You're generally a reasonable guy, (and infuriatingly rational, even when I don't agree with you) but I think you missed the mark a little here.

Apple Pay is part of Apple's core business. They are completely honest about a couple of things:

First, that they want to make money doing this.
Second, that they approached this from a user experience, privacy, and security standpoint first.

Rite-Aid and CVS sell pharmaceuticals, hygenic products, etc. They do not portend to sell financial services. Their payment processes and hardware are supposedly overhead in their business, and most reasonable minds would agree that they try to hold themselves up as being about convenience and usability for their customers in this regard(Thus, ostensibly their willingness to put NFC in their stores).

Now they are joined into a consortium whose main objective, by all apparent accounts is to cut the credit card industry out of a sizable number, but not all (more on that below) transactions, and allow them to continue to expand data gathering operations on their customers.

And what is the benefit to the customer for this new technology? Let's see:

Less convenience than using their credit card.
Less privacy than using their credit card.
The inability to use the system with their credit card, as each transaction requires an ACH deduction from a funded account.

These businesses apparently had no problem with spending the money to put this technology in their stores when their only potential rival was Google Wallet, a solution that has been hamstrung by poor implementation, and rivals who control too much of the Google ecosystem (i.e., the phone carriers).

But, now that Apple Pay is here they suddenly don't want NFC payments processed in their stores.

A rational person could only assume that their reasoning behind this is to deny their customers the choice of payment method, so that CurrentC could be forced down their throats.

Is any of this illegal? Probably not. Is it on the same "moral high ground" as Apple? Not even close.

The equivalent would be going into an Apple Store and being told that you can't buy a new Mac unless you use Apple Pay. Something that Apple would never do.

Further, with the advent of Apple Pay it would not surprise me if you can use Google Wallet to buy something at the Apple Store

 

[caesarp]

You need to stop spamming the board with the same post over and over. It's not only annoying, but against policy.

Why? The guy had it wrong and I corrected him. who are you a mod?

 

[rdlink]

ApplePay is not part of Apple's core business at this point in time. Apple uses soldered memory on most of it's products, no SD cards on iOS devices forcing you to buy additional storage from Apple, no USB on iPad so you can't use a USB drive, etc, you must use iTunes with iOS devices, ApplePay only works with Apple devices, Apple never supported BluRay, Thunderbolt is pretty much a propriety connection just like FireWire. These are a few off the top of my head.

I don't know if I'd call it stifling competition, maybe supporting one's best interests would be more accurate. Obviously CVS has a reason to abandon ApplePay for their own most likely selfish reasons, just like Apple locks most things down to make one a captive customer.

Apple Pay became part of Apple's core business the minute it went public. Is it their most profitable business? No. But it is a service that they market to their consumers, so it is part of their core business.

Sorry, none of those examples is stifling competition. All of the product decisions you claim to be selfish can be reasonably argued to be beneficial to the customer, and the products in question are marketed with full disclosure. The notion that Apple's only reason for "locking things down" is to keep customers captive is an absurd and obsolete myth. I don't have one file, or piece of media that I couldn't easily take to another ecosystem. And while you state that Apple Pay only works with Apple devices, the fact is that Google Wallet will work anywhere that Apple Pay works.

And again, this is not a matter of CVS and Rite-Aid deciding not to allow Apple Pay. This is about them withdrawing support for something they previously offered their customers, presumably out of convenience, only to squelch competition. They are making a public proclamation that they do not want certain of their customers' lives to be as convenient, secure or private as they were 4 days ago. Frankly, it's a pretty damn aggressive and obnoxious statement to their customers. And this customer's reaction is just as obnoxious: I won't give you my business.

 

[Tubamajuba]

Where was this concern about MCX two weeks ago? It was only when they dared defy Apple that caused people to lose their minds.

Pardon me... You're seriously implying that because people simply weren't aware of MCX and it's intentions, that they should be called out for learning about it when they shut down Apple Pay? As if everyone is expected to keep tabs on everything? It's human nature to become more aware of the things that directly affect you. I don't know why you care anyways, do you feel that strongly about demonizing anybody who likes Apple?

