Skip to main content

Merchants aren't 'skeptical' of Apple Pay, they're just self-serving

Apple Pay, the contactless payment system announced by Apple last September, absolutely faces challenges when it comes to gaining widespread adoption by an industry not always aligned with the best interests of the customer. No, not Hollywood — big retail. The top 100 merchants in the United States of America.

Reuters ran a survey to find out what those challenges were, but framed the results in such a way as to make the merchants seem "skeptical", when the actual data seems to suggest a far better term would be "self serving". When reached for comment, Apple told iMore:

"Customers love Apple Pay and we are very happy with the progress of our rollout since launching just six months ago," an Apple spokesperson reiterated to iMore. "We've spoken to all of the top 100 merchants in the U.S. and about half will accept Apple Pay this year, with many more the following year. There's tremendous momentum from not only large retailers but also Main street merchants, with payment service providers telling us they're seeing unprecedented demand from small and medium businesses nationwide."

That "about half will accept Apple Pay this year" is what the company's CEO, Tim Cook, previously referenced in his year of Apple Pay comments back in January. Reuters seemed eager to suggest Apple wouldn't make it, less eager to report Apple was sticking to it.

Regardless of whether or not Apple makes it to 50 exactly, that's absolutely the attitude and drive I want them to have. For far too long mobile payments have been an afterthought — if the mainstream public gave them any thought at all. Being ambitious is what's gotten Apple Pay into hundreds of thousands of stores (opens in new tab) in just one country and in under a year, and it's absolutely what's going to get them further.

As for the retailers, some said cost was an issue when it came to accepting Apple Pay. This read as sophistry to me. U.S. retailers already need to upgrade to support what is, in Canada and Europe, the widespread security and convenience offered of pin-and-chip and near-field communications. (NFC).

I'm not sure what Apple-specifc costs retailers want us to believe exist, since Apple's documentation lists none that I can find. Perhaps training staff to explain the privacy and security benefits? Otherwise, faster transactions and no risk from data breaches seems like an enormous cost-savings, at least to me.

Of the more candid retailers, 28 said they weren't accepting Apple Pay because they couldn't get our data from it. That doesn't shock me at all. Data is money. And the various analytics and brokerage there of can be an important revenue stream all on its own. So, it's understandable some merchants want to own it.

But with big data comes big responsibility. Given the breaches that have happened with merchants large and small over the last few years, when it comes to my data — especially my financial data — I'd just as soon the merchants have precisely none of it.

None of it to lose, none of it to exploit without giving me something of value in return, and none of it to compromise my security or privacy on their or anyone else's systems.

In that way, those 28 merchants have done me a service. They've made my decision about where to buy easier. Expressly: not from them. Not unless and until they give me options or incentives that make it better for me. Not just for them.

For right now, merchants are running out of excuses that don't make them seem out of touch or disingenuous, and that's putting it mildly.

I'm looking forward to having Apple Pay, and at shopping at all the fine retailers that have the good sense to support it. Because that's in my best interests.

Rene Ritchie
Contributor

Rene Ritchie is one of the most respected Apple analysts in the business, reaching a combined audience of over 40 million readers a month. His YouTube channel, Vector, has over 90 thousand subscribers and 14 million views and his podcasts, including Debug, have been downloaded over 20 million times. He also regularly co-hosts MacBreak Weekly for the TWiT network and co-hosted CES Live! and Talk Mobile. Based in Montreal, Rene is a former director of product marketing, web developer, and graphic designer. He's authored several books and appeared on numerous television and radio segments to discuss Apple and the technology industry. When not working, he likes to cook, grapple, and spend time with his friends and family.

