Early Apple Pay Reception Tepid Outside of United States

[AsherN]

As to people complaining about the spending limits. Complain to the vendors/merchants. It's THEM that's imposing that limit, not the banks. @ Esso, you can spend up to $200 on gas and merchandise, most others it's $100. We need to complain to the retailers to bump up their limits.

Yes and no. The merchants are not going to up the limit for plain tap. However, it is up to the payment processor to accept the "secure transaction" flag that comes on an Apple Pay transaction and treat it as a Chip-and-PIN.

 

[fischersd]

Yes and no. The merchants are not going to up the limit for plain tap. However, it is up to the payment processor to accept the "secure transaction" flag that comes on an Apple Pay transaction and treat it as a Chip-and-PIN.

In this case, it's not the payment processor (see the comment about the letter from RBC, who is stating that this is a more secure way to pay than chip and pin).
It's the retailers (at least here it is).

 

[kdarling]

In this case, it's not the payment processor (see the comment about the letter from RBC, who is stating that this is a more secure way to pay than chip and pin).
It's the retailers (at least here it is).

You and AsherN are actually saying the same thing:

For contactless in general, merchants are not going to raise the limit. Too dangerous.

However, IF the terminal / processor recognized the on-device cardholder verification flag that Apple Pay sends, then the merchant could raise the limits for that case, because it's like automatically entering a PIN on the card side.

 

[AsherN]

You and AsherN are actually saying the same thing:

For contactless in general, merchants are not going to raise the limit. Too dangerous.

However, IF the terminal / processor recognized the on-device cardholder verification flag that Apple Pay sends, then the merchant could raise the limits for that case, because it's like automatically entering a PIN on the card side.

The limit ultimately, is at the merchant's discretion, but most just accept the default. The change needs to occur at the payment processor's end. Push to the terminal, by default, NFC limit $100. Apple Pay = Chip-and-PIN, no limit. Then make it on the merchant to request it be changed. The CC companies would also need to accept the same liability level for Apple Pay as CnP.

 

[carson5]

Signed up for Apple Pay on in Canada with RBC the day it was offered (about two weeks ago). Used it on both my phone and watch and it works flawlessly.

It's so convenient, and since pretty much everywhere in Canada has tap, I use it everywhere. I basically don't need my wallet anymore.

It's great - no complaints!

 

[jdbr]

Tepid in the UK?
Not from my experience. I have been using ApplePay everyday in a wide range of stores.
I was in the centre of Belfast today and shopped in two major retailers M&S and Boots with no issues at all and no strange looks from the assistants.
Fast, reliable, convenient and very secure.
A fantastic service available on my iPhone and to top it all my debit card isn't contactless and my building society the Nationwide still allowed it to be added to ApplePay, so I received a genuinely new and useful service!
I think the writer needs to visit the UK rather than make up a story!

 

[dontwalkhand]

Iowa in the US is working on that digital drivers license.

Loyalty Cards, just type in your phone number at these places.

Problem solved. No more wallet eventually.

 

[kdarling]

The limit ultimately, is at the merchant's discretion, but most just accept the default. The change needs to occur at the payment processor's end. Push to the terminal, by default, NFC limit $100. Apple Pay = Chip-and-PIN, no limit. Then make it on the merchant to request it be changed.

For those reading, the cool thing about the on-device cardholder verification flag... if supported... is that it essentially changes a contactless transaction into the equivalent of a full chip & PIN transaction with the PIN already verfied.

That removes the limits normally used for contactless purchases or before a PIN entry is required.

The CC companies would also need to accept the same liability level for Apple Pay as CnP.

Not sure what you mean.

A contactless transaction is always treated as Card Present.

 

[AsherN]

Not sure what you mean.

A contactless transaction is always treated as Card Present.

But a contactless transaction can be more easily disputed, hence the low limit. The device pay needs to be the full equivalent of CnP. It's actually in the CC companies' interest to accept the secure flag.

 

[oliversl]

Apple Pay is a product for the USA or maybe 1st world countries. I hope Apple can make some good worldwide product again.