There are many, many more NFC-equipped Android smartphones that are affected than iPhones, but I'm not seeing anywhere near the same vitriol from Android owners. More than a few here have or are advocating disrupting checkout lines in order to "make a statement". That's from iPhone users, I'm not seeing it from Android users.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/

I suppose Android fans are suddenly mindless Apple sheep now, right? Or maybe, just maybe, there's something to this whole MCX, CurrentC thing.

 

[CFreymarc]

This does not surprise me at all. After the CVS took over the west coast Longs Drugs chain, the place got really cheap.

First, they got rid of almost all the existing stock only to replace it with much cheaper brands but kept the same price for this affluent neighborhood. Then they cut the shifts on the cash register lines to the point there was always a line to wait even in the middle of a weekday afternoon. Then they started to have manufacture reps work the aisles of the store promoting products (there is good money for a retailer to allow that in their stores) a year into the buy-out.

For me the final straw was them not taking some pre-paid credit cards due to "fraud" issues. Them to quickly axe Apple Pay is no surprise. Talked with the local CVS manager here about this. She said that several iPhone 6 users just left the store leaving their bags of goods at the counter after Apple Pay was stopped. A Walgren's was just two blocks away and many of them went there.

IMO, this CurrentC is a train-wreck in the making. Using QR codes for purchases is really prone to fraud. I can easily see rogue app generate false QR codes for scanning with an underground of coupon codes passed around. With NFC, yes, you can spoof it but the technical effort is a lot more than writing an app. You'll need some damn good RF and firmware experience to spoof it.

 

[rdlink]

As a pharmacist, I really wish doctors would not tell patients that their prescription will be ready when they get to the pharmacy. We are busy and are waiting on lots of people, we might not have even had a chance to look at that prescription before they have walked in.

How would you like it if I told them they could go to your office and walk right in and talk to you, no wait?

I know. Really. I mean have most people never had a prescription filled in their lives? I never show up at the pharmacy until I get my email from Walgreen's. Not CVS or Rite-Aid, btw...

 

[VARTV]

It hasn't run its course until the thread reaches atleast 10,000 posts...

Here's one to get to 10K...

 

[samcraig]

You're generally a reasonable guy, (and infuriatingly rational, even when I don't agree with you) but I think you missed the mark a little here.

Apple Pay is part of Apple's core business. They are completely honest about a couple of things:

First, that they want to make money doing this.
Second, that they approached this from a user experience, privacy, and security standpoint first.

Rite-Aid and CVS sell pharmaceuticals, hygenic products, etc. They do not portend to sell financial services. Their payment processes and hardware are supposedly overhead in their business, and most reasonable minds would agree that they try to hold themselves up as being about convenience and usability for their customers in this regard(Thus, ostensibly their willingness to put NFC in their stores).

Now they are joined into a consortium whose main objective, by all apparent accounts is to cut the credit card industry out of a sizable number, but not all (more on that below) transactions, and allow them to continue to expand data gathering operations on their customers.

And what is the benefit to the customer for this new technology? Let's see:

Less convenience than using their credit card.
Less privacy than using their credit card.
The inability to use the system with their credit card, as each transaction requires an ACH deduction from a funded account.

These businesses apparently had no problem with spending the money to put this technology in their stores when their only potential rival was Google Wallet, a solution that has been hamstrung by poor implementation, and rivals who control too much of the Google ecosystem (i.e., the phone carriers).

But, now that Apple Pay is here they suddenly don't want NFC payments processed in their stores.

A rational person could only assume that their reasoning behind this is to deny their customers the choice of payment method, so that CurrentC could be forced down their throats.

Is any of this illegal? Probably not. Is it on the same "moral high ground" as Apple? Not even close.

The equivalent would be going into an Apple Store and being told that you can't buy a new Mac unless you use Apple Pay. Something that Apple would never do.

Further, with the advent of Apple Pay it would not surprise me if you can use Google Wallet to buy something at the Apple Store

Could also be timing. CurrenC is getting closer to their launch. Google Wallet has been out for some time. It IS possible that even without Apple Pay, Google Wallet/NFC payments would have been disabled. It was just expedited by the release of Apple Pay

Why? The guy had it wrong and I corrected him. who are you a mod?

You have posted very similarly in this thread and others with the same exact information. You know - you can link to a previous post without posting the same crap every few pages.