76 Comments
  • So educate me - what kind of data can merchants actually get from other forms of mobile pay, like Google Wallet (or the upcoming Android Pay) for example? And I mean legally, not from a security breach or anything along those lines. Edit: I'm wondering if the 28 that said they didn't want to use it b/c they couldn't get the data were making a blanket comment about mobile pay in general, or something more specific to Apple Pay vs other forms of mobile payment.
  • They were speaking of mobile pay, not just Apple. Sent from the iMore App
  • Far as I know, Google's payment solutions are the same as Apple Pay, and no customer data is divulged. But Google of course will use your purchase data because they're soulless shills. True Story!
  • @The Jimmy James, That's incorrect. Google Wallet did not offer convenience, security, nor privacy. Google Pay does, but most Android devices in use aren't compatible with it.
  • I cannot say it's on par with Apple pay but Google Wallet does offer all of those. Sent from the iMore App
  • Google Wallet lacks the security of biometric authentication; requires the user to register their credit card number(s) with Google; requires an inconvenient and inefficient process that includes unlocking your phone, opening an app, and entering a PIN#; and allows Google to capture all of the user's purchase history for data mining and monetization. Therefore, Google Wallet offers neither the convenience, security, nor privacy. of Apple Pay.
  • Have you actually used Google Wallet? First... If you want to use a credit card with ANY mobile payment system, you have to register that card with somebody. Apple Pay doesn't magically know your credit card numbers. Second... no, you don't have to open an app and enter a pin # before hand. You merely tap your phone (whether it's asleep in standby, or awake and preprapared) and you're ready to go. Third... if you for a minute think that Apple Pay doesn't log the same transactions as Google Wallet... you're deluding yourself. In fact... it's mandatory. Fourth... Biometrics are a convenience, and not the most secure method. But hey... let's not let fact get in your way.
  • Actually, your wrong. Apple Pay doesn't log the same transactions as Google Walle,. so you're the one deluding yourself. Biometrics are a convenience, and the most secure method. But hey... let's not let fact get in your way.
  • Meh Google wants info apple wants money nether are saints but overall apple pay is a tad more secure. How Apple Pay and Google Wallet actually work | Ars Technica
    http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/10/how-mobile-payments-really-work/ Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • @Kitwalz No, every company wants money. The difference is in how they make that money - by selling a quality product or service to their users or by giving away a product or service and then monetizing the users' personal information for advertising. With Apple, the user is the customer. With Google, the user is the product being sold.
  • With Apple Pay, you do not register any credit cards with Apple. The card is registered between the device and the card-issuing bank. Big difference compared to Google Wallet, which requires you to register the credit cards with Google as the middle man. With Apple Pay, Apple does NOT keep a history of what you bought or from whom. Biometrics are not just a convenience. They allow the user to securely complete a transaction with great convenience. If Google Wallet allows you to make a payment just by tapping your locked phone, then that is the same as no security. Anyone who steals your phone can make payments with it. Google realizes that everything I said is true and a competitive disadvantage, which is why they copied Apple and announced Android Pay, which incorporates biometrics and non-sharing of your credit card number with the merchant. The two big differences are that only a tiny number of Android phones have a functional biometrics sensor and that even with Android Pay, Google will track every detail about every purchase you make.
  • Meh I am fine with that could careless ether way. Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • Convenience: true, you have (present tense, Wallet is still a thing) to unlock your phone, tap the reader and enter your Wallet pin, but with Smart Lock and a homescreen shortcut it's not that much more time consuming. Security and privacy: Wallet also tokenizes your info, just in the cloud rather than on-device. Less secure, but still better than actually using a card. Also, its called Android Pay, which is compatible with any Android device with M that has NFC. Just because it's a Google product means they're using it for advertising monetization, and no one else does this? Does iAd not exist?