 

[SteveW928]

However (and I'd assume it's the case worldwide) Visa and MasterCard also offer chargebacks on debit cards here in the UK.

I can also earn rewards with Lloyds Bank on my Visa Debit card so you don't necessarily need a credit card (and because of a EU ruling a lot of banks have cut rewards on credit cards due to the interchange fee being capped).

Yea, I don't know the details here in Canada, as I've never used that on my debit card (which is also Visa enabled). But, my point for the USA folks to understand, is that most of the rest of the world isn't as credit-card centric as the USA, and some people are against them in principal. *MOST* people in Canada regularly use debit cards (as the person I was responding to was saying how dangerous that is).

 

[fischersd]

You and AsherN are actually saying the same thing:

For contactless in general, merchants are not going to raise the limit. Too dangerous.

However, IF the terminal / processor recognized the on-device cardholder verification flag that Apple Pay sends, then the merchant could raise the limits for that case, because it's like automatically entering a PIN on the card side.

Heh, no, I think we were haggling over where the "bottleneck" is in terms of the transaction limit. (at least here in Canada, it's the merchants that dictate the limit).

The token that Apple Pay sends SHOULD be equivalent to chip+pin authentication as:
1) Verification / authentication was done with the banks at time of setup of Apple Pay on the devices
2) Apple Watch via PIN/constant contact and iPhones via PIN/Fingerprint are equivalent if not more secure.

The merchants WILL either change or abolish the limits if there's enough customer pressure to do so.

 

[tmiw]

Yea, I don't know the details here in Canada, as I've never used that on my debit card (which is also Visa enabled). But, my point for the USA folks to understand, is that most of the rest of the world isn't as credit-card centric as the USA, and some people are against them in principal. *MOST* people in Canada regularly use debit cards (as the person I was responding to was saying how dangerous that is).

Honestly I don't think the US is that credit centric. Last I heard debit cards still accounted for 2/3rds of card use, for instance. And once chip becomes more widespread I'd imagine that card fees will end up getting capped anyway, making credit cards not all that worthwhile anymore.

 

[AsherN]

Heh, no, I think we were haggling over where the "bottleneck" is in terms of the transaction limit. (at least here in Canada, it's the merchants that dictate the limit).

The token that Apple Pay sends SHOULD be equivalent to chip+pin authentication as:
1) Verification / authentication was done with the banks at time of setup of Apple Pay on the devices
2) Apple Watch via PIN/constant contact and iPhones via PIN/Fingerprint are equivalent if not more secure.

The merchants WILL either change or abolish the limits if there's enough customer pressure to do so.

Agreed

 

[SteveW928]

Honestly I don't think the US is that credit centric. Last I heard debit cards still accounted for 2/3rds of card use, for instance. And once chip becomes more widespread I'd imagine that card fees will end up getting capped anyway, making credit cards not all that worthwhile anymore.

Yea, maybe it's changing. I just remember that when we moved from the USA to Canada, that was one fairly notable difference.

 

[kdarling]

But a contactless transaction can be more easily disputed, hence the low limit. The device pay needs to be the full equivalent of CnP. It's actually in the CC companies' interest to accept the secure flag.

Ah, I think I see now

You were using "CnP" as an abbreviation for "Chip & PIN" ?

I had automatically assumed you were using the industry standard "CNP", meaning "Card Not Present".

 

[Jambalaya]