 

[2020DC]

Reply from best Buy

Here is a reply i got to an email i sent Best Buy about Apple Pay:

Thank you for contacting Best Buy.

I understand that you would like to use Apple Pay as your mode of payment. Let me take note of this concern.

Best Buy explores all options when it comes to emerging technologies and offerings, keeping the needs and best interests of our Customers, our Company, and our Shareholders front of mind.

As much as we want to make payments easier for you, Apple Pay and all other NFC payments are not accepted at Best buy for this time. We understand that the mobile payment space is rapidly evolving and exciting market space. We will continue to evaluate and consider Apple Pay, as well as other platforms, as an option. We do apologize for this inconvenience.

Thank you for reaching out to us taking the time to share your perspective. We always appreciate hearing from our customers about the things that are important to them.

We appreciate your business. For any other concerns, you may visit our Help Center at www.bestbuy.com.

Sincerely,
Kitty
Best Buy Customer Care
Reference ID: 146548292

 

[AppleScruff1]

Apple Pay became part of Apple's core business the minute it went public. Is it their most profitable business? No. But it is a service that they market to their consumers, so it is part of their core business.

Sorry, none of those examples is stifling competition. All of the product decisions you claim to be selfish can be reasonably argued to be beneficial to the customer, and the products in question are marketed with full disclosure. The notion that Apple's only reason for "locking things down" is to keep customers captive is an absurd and obsolete myth. I don't have one file, or piece of media that I couldn't easily take to another ecosystem. And while you state that Apple Pay only works with Apple devices, the fact is that Google Wallet will work anywhere that Apple Pay works.

And again, this is not a matter of CVS and Rite-Aid deciding not to allow Apple Pay. This is about them withdrawing support for something they previously offered their customers, presumably out of convenience, only to squelch competition. They are making a public proclamation that they do not want certain of their customers' lives to be as convenient, secure or private as they were 4 days ago. Frankly, it's a pretty damn aggressive and obnoxious statement to their customers. And this customer's reaction is just as obnoxious: I won't give you my business.

I respectfully disagree. Your response sounds like if Apple does it it's ok, yet you criticize anyone else for doing something similar. And that has been the whole point of why I have posted what I have in this thread. Apple does what they do to squelch competition and line their own pockets. I suspect CVS and Rite-Aid are doing it for the same reasons.

 

[SactoGuy18]

For me the final straw was them not taking some pre-paid credit cards due to "fraud" issues. Them to quickly axe Apple Pay is no surprise. Talked with the local CVS manager here about this. She said that several iPhone 6 users just left the store leaving their bags of goods at the counter after Apple Pay was stopped. A Walgren's was just two blocks away and many of them went there.

In short, both CVS and Rite-Aid just created a gigantic PR disaster that could end up costing both companies a lot of good will and eventually business, especially in coastal parts of the USA with their much more tech-savvy customer base. I would not be surprised that both CVS and Rite-Aid are quietly exploring how to buy out their stake in MCX to end this very issue.

 

[rdlink]

I respectfully disagree. Your response sounds like if Apple does it it's ok, yet you criticize anyone else for doing something similar. And that has been the whole point of why I have posted what I have in this thread. Apple does what they do to squelch competition and line their own pockets. I suspect CVS and Rite-Aid are doing it for the same reasons.

I'm not sure how to respond to that. Sigh...

 

[iososx]

What, pray tell, is not an issue?

Like anything else this can be argued several ways. I am neither for or against Apple Pay.

I have comprehensive understanding of the various elements in play, the pros and cons, as well as the difference between the truth vs what we, the public, are being told by either side. The amount of revenue involved is a huge incentive, Apple's been honest when acknowledging they're in it for the money.

In addition their expertise at crafting a story that will appeal and draw in the Apple faithful, causing them to believe that only Apple has their best interests in mind, is a huge advantage. Then factor in the reality that the faithful never question what Apple claims, puts them in a very good position. To confirm this fact one only has to notice the two thousand posts the Apple faithful have made in a very short time.

Yet it's only a method of payment, not curing cancer. Big picture thinking shrinks this down to a non issue unless one is as emotionally invested as this thread reveals.

 

[laurim]

I'm not sure how to respond to that. Sigh...

