MCX Confirms Retailer Exclusivity for CurrentC Mobile Payments, but No Fines for Leaving Consortium

[samcraig]

actually, you are.

either pay 3% to someone else -or- LOAN 3% to someone and give them 2% (i.e.- pay the same 3% fee to the merchant's own lending setup and give the customer 2% off)

in the fractional reserve system, loaned money generally requires you have 10% of the amount.. the other 90% can be used to make more loans.. and on and on..

the merchants will make more money if they are the ones doing the loaning/collecting interest/etc.. and i assume much more than the 2% customer savings

Thanks for replying to that. I had stepped away

Exactly this. Since people like buying on credit so much as some have pointed out - on top of potentially saving a lot of money on CC transaction fees, they will make more money on those that choose to finance through them. That's just not % off the purchase - it's also late fees, etc.

 

[flat five]

Ok, NFC is a technology, but it's implementation with regards to payment is a system. You tap to pay, works the same between Apple Pay, Google Wallet, PayPass, etc. CurrentC is a system, you use the QR code shenanigans. And, no, they won't use NFC, at least not in an Apple phone. In my mind they are directly comparable.

nowhere will you see me saying CurrentC is better than applePay.. if that's what you're reading me as then i'm not communicating properly.. as far as i can tell from a buyer/user pov, applePay is way better than currentc.

but CurrentC isn't even a real product/system right now.. it's moreorless vaporware.

remember this?
The Day Google Had to Start Over on Android

that's (i'm guessing) what's happening at MCX right now.

 

[Arran]

The companies that are behind it are big, deep-pocketed companies. They can afford to hire exceptional talent to help put this together.

But they haven't hired exceptional talent, have they?

Two years in and they have a hokey proposal to scan barcodes back and forth. Seriously, that's it?

If they want to build something as slick and crowd-pleasing as Apple Pay, they'd better start building their own hardware and hire a team that understands consumer technology. Because right now it's hard to take them seriously.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The vast majority of the argument against NFC was that the Android crew wanted to ding Apple for not including it over the last couple of years. The argument was 'show me a reason that it's useful and I'll reconsider.' So yes, I was completely against including NFC unless it was there for a specific, useful reason.

I realize it's not Apple but since you admit you were completely against NFC until Apple rolled out it's implementation of it to show that "specific, useful reason" you might consider that this CurrentC thing doesn't roll out until NEXT YEAR. Between now and then, it can evolve toward finding it's "specific, useful reason" to justify your reconsideration. Judging it so negatively now is just like judging NFC so negatively back then.

----------

But they haven't hired exceptional talent, have they?

And you know this by what? Guessing? Speculation? What you know about it so far implies that they haven't?

Apple works really hard to hide anything good until the day they are ready for it to come to market. Sometimes threads like this one fill with very wrong speculation even about Apple goodies. Then, they pull the curtain back.

For all you or I know, they've hired the best talent in the world... or not. But if they've hired mediocre or less, then all this is a waste of time as it will flop. If they are going to challenge the big banks with a new alternative, it better be at least as good if not better.

 

[zhenya]

I realize it's not Apple but since you admit you were completely against NFC until Apple rolled out it's implementation of it to show that "specific, useful reason" you might consider that this CurrentC thing doesn't roll out until NEXT YEAR. Between now and then, it can evolve toward finding it's "specific, useful reason" to justify your reconsideration. Judging it so negatively now is just like judging NFC so negatively back then.

----------



And you know this by what? Guessing? Speculation? What you know about it so far implies that they haven't?

Apple works really hard to hide anything good until the day they are ready for it to come to market. Sometimes threads like this one fill with very wrong speculation even about Apple goodies. Then, they pull the curtain back.

For all you or I know, they've hired the best talent in the world... or not. But if they've hired mediocre or less, then all this is a waste of time as it will flop. If they are going to challenge the big banks with a new alternative, it better be at least as good if not better.

You are acting as if all we have to go on is 'there is a new payment method coming out that will reduce fees for merchants and by extension customers and allow you to pay conveniently by smartphone.' When in fact we have a fairly detailed description including specific illustrations about how it will work. I can't understand how you can't see the difference. It doesn't matter that it might change - if it does it will likely be as a direct result of the kind of feedback they are getting right now.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

And you're acting like ideas in that "fairly detailed description including specific illustrations" are in stone upwards of a YEAR before it is supposed to come to market. Apple Pay just got rolled out. Relative to that "detailed description" it's probably a massive game-changer on par with when Apple rolled out that first iPhone and the other smart phone companies looked at their "detailed descriptions with illustrations" for their next lines of new smart phones.