You suffer from a deficit of info. Look more. Look into fraud aspects.
[doublepost=1464876920][/doublepost]
I can't understand your thinking. You get the benefits of touch pay but more.
[doublepost=1464877082][/doublepost]
Have you even tried it?
[doublepost=1464877409][/doublepost]
I live in Europe. Not having to open my wallet, dip my chip, type my pin (or sign the receipt, this being for USA credit cards), having to deal with a physical receipt, reconciling the receipt against my statement (the statement indicates where I used Apple Pay so I don't have to worry about fraud on those transactions, so there is less admin burden), all together save a lot of time and increase confidence over all other methods.
[doublepost=1464877638][/doublepost]
I'm not convinced the 10G$ is income to Apple. I'm rather thinking it is the aggregate value of transactions processed on Apple Pay. If so, Apple still netted 16M$, enough to subsidize the cost of Apple's Apple Pay teams.
[doublepost=1464878074][/doublepost]
No charge to the merchant or you for using Apple Pay. If the bank has signed up to Apple Pay, they have agreed to pay Apple 0.0015% of their income on the transaction as a fee (really it is cheap insurance to eliminate fraud risk) but the charge is not passed on to you.
[doublepost=1464878440][/doublepost]
Unless the merchant deliberately blocks this. The members of the stillborn CurrentC had to do this (in 2012 it made sense to sign an exclusivity contract because that was before Apple Pay and knowing CurrentC would become an abject failure and be aborted.) Some have already begun to reverse this obstacle.
[doublepost=1464878665][/doublepost]

Yes the do. Even if you pay cash. Even if you pay with any less convenient or secure method than ApplePay. Don't expect this to change, that ship sailed like 30 years ago.
[doublepost=1464878986][/doublepost]

Sure, this was to offset the inhibition of geek-toy factor with a design and fashion factor.
[doublepost=1464879481][/doublepost]
Your first point is filled with inaccurate fail. Apple doesn't charge merchants or customers for its fee. The fee is a whopping 0.0015% of the transaction value, it is paid by the issuing bank and not charged to the customer. The delay accrues to many things, banks having to pay the fee, banks having to get certified by Apple to meeting their contract obligations, some banks not seeing the point (this changes as customers leave or charges on previously used cards begin dropping a sign customers have moved off the bank credit card) and big banks like Barclays (or retailers like Walmart) pursuing the chimeric wet dream of displacing credit cards with a proprietary payment system.

I am sorry you don't understand but there is not much I can say, touch-pay works, its quick, it was there first. Apple needs to do something extra to break into the market. I am clearly not alone as Apple Pay adoption is weak.its all setup on my phone and I don't use ir

 

[AsherN]

Outside of Apple's control, but what it can bring is the convenience of touch pay without the $$$ limit per transaction.

 

[hiddenmarkov]

Yes that's sort of true, there is no explicit additional charge but the retailers include their business overheads like card charegs. when they set prices

This is an issue. reading the article its negotiations holding things up for some.

To run this stuff you need a merchant code. this costs money. Some are fair in their code's costs, or so prevalent you have to take them. Why visa and mastercard in the say US are so prevalent. Cost or its just expected. You will always see these 2 cards. Since the most common cards around.

Then you have American Express...who charge a lot for the "privilege" to run their cards. to the point some opt to not even bother getting a merchant code to run them. Case of Amex...you can assume most will have a visa/mc backup so not a deal breaker since usually right about that.

Case of applepay, same thing really at this point. Don't support it...we can assume there is a CC or other option backup in the wallet. Especially out of the US. Japan not on the list but when it comes to try for here I see issues. We like points cards here and rechargeable cards. My edy card (how I buy most things) is in the same wallet case as the phone and real convenient to use. It runs low on funds, recharge it at a machine and carry on.

Hell, in japan the prefecture I live in I can show handfuls of restaurants that don't even take credits cards. Cash only. If nice and convenient they take dollars as well as yen. Limits their overhead cost wise one. No merchant card fees. No support needed for a electronics pos based system either. NCR (also big here for POS systems) doesn't come out to fix your terminal for free lol. Plain old cash and tap tap tap ka ching register works fine for them.

 

[SteveW928]

Hell, in japan the prefecture I live in I can show handfuls of restaurants that don't even take credits cards. Cash only. If nice and convenient they take dollars as well as yen. Limits their overhead cost wise one. No merchant card fees. No support needed for a electronics pos based system either. NCR (also big here for POS systems) doesn't come out to fix your terminal for free lol. Plain old cash and tap tap tap ka ching register works fine for them.