It's the classic, "if you don't agree with my Apple slam, you are automatically an Apple shill (or sheeple, take your pick)". Our opinion is only valid if it matches the person slamming Apple.

----------

Like anything else this can be argued several ways. I am neither for or against Apple Pay.

I have comprehensive understanding of the various elements in play, the pros and cons, as well as the difference between the truth vs what we, the public, are being told by either side. The amount of revenue involved is a huge incentive, Apple's been honest when acknowledging they're in it for the money.

In addition their expertise at crafting a story that will appeal and draw in the Apple faithful, causing them to believe that only Apple has their best interests in mind, is a huge advantage. Then factor in the reality that the faithful never question what Apple claims, puts them in a very good position. To confirm this fact one only has to notice the two thousand posts the Apple faithful have made in a very short time.

Yet it's only a method of payment, not curing cancer. Big picture thinking shrinks this down to a non issue unless one is as emotionally invested as this thread reveals.

And this is the classic "children are starving in Africa, how dare you take a couple minutes to care about something else" argument.

 

[CFreymarc]

In short, both CVS and Rite-Aid just created a gigantic PR disaster that could end up costing both companies a lot of good will and eventually business, especially in coastal parts of the USA with their much more tech-savvy customer base. I would not be surprised that both CVS and Rite-Aid are quietly exploring how to buy out their stake in MCX to end this very issue.

While I'm not privy to the upper management operations of CVS nor Rite-Aid, a sudden move like this from two competing companies at the same reeks of smoke filled room screams. Wouldn't be surprised that this decision was made over a round of golf and cell phone calls for it to happen so fast.

----------

And what is the benefit to the customer for this new technology? Let's see:

Less convenience than using their credit card.
Less privacy than using their credit card.
The inability to use the system with their credit card, as each transaction requires an ACH deduction from a funded account.

These businesses apparently had no problem with spending the money to put this technology in their stores when their only potential rival was Google Wallet, a solution that has been hamstrung by poor implementation, and rivals who control too much of the Google ecosystem (i.e., the phone carriers).

But, now that Apple Pay is here they suddenly don't want NFC payments processed in their stores.

A rational person could only assume that their reasoning behind this is to deny their customers the choice of payment method, so that CurrentC could be forced down their throats.

Is any of this illegal? Probably not. Is it on the same "moral high ground" as Apple? Not even close.

IMO, CurrentC is a huge consumer privacy liability in the making. They collect data like this, just a matter of time the transaction database security is compromised and Humpty Dumpty falls.

 

[AppleScruff1]

It's the classic, "if you don't agree with my Apple slam, you are automatically an Apple shill (or sheeple, take your pick)". Our opinion is only valid if it matches the person slamming Apple.

It's not an Apple slam, it's about why are there two sets of standards. But that seems to escape some. Oh, and I'm an Apple user too.

 

[rdlink]

"CurrentC will offer customers the freedom to pay with a variety of financial accounts, including personal checking accounts, merchant gift cards and select merchant-branded credit and debit accounts. Additional payment options will be available in the coming months."

It may not offer support for bank issued credit cards to begin, but if they get enough of a foothold based on alternative payments, they'll negotiate a more favorable rate with Visa, MC, AMEX using their market power in the future.

Well, the truth is that all of these "merchant-branded" credit cards are backed by the same major banks that are involved in Visa, MC and Amex. Citibank runs almost every store branded credit card out there.

 

[samcraig]

In short, both CVS and Rite-Aid just created a gigantic PR disaster that could end up costing both companies a lot of good will and eventually business, especially in coastal parts of the USA with their much more tech-savvy customer base. I would not be surprised that both CVS and Rite-Aid are quietly exploring how to buy out their stake in MCX to end this very issue.

Meh - I think among the techies - this is a "bigger" issue. I think many of the general population don't really care all that much and aren't as emotionally invested. Many of my friends shrugged their shoulders and thinks it's no big deal because they can still use their credit card. They aren't tied so much to their phone that they need to use it for every function.

On the flip side - CVS and others might change their mind. And then there will be a few days or a week of these same people who are pissed off now high fiving each other for the companies bending to their will and pressure and that will be that. They will resume shopping at these stores. People are fickle. Long term - I don't see this as having that huge of an impact.