Plans will evolve. That whole plan might get thrown out. If what comes to market is exactly what is in those "detailed descriptions with illustrations" it's likely DOA... much like if smart phones planned just before iPhone 1 was revealed were developed exactly as planned without adapting to Apple's big reveal.

 

[ee4life]

Thanks for replying to that. I had stepped away

Exactly this. Since people like buying on credit so much as some have pointed out - on top of potentially saving a lot of money on CC transaction fees, they will make more money on those that choose to finance through them. That's just not % off the purchase - it's also late fees, etc.

And for the ACH example, ala the Target RedCard debit, where no financing is involved? That is what is being tossed around as the primary method for CurrentC, no?

 

[samcraig]

You are acting as if all we have to go on is 'there is a new payment method coming out that will reduce fees for merchants and by extension customers and allow you to pay conveniently by smartphone.' When in fact we have a fairly detailed description including specific illustrations about how it will work. I can't understand how you can't see the difference. It doesn't matter that it might change - if it does it will likely be as a direct result of the kind of feedback they are getting right now.

All you have is a beta project currently rolled out to a very small audience.

Of course it matters that it might change. And if it changes from feedback that it's gotten so far, how is that remotely bad.

Isn't that WHY there are BETA programs?!

----------

And for the ACH example, ala the Target RedCard debit, where no financing is involved? That is what is being tossed around as the primary method for CurrentC, no?

You're aware of non-payment fees (IE - insufficient funds) and so forth?

I'm not implying these are money makers. I am sure the risks/costs for collection aren't cheap.

Point is - people like to buy on credit. If you're going to argue debit purchases - then do apples to apples. Since I don't believe that credit card companies get a dime if you use your debit card for a transaction. if so, it's considerably less.

 

[ipader]

This solution is going backwards... As almost entire world (I mean the world outside of the USA) accepts the card payments using the NFC standard the MCX here in America wants to introduce another, yet propriatery solution of payment. This is ridiculous... I hope all interested parties will wake up and walk away...

You have it WRONG here......

All interested parties should wake up and RUN away, fast!

CurrentC is a bad, bad, BAD idea!!! Not many customers will be willing to risk their savings by exposing their bank accounts.

New technology and past mismanagement of customer information has now bypassed the old ideas of CurrentC.

 

[Rogifan]

OR, now that they've seen the slickness of Apple Pay, they have been inspired to take a crack at trying to alter what underpins Apple Pay (the old bank-enriching CC model). So they are trying to slow down adoption a bit so they have time to try to accomplish their business objectives.

I don't think they removed the ability to pay via NFC because they have a beef with CC/banks. I suspect they just want some time to try to take advantage of this opportunity. It's not an act against Apple; it's likely an act inspired by Apple Pay. Here's a rare chance to make a bigger change than just putting a slicker, more secure interface over an old, somewhat exploitive CC system. So they're trying.

By the way, Walmart sells iPhones. And Walmart LOVES revenue. They aren't turning away your only Apple Pay transactions because they hate Apple's products or your money. There's more at work here than conspiracy against Apple or NFC.

----------



It's Apple's store. They can sell whatever they want.

And please point me to anything that says someone won't be allowed to us Apple Pay on the MCX/CurrentC platform. Just because some retailers have turned off NFC for now doesn't mean that's a permanent thing against Apple Pay. In fact, if I was part of this MCX group, I'd be aggressively working with Apple to try to get them to also make Apple Pay work with the platform. And Apple should be interested because supporting multiple platforms like supporting multiple CCs is just good for Apple Pay (and thus iPhone) adoption.

I guess I'm getting hung up on the whole platform thing. What platform is CurrentC and how is it different than what we have now? Are there going to be different POS terminals required to support it? Pay already has support for debit cards and rumors are they're working on incorporating loyalty cards/rewards possibly via the use of iBeacons and BLE. So Also Pay works at any POS terminal that supports NFC. So I'm not sure what Apple has to do to make it work. How about Walmart and other MCX retailers enable NFC in their POS terminals? Wouldn't NFC be a better route to go than QR scanning?

Regardless of what they do there isn't any discount or reward they could offer to get me to use my debit card/bank account instead of my credit card. Like someone on Twitter said: the killer feature of Pay is "pay later".