And, that's not necessarily a bad thing. As we globalize in payment systems and currency, along with governments becoming more controlling, I can certainly see a time coming when freezing of funds and such will become a method of exerting pressure to get back in line with the 'norm' the gov't is pushing.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

And, that's not necessarily a bad thing. As we globalize in payment systems and currency, along with governments becoming more controlling, I can certainly see a time coming when freezing of funds and such will become a method of exerting pressure to get back in line with the 'norm' the gov't is pushing.

And that's exactly what governments want and it's exactly why consumers should never allow it to happen.

 

[kdarling]

Heh, no, I think we were haggling over where the "bottleneck" is in terms of the transaction limit. (at least here in Canada, it's the merchants that dictate the limit).

Yep, different countries, different limits and primary limit sources.

The token that Apple Pay sends SHOULD be equivalent to chip+pin authentication as:
1) Verification / authentication was done with the banks at time of setup of Apple Pay on the devices

Sure, although it's not really the same. When we register a card that was mailed to us, the issuer is expecting our call to enable a new card from our known home phone.

Registering for Apple Pay is different. It can happen at any time, and from a device the issuer could easily be previously unaware of. Which is why, at first, thieves took advantage of this relative anonymity to register stolen cards, and reportedly cause millions in fraud purchases. Later the issuers bolstered their verification methods to account for this difference.

So, just noting that the verification has to be a bit more rigorous than how it's done for a regular card issuance.

2) Apple Watch via PIN/constant contact and iPhones via PIN/Fingerprint are equivalent if not more secure.

Yep, although same as with a PIN, a device-registered fingerprint verification does not guarantee that the user is the actual cardholder.

Actual user-to-fingerprint verification would require for the fingerprint to be registered, say while at a bank, and then locked into the device so it could not be changed. And since fingerprints can be faked as well, it'd be even more secure to ask for photo id. But who wants all that? Too inconvenient for all sides.

The point is, no currently used method is really secure. However, they're considered "good enough", especially if the convenience to the user is high, which allows for more purchases

--

Personally, I sometimes prefer less security, same as now. There's times that I physically loan a card to my wife or kids or even babysitter... and it's a lot easier to do that with minimal security. No PIN needed. No fingerprint set up needed. And I'm covered in any case. Extra security is more for the benefit of the merchant and bank, IMO. (Yes, it can be inconvenient to have to change account numbers, but that's nothing compared to taking a loss like stores and banks do.)

 

[AsherN]

The Canadian banks, RBC and TD at least, require you to load their app on your phone and sign in to your account from the app to enroll a card in Apple Pay. It ensures that someone with sufficient knowledge of the account added the card. After that, using Apple Pay requires TouchID or the phone PIN, which is more secure than tap, and at least as secure as chip-and-PIN.

 

[fischersd]

Personally, I sometimes prefer less security, same as now. There's times that I physically loan a card to my wife or kids or even babysitter... and it's a lot easier to do that with minimal security. No PIN needed. No fingerprint set up needed. And I'm covered in any case. Extra security is more for the benefit of the merchant and bank, IMO. (Yes, it can be inconvenient to have to change account numbers, but that's nothing compared to taking a loss like stores and banks do.)

In terms of loaning the card - you could just add your card to your wife's wallet on her phone.

I'm suspecting Apple will have device transfers of funds soon - when that happens, you'll be able to more easily give funds to the kids or babysitter (hopefully a little easier than e-mailing funds today). Me, I'd like them to give the option to tap iPhones / Apple Watches to transfer funds.

 

[kdarling]

The Canadian banks, RBC and TD at least, require you to load their app on your phone and sign in to your account from the app to enroll a card in Apple Pay. It ensures that someone with sufficient knowledge of the account added the card.

Very interesting. Thanks!

In terms of loaning the card - you could just add your card to your wife's wallet on her phone.

Yes sir, that would work... if she didn't still use a flip phone

I'm suspecting Apple will have device transfers of funds soon - when that happens, you'll be able to more easily give funds to the kids or babysitter (hopefully a little easier than e-mailing funds today). Me, I'd like them to give the option to tap iPhones / Apple Watches to transfer funds.

Yep, I think it'll be interesting to see how social and purchase dynamics change in the future as more transfer options appear.