 

[MasonDoc]

I still believe this is about Apple for many posting in this thread. I'm sure I'll also use ApplePay too. But I probably won't hang myself if someplace I shop doesn't support it and I won't change my shopping habits over it.

I'm sure you meant that comment sarcastically, however many health professionals myself included would find it worrying you'd bring it up. Suicide is really not a holding matter.

Ok now that is out of the way have you seriously read up on this CurrenC garbage they want you to use its quite scary. It's a pure and blatant attempt at data mining on a level unlike anything I've ever seen.

 

[samcraig]

I'm sure you meant that comment sarcastically, however many health professionals myself included would find it worrying you'd bring it up. Suicide is really not a holding matter.

Ok now that is out of the way have you seriously read up on this CurrenC garbage they want you to use its quite scary. It's a pure and blatant attempt at data mining on a level unlike anything I've ever seen.

But you don't have to use it (CurrenC).

ETA: Some people here are acting as if now that their phone has X functionality - they HAVE to use it. I understand wanting to use it. But some are taking it to the extreme. Which is amusing since it's so new. And can still be used in so many places. But don't dare tell someone they can't use it at store X.

 

[macduke]

I agree, perfect sequence of events. I am going to copy this to my notes and re- share it when your prediction comes true.

LOL, it would be funny if it did come true in exactly the way that I put it, but I doubt it. However, these things do typically follow a sequence like I described. Refusing to take customer's money—especially given how many average consumers don't trust retail outlets with their security any more—seems like an exercise in futility.

Since writing that post I've learned more about how CurrentC works, and so I might amend my original timeline to be shorter. Customers can at times be clueless, but they aren't this dumb. They've been taught to guard their data. They're not going to give out their social security, driver's license, and checking account number to be stored in the cloud. Are they freaking kidding us? This shorter timeline might actually help these companies, because as opposed to the slow burn of defeat (aka Blackberry circling the drain for years), they might realize their mistake with enough time to recover. Apple needs to hit hard and early with their ads to make sure that the few people who might try to use these other systems realize how inherently insecure they are compared to Apple Pay.

I understand where these companies are coming from, not wanting to pay the big bank fees. But did they stop to realize what will happen if this, SOMEHOW, is actually successful? Well let's think about it for a minute. Let's assume CurrentC (even the name is dumb) actually takes off and credit card companies/banks are no longer receiving their cut. What do you think is going to happen next? The banks are going to start charging for access to customer checking accounts via payment terminals. They will add on fees, and the new fees might even be more aggressive than before given that they have been losing a lot of money (again, in our hypothetical situation). Banks are always changing their terms. There is no way that CurrentC can win. The banks will be against it, the consumers will be against it, and even the technology companies are against it. I've never seen Apple and Android users agree more than in this whole debacle. If this can even unite us, then damn, this thing is doomed. Who would ever recommend this thing?

 

[rsocal]

I'm no fanboy, but I am a user - iPhone, iPad, rMBP and ready to get a new desktop, as well. When Apple does something right, I'm happy to give credit. And when they f-up, I've no issue with criticising them.

What I don't understand are the people who are upset to the point of boycotting stores or losing sleep at night because they can't use Apple Pay at a store - whether it was never offered at the store (and they feel it should be) or it was offered (but the store is backtracking).

Apple Pay is a cool concept. And I applaud the stores who are on board with it. But I don't shun the stores who don't want to get involved with it. Just as I don't cry at the register if I have my Amex Card in hand, and the store tells me they don't take it.

I'm in need of carrying a wallet for cash/change, DL/ID and I bring an ATM card and credit card with me. My choice, correct. But if I need to buy something, I go where I need to go and I pay with whatever means I have on me and the store accepts. I don't boycott a store because they won't take a personal check. And in the same ballpark, why should I boycott a store or get upset because they don't accept Apple Pay or decided to stop accepting it? Just pay in a different manner.

I can agree with you in a lot of what you are saying, and in many case's it's dead on!

But I think you're not seeing what really happened here, CVS/Rite-Aid had NFC turned on and let NFC payments process for a long time, such as Google Wallet, and Apple Pay for a day or two.