----------

Thanks for replying to that. I had stepped away

Exactly this. Since people like buying on credit so much as some have pointed out - on top of potentially saving a lot of money on CC transaction fees, they will make more money on those that choose to finance through them. That's just not % off the purchase - it's also late fees, etc.

So basically CurrentC isn't about the customer it's about how merchants can screw the credit card companies. Let's not forget the former Walmart CEO who admitted he didn't know if MCX would work but he didn't care so long as he screwed Visa. I have a Wells Fargo Visa, I bank with Wells Fargo. Can someone explain why I'm supposed to hate Wells Fargo and Visa?

 

[hudson1]

I've not seen one line where any of the MCX group is saying customers will be forced to use CurrentC. Please point to that if it exists.

Well, you completely dropped the context of my comment on that one. I responded to your sarcasm about "only Apple is allowed to try new things". My point is Apple isn't forcing anyone to use their new toy nor blocking anyone from using someone else new toy. By contrast, the CurrentC cabal is saying if you want to use a new toy, it will only be our new toy. Quite a different approach.

 

[ee4life]

You're aware of non-payment fees (IE - insufficient funds) and so forth?

I'm not implying these are money makers. I am sure the risks/costs for collection aren't cheap.

Point is - people like to buy on credit. If you're going to argue debit purchases - then do apples to apples. Since I don't believe that credit card companies get a dime if you use your debit card for a transaction. if so, it's considerably less.

The topic is CurrentC, which does not currently support credit. Hard to compare apples to apples. Under their current model, with no available credit or financing options, any discount it provides offsets the gains from reduced credit fees. That may not always be the case, but that's what I see now.

 

[hudson1]

Are consumers supposed to imagine detriments for themselves? That's all that going on here.

The thing's apparently a year out from coming to market. Consumers know next to nothing about what the final version of this will be. A year before iPhone 6, this crowd was railing hard against screen sizes bigger than 4". Even a few weeks before 6+, this crowd was railing hard against the very idea of a 5.5" iPhone screen. In spite of all that faulting with the concept of bigger iPhones, we see how the reality played out when it came to market.

Use advanced search and look for NFC threads from even as recent as 1 year ago. This same crowd railed hard against NFC with much of the same reasoning flying about this. Go look it up; it's right on this site.

I'll grant you that CurrentC may be a total dog by the time it gets here in final form. But then again, maybe it's an iPhone 6 when >4" screen phones were still viewed as "abominations", "stupid", "99% don't want", "one handed use", "cargo pants pockets" and all that.

The companies that are behind it are big, deep-pocketed companies. They can afford to hire exceptional talent to help put this together. Apple has just shown them how easily a phone-based payment system can be set up so a bar- a very high bar- has been set. They'll either rise to the occasion or not by the time they try to bring this to market.

The point you raise is not at all the point in question. Apple never said CurrentC should stop what they are doing. Instead, most here are saying CurrentC members are colluding to stop what Apple and Google are doing.

If the final version of CurrentC is the best thing since sliced bread, people will use it. So why are they the only ones out there trying to ban others' solutions? Competition produces benefits. Banning competition doesn't and you can ask anyone in the former Soviet Union if you need confirmation.

 

[samcraig]

The topic is CurrentC, which does not currently support credit. Hard to compare apples to apples. Under their current model, with no available credit or financing options, any discount it provides offsets the gains from reduced credit fees. That may not always be the case, but that's what I see now.

You see a beta program. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be.

----------

So basically CurrentC isn't about the customer it's about how merchants can screw the credit card companies. Let's not forget the former Walmart CEO who admitted he didn't know if MCX would work but he didn't care so long as he screwed Visa. I have a Wells Fargo Visa, I bank with Wells Fargo. Can someone explain why I'm supposed to hate Wells Fargo and Visa?

You're already injecting an emotion into it. It's about reducing overhead. On top of that, merchants have found that by coupling this new way of payment, they can also enable better target marketing as well.

Why should I hate Samsung because Apple doesn't like them or calls them copycats? Why should I think a netbook has no value because Apple said so? Why did someone tell me that since I can use NFC payments and I am not, I am hurting the cause.

Newsflash - I don't care. I use the tech I want. And my use case is my own. I don't care what you use or company's you hate. It doesn't affect me in the slightest. Who is telling you to hate wells fargo and visa? Not Walmart. they are giving their stance on their financial position with the company.

