The battle of these systems vs traditional physical cards boil down to SPEED. If it takes far much time to use Apple Pay, it will be an epic flop. I'm yet to see any value proposition in Apple Pay over traditional cards other than it is 'new'
You suffer from a deficit of info. Look more. Look into fraud aspects.
[doublepost=1464876920][/doublepost]
I'm in the UK and loaded up Apple Pay immediately. However I have nevr used it as touch-pay with my debit card is so easy. Had Apple come out with this sooner maybe it would have caught on but touch-pay has the first mover advantage and all the momentum
I can't understand your thinking. You get the benefits of touch pay but more.
[doublepost=1464877082][/doublepost]
In Canada, all credit cards have a chip and it's easy to pay quickly by just entering your pin or using the wifi direct payment capabilities built into all Canadian credit cards. ApplePay brings nothing better (it's actually more complicated using ApplePay than using credit cards with a chip). That's why there is little interest here. ApplePay will be used, but it's not really a big deal. The US is really behind regarding credit cards technology. That explains why ApplePay seems such a step forward. But it isn't really.
Have you even tried it?
[doublepost=1464877409][/doublepost]
The difference between old school across the Atlantic is something worth mentioning in my opinion.
Going old school in Europe means that you use chip and pin, that is, you insert your card into a portable reader (usually GSM/3G/LTE/whatever), follow it up with the pin and complete payment in a few seconds. And you still get a printed receipt if you want. It is not a particularly inconvenient or unsafe method.
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]
That's been my experience as well. I love using Apple Pay. It works great -- when I can find a retailer who accepts it.
How is $11 billion in one year a failure? And if that amount (at just 15 cents per $100) is mostly coming from just the U.S., that seems pretty successful to me.
I'm not convinced the 10G$ 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]
Does Apple/my bank charge me to use it? I can't get a straight answer and that is a little off putting.
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]
If it accepts contactless cards, it accepts paying with your iPhone.
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 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
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]
And many say the same about iPhones and Apple Watches - just look at the number of fashion show events that Cook, Ive et al attend.
Sure, this was to offset the inhibition of geek-toy factor with a design and fashion factor.
[doublepost=1464879481][/doublepost]
Apple actually charge the merchant, when your bank issues the token card number (the one in your phone) against your real card number they flag it as Apple Pay. When you use that card the bank have to pay Apple a cut, the size of the cut was the reason why it took a while to get out of the US as there are EU laws around how much a bank can charge a merchant, in the EU this % is way way way smaller than in the US and Apple wanted a really big piece of that effectively wiping out the banks profit.
There is also an EU law due which stops merchants from passing the card charges to the consumer. Travel booking services are currently the only merchants to really do this anymore.
An Apple Pay and contactless transaction are indistinguishable from each other as they both use the same EMVCo standard communication protocol. The incompatibilities come as each scheme (VISA/AMEX/etc) have implemented the standard differently and then they have different versions of their own implementation. The terminal and card both have to talk the same version (or at least the card can't be a newer version) for the transaction to work correctly.
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.