The problem for me is anybody with common sense about business, would know the reason they stopped, NFC, is they saw how much people wanted Apple Pay, and it already is gaining traction. This would cause CurrentC/MCX to never gain any use by consumers! It's a ****** system for consumers, only bennifits Merchants!

Securty has become a big issue this day and age, and the majority of people prefer not to give up SS number and free access to checking! As well, for a company to have free use to sell your info and the increase the probability of ID theft!

All I want is the choice to use any form of payment I choose, this for me is just another option given to consumers to give you money and feel safe in doing so!

Our business has always tried to keep up with ways to make it easy for customers to pay! I will never understand a business wanting my money, but telling me, only if you pay this way!

Yes, I agree it costs business & us a bit to use CC's, and I'll be the first to admit whenever a customer wants to use Amex, I know it's taking a bigger cut then others, yes I can say no. However, if I didn't take it, I would lose a fortune over the year turning customers away!

We have done customer inquiries regarding what card they like to use, Amex ranks up there, most reasons for getting miles. I've had this conversation with so many of my customers over the years! We did this thinking, don't worry, they'll pay another way, and that's what I found out to be completely wrong!

I have customers call before taking business to me and ask, what CC's do I take? When I tell them all CC's, they'll tell me, "that's why you get the job"! This is how I compare the CVS/Rite-Aid issue. People will go elsewhere if it's not to much of an inconvenience.

When it comes to getting the same service, but one place gives you the option of payment methods, where will you go?

I've said it in hear several times, I can't believe any business limiting how they get paid! Does CVS/Rite-Aid, Walmart & Target etc have enough business that they can afford to lose 1000's of customers and still make up the difference with this CurrentC???

Walmart & Target aren't going to go out of business from Apple pay & NFC issue, but the bean counters will not be happy losing customers due to limiting payment options!

I already have refused to use Walmart and now, as much as I like Target will not be using them. Costco is not far from me and they can usually fill any gap of goods. If not Amazon there's Amazon and my Amazon card has Apple pay setup.

The safest Method of payment right now is Apple Pay, and they have the power to push this! I'll be behind this all they way, and I'm all for companies using the antiquated design of MCX. Just don't force me to use it if you want my business!

 

[rsocal]

LOL, it would be funny if it did come true in exactly the way that I put it, but I doubt it. However, these things do typically follow a sequence like I described. Refusing to take customer's money—especially given how many average consumers don't trust retail outlets with their security any more—seems like an exercise in futility.

Since writing that post I've learned more about how CurrentC works, and so I might amend my original timeline to be shorter. Customers can at times be clueless, but they aren't this dumb. They've been taught to guard their data. They're not going to give out their social security, driver's license, and checking account number to be stored in the cloud. Are they freaking kidding us? This shorter timeline might actually help these companies, because as opposed to the slow burn of defeat (aka Blackberry circling the drain for years), they might realize their mistake with enough time to recover. Apple needs to hit hard and early with their ads to make sure that the few people who might try to use these other systems realize how inherently insecure they are compared to Apple Pay.

I understand where these companies are coming from, not wanting to pay the big bank fees. But did they stop to realize what will happen if this, SOMEHOW, is actually successful? Well let's think about it for a minute. Let's assume CurrentC (even the name is dumb) actually takes off and credit card companies/banks are no longer receiving their cut. What do you think is going to happen next? The banks are going to start charging for access to customer checking accounts via payment terminals. They will add on fees, and the new fees might even be more aggressive than before given that they have been losing a lot of money (again, in our hypothetical situation). Banks are always changing their terms. There is no way that CurrentC can win. The banks will be against it, the consumers will be against it, and even the technology companies are against it. I've never seen Apple and Android users agree more than in this whole debacle. If this can even unite us, then damn, this thing is doomed. Who would ever recommend this thing?

I wish I could Articulate as well as you did here!

Absolutely the banks will pass the cost on to us, OMG I haven't even thought of that yet!

Absolutely incredible, to have Apple and Android users united for the first time! That should really indicate to anyone how bad this is!

 

[bitslap47]

You would think shifting fraud liability to the card issuer would be decent incentive to the retailers.

They don't just save the cost of the fraudulent activity... less training required and less contact with sticky subjects such as profiling customers, etc.