 

[UnfetteredMind]

...seems we have some oddities here:

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-michigan/index.ssf/2014/10/why_meijer_isnt_ditching_apple.html

Will be interesting to see what the MCX consortium does to/with them (since they are a member after all). If they turn off NFC, they kill their own tap-to-pay credit cards so they obviously don't want to do it. By leaving it on, they have no choice, the POS system is able to be used by Pay customers.

 

[tom123]

Posted by HobeSoundDarry "Let me guess: it's fine for Apple to spread out into non-traditional products or services but other companies should only keep doing what they do. Only Apple can try new things."

Kind a like Tesla, okay you can manufacture the product but you can't sell it to the public, you must sell it at a car lot.
(in other words you must use our middle man) States are now passing laws!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Well, you completely dropped the context of my comment on that one. I responded to your sarcasm about "only Apple is allowed to try new things". My point is Apple isn't forcing anyone to use their new toy nor blocking anyone from using someone else new toy. By contrast, the CurrentC cabal is saying if you want to use a new toy, it will only be our new toy. Quite a different approach.

hudson, there is nothing that would make this variation of the same sentences wrong either...

My point is CurrentC isn't forcing anyone to use their new toy nor blocking anyone from using someone else new toy. By contrast, the Apple Pay cabal is saying if you want to use a new toy, it will only be our new toy.

Maybe that first sentence can be considered wrong right now because some retailers turned off NFC, but that doesn't mean they'll leave it off. Maybe they are just trying to buy some time.

I've seen nothing that says CurrentC will force anything on anyone. Instead, everything I've seen makes me see it as an alternative. On the other hand, to utilize Apple Pay, one does have to buy an iPhone and it must work with iTunes. So to me it looks like the reality of Apple Pay has more restrictions than the (currently) vaporware of CurrentC. I don't say that to feed the fires of this perception that this is a challenger to Apple Pay or that Apple Pay is bad or anything- I think Apple Pay is WOW!!! good. But just like big screen phones before Apple had them or NFC about 1+ years ago, I don't automatically see something as bad because it appears to compete with something from Apple (I wonder if we could have gotten iPhone 6 phones without Samsung and others demonstrating a lot of revenue & profit with those larger screens).

As I've said several times, I don't even see this as Apple Pay vs. CurrentC. I think this is existing CC "as is" model vs. CurrentC with stuff like Apple Pay running atop such platforms (like iTunes running atop either OS X or Windows). If someone could wave a magic wand and make this proposed CurrentC platform the "as is" and have this long term CC model trying to come on now, I'd expect that this crowd would be rallying for Apple Pay (on CurrentC) against this crazy new idea of CCs... much like how AT&T (the devil that they are) got the Apple halo when they were the exclusive partner for iPhone. There were many people here who would defend AT&T shenanigans as if AT&T was Apple in those days. But once iPhone got more partners, the view of AT&T shifted.

All that has to make this CurrentC thing go from atrocious to excellent is Apple making Apple Pay also work with it. Like bigger screens on phones, once Apple endorses something, the view of it can dramatically shift here. Right now "we" think it's a competitor so it must be the enemy, but I see it as a shot at the big banks, not Apple. Again, if it's as I think I see it and I'm Apple, I just make Apple Pay also work with it. Then I sell more iPhones because Apple Pay runs on more platforms. Flexing my Apple muscles, I may refuse to participate in some part of the CurrentC concept (like the data capture parts) but buying something is buying something whether you use CCs, DCs, cash, checks or other.

 

[ee4life]

You see a beta program. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be.

Hey, if it ends up not sucking at launch, I'll show up hat-in-hand to take my plate of crow.

 

[UnfetteredMind]

hudson, there is nothing that would make this variation of the same sentences wrong either...

My point is CurrentC isn't forcing anyone to use their new toy nor blocking anyone from using someone else new toy. By contrast, the Apple Pay cabal is saying if you want to use a new toy, it will only be our new toy.

Maybe that first sentence can be considered wrong right now because some retailers turned off NFC, but that doesn't mean they'll leave it off. Maybe they are just trying to buy some time.

I've seen nothing that says CurrentC will force anything on anyone. Instead, everything I've seen makes me see it as an alternative.

How about this from MCX's blog posting (emphasis below is mine)? If the retailer signs on with MCX (in theory, from the wording shown below), they are only to allow MCX mobile payments. It will be interesting to see how Meijers is dealt with since they are now doing both (since they're Tap-to-Pay credit cards use NFC and they therefore are not turning off NFC functionality).