  • "Also, its called Android Pay, which is compatible with any Android device with M that has NFC." Without a fingerprint sensor, the user must choose between security and convenience. What percentage of Android phones in customers' hands have functional fingerprint sensors? (And by functional, I mean sensors that are mounted on the front of the phone and actually work, as opposed to those old Samsung rear-mounted sensors that are a pain to use, unreliable, and ergonomically ridiculous.
  • I have a hunch you get your Android news from iMore... Samsung has never made rear fingerprint sensors. The only phones that have those are a few older HTC devices and a Huawei phone or two. Also, having played around with the HTC One Maxx, the sensor is right where my finger naturally rests, so for phones without hardware navigation keys it's the most logical place to put it. Let's see, the Galaxy S5 probably sold about 25,000,000-30,000,000 units, the Galaxy Note 4 probably around 10,000,000 units, the Note Edge sold about 1,000,000 and the S6/S6 Edge has sold about 20,000,000 combined. (I'm not including rear-facing fingerprint reading phones simply because you asked me not to, and I'm also only menti8ning phones available in the US) That's about 56,000,000-61,000,000 phones on the market TODAY. Surely more S6s and Note 4s will sell, the Note 5 will be released and several other phones will have fingerprint readers by the time Android Pay rolls out. By the end of the year, it's not illogical to presume that 100,000,000 phones will be able to use Android Pay as easily, securely and privately as iPhone users can Apple Pay. (Sundar Pichai says that 7 out of 10 Android phones in the US can use Android Pay. Not sure if that's with fingerprint authentication, but it's and official number and should be included in this post) On privacy, Google can't be selling banking info to advertisers. For one, it wouldn't really benefit anyone, and two, if the public found out the company would be done for. Just because some corporation has the ability to do someone doesn't mean they will or are. Apple could buy Microsoft, Google and Luxembourg, but they haven't.
  • (This would be an edit to my previous post, but my edit window is up) I just realized that Android Pay works with any device with 4.4 (39.2% of world market share), 5.0 (11.6%) or 5.1 (0.8%, I'm running 5.1.1 on my OnePlus One) and NFC. It's just being LAUNCHED with M. According to Sundar Pichai, this is 7 out of 10 Android phones in the US, where it will (probably exclusively, I don't remember if they mentioned availability at I/O) be initially launched.
  • @tnt4, Google Wallet required customers to provide Google with their credit card numbers and details about everything they purchased using the service. The newly announced Google Pay will work on a tokenized system (copied from Apple) that shields the user's credit card numbers and purchase history from both Google and the merchants (but only a tiny percentage of Android devices on the market are compatible.)
  • R. I agree with your assessment regarding the ease-of-use of Apple pay. It's extremely fast, convenient, and simple. CurrentC removes the option of privacy from the customer. Not the mention the fact that it was hacked while in beta. And I'm suppose to give you direct access to my bank account; no thanks, Apple pay please! Sent from the iMore App
  • You seemed to have overlooked "insufficient customer demand" as a top reason. Not to mention this zinger from Apple partner IBM "Apple has yet to answer the question "what is in it for us if we use Apple Pay?". Then finally, there is the survey: "A survey released in March by shopper insight firm InfoScout and PYMNTS.com of more than 1,000 iPhone6 users found that while 15 percent of them had tried the payment system, only 6 percent said they continued to use it." Apple needs to make Apple Pay something customers, instead of geeks, want to use.
  • Insufficient customer demand is really the main reason at this point. Maybe that will change in 5 years, but right now, the percentage of consumers that utilize (and want) payments through their phones is so small that some business have no good reason to adopt it.
  • Can't say it better than that.
  • I have an iPhone and I wouldn't use Apple pay. You know why? It's stupid as hell. As mentioned, Canada and Europe already have a standard. What the hell is wrong with adopting it? Android has the largest market share and Rene here is flabbergasted why every retailer doesn't run out and buy all new hardware for Apple pay? Didn't even spend ten seconds thinking about it before you wrote it, did you, Rene? That's some serious blind fanboy shit you having going on, Rene.
  • @Novron 1) We're presently talking about the US, not Canada or Europe. 2) Google Wallet, Android's long standing NFC payment system, is neither convenient, private, nor secure. For these reasons, nobody uses