Does MCX Require its Merchants to Only Offer CurrentCTM?

MCX merchants make their own decisions about what solutions they want to bring to their customers; the choice is theirs. When merchants choose to work with MCX, they choose to do so exclusively and we’re proud of the long list of merchants who have partnered with us. Importantly, if a merchant decides to stop working with MCX, there are no fines.

Back when the MCX merchants first got together, it was in response to a market that lacked a viable mobile wallet that would benefit both consumers and retailers. Today, we believe that need still exists, and our working group is getting ready to reveal a solution that is different from other mobile payment options in many important ways.

They obviously feel their system will benefit consumers. Until it's rolled out and details are available, we are more or less left to guess for now. From the Pay perspective, it benefits consumers and banks/credit card companies (and potentially retailers as well, since data such as credit card numbers will be obfuscated in the retailers system and, even if compromised in a hack, won't be usable).

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If the final version of CurrentC is the best thing since sliced bread, people will use it. So why are they the only ones out there trying to ban others' solutions? Competition produces benefits. Banning competition doesn't and you can ask anyone in the former Soviet Union if you need confirmation.

Again, I suspect they're trying to buy time to re-work their cut of it and bring it to market. Apple does this all the time too. They put down something until they bring out their cut of the same thing. Curiously, before Apple brings out their cut, this crowd argues right with Apple. Then, Apple rolls it out and this crowd flips right with Apple. Look back to even not long before iPhone 6 launches to see so many railing against bigger-screen iPhones. Then Apple rolls them out and the crowd shifts to buying more than ever before. Weeks later now and I still don't notice anyone with specially-made pants with much bigger pockets, nor a big uptick in man purses in the wild.

You can go back to even 1-year old NFC threads where NFC was pounded by this crowd. It's stupid. It's insecure. Why would I want a much thicker phone to get NFC that I would never use? And on and on (this crowd is great at spinning a thousand reasons against something before Apple has it). Where's all that NFC bashing now? Now, we rail against some retailers for turning it off with posts like "I'll never buy anything from them unless I can pay with Apple Pay".

iPad with screens smaller than 9.7" make no sense. People would have to use sandpaper to file their fingers down. Jobs actually said this. Then, Apple rolls out iPad Mini without any sandpaper.

Who wants iPods with video? Jobs spun that too. Then Apple rolls out iPods with video.

Each time, it was an action or spin to buy some time until Apple could roll out their version. Maybe that's what going on here too. Else, you have very smart retailers choosing to turn away money from people who want to pay with Apple Pay and Google Wallet. Unless we write them off as insane or conspiring for no obvious gain, why would they do that? My guess is for the same reasons that Apple poked so much at bigger-screen smart phones before iPhone 6 or smaller-screen tablets before iPad Mini and so on.

----------

How about this from MCX's blog posting (emphasis below is mine)? If the retailer signs on with MCX (in theory, from the wording shown below), they are only to allow MCX mobile payments. It will be interesting to see how Meijers is dealt with since they are now doing both (since they're Tap-to-Pay credit cards use NFC and they therefore are not turning off NFC functionality).

Yes, but that's the thinking today or weeks or months ago. Now they've seen Apple Pay and that thinking seems likely to change. For example, if they couldn't talk Apple into also supporting MCX via Apple Pay, then they would be choosing to turn away all Apple Pay consumers. Same with Google Wallet. And others.

So what's there seems likely to evolve. Or Apple Pay & Google Wallet may already be moving to also support this platform (so that Apple and Google basically don't care if it's "as is" or CurrentC underneath).

We're taking a hard facts, out now Apple Pay platform and comparing it to Vaporware, likely-to-evolve, not-out-until-next-year concept.

 

[Robstevo]

Thankfully I'm in Australia and most retailers are already fully behind NFC payments when it comes to card , chip and pin etc and it's actually not possible now to use your signature for a purchase , your required to use your pin now.

So hopefully when apple sort out a deal worth the banks it will be a seamless switch over.

This currentC thing seems so pre NFC, all new phones have NFC now , Apple has now caught up to the rest as well after years of being behind the game. What's clear to me though is that this is clearly technology that has already been suppassed , yet it hasn't even been release yet.

Scanning a code is so outdated when you can simply tap and pay via NFC.

The fact you have to even:

1: open your phone
2: find app
3. Probably open the app via code unless they have no security.
4. Probably select which account to pay from
5. Hold the code up to the cash register
6. And then it takes it directly of your account

All while mining your data , seems to a over complicated mess that isn't as simple as the current method of

1: Take the card out of your wallet
2. Swipe/tap and pay/ insert card
3. Enter pin and boom

 

[hudson1]

Again, I suspect they're trying to buy time to re-work their cut of it and bring it to market. Apple does this all the time too. They put down something until they bring out their cut of the same thing.

I'm finding it hard to follow your arguments. "Buying time" to you is what the rest of the world calls "collusion to prevent competitive solutions". Is it any wonder the Feds are taking a closer look at MCX? And what is Apple doing that you feel is analogous? We know they aren't working with Microsoft to prevent MS from developing Office for Linux or something like that. "Putting down" something is nothing other than what anyone can do. Telling merchants to shut down a payment system or be fined is collusion to prevent the adoption of others' solutions. My hunch is the government will tell MCX back off or risk a law suit.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

hudson1, believe whatever you want. Deciding not to take payments by NFC is not any kind of offense. Sellers can take or not take any form of payment. These businesses are conceptually turning away business. They could choose not to sell anything to anyone in any way if they like. There is no obligation to sell anything.

If the Feds are "taking a closer look at MCX", it's not because the Feds want to help Apple. If that's actually happening, that's probably the big banks ordering- er, I mean- asking their buddies in the government to put some pressure on a group that might be trying to prevent the big banks from continuing to get the cash flow from the system "as is"... a so-called "protecting my turf" tactic that should be at least as illegal as anything you think you read into that.

The buying time analogy with Apple is putting things down until they get their version of it out. If you want something closer than that, it's Apple not allowing say- Google Maps- in the app store until some time after Apple Maps was out (or any other app that challenged something from Apple).

Or if we want to imply MCX is doing something so wrong that the Feds are "looking into it", the FEDs actually got after Apple for the book pricing thing and that involved Apple "conspiring" with book publishers to basically raise the prices of books for consumers. Remember that? No? Here's a link: http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/17/technology/apple-ebook-settlement/index.html

So if we want to imply wrongdoing, we have actual actions of the Feds against Apple vs. an insinuation that the Feds might be looking into something within MCX. Actual tends to weigh more than insinuation (but probably not with you).

 

[tom123]

The fact you have to even:

1: open your phone
2: find app
3. Probably open the app via code unless they have no security.
4. Probably select which account to pay from
5. Hold the code up to the cash register
6. And then it takes it directly of your account

6. Doesn't sound like a credit card, as I don't have 30 days to pay.

 

[donny77]

I don't like the data mining part of CurrentC either. But don't fool yourself into thinking that since Apple Pay doesn't collect transactional data, your transactions are not collected by the credit card companies underpinning Apple Pay. They mine it. They sell it. Apple Pay is just a layer. Underneath it is big banks who are masters at making tons of money without having to make any tangible product. While Apple is doing a great job of spinning how THEY are not collecting data, the banks underneath Apple pay are also in the transaction. They know. They have the data. And they can mine it and sell it.

And sure, the retailers will price credit card transaction fees into their pricing. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't look for ways to reduce their costs. Apple works very hard to reduce their costs too. Do you really think the components in products Apple updated months or years ago cost as much now as they did when they were new? So Apple does the work to reduce such costs over time and enjoys the added profit by still selling Apple products at the same pricing. These retailers are trying to reduce transactional costs while still selling products at the same pricing. Same objective. And nothing particular wrong with either.

But they are my bank. Unless I limit myself to cash only withdrawals they will have this information. Apple Pay is not facilitating them getting this data. Right now, today both merchants and banks get this info. Apple Pay cuts the merchant out form this data, unless I choose to scan a loyalty card, and they do not add themselves into the mix. This is a net positive, a big net positive.

CurrentC on the other hand is a big net negative. You are now not only providing data to a merchant, but also potentially a conglomerate of merchants. Walmart might see my purchases at Target. Additionally I am storing my account information in a target-rich cloud and hoping they have adequate security. Lastly, my bank STILL has access to the data. Even as an ACH, the Bank knows who is getting paid and how much. Oh, and I lose all the fraud protections and charge back capabilities of VISA/MC. The absolute only "positive" with CurrentC, is scanning your loyalty card and payment information in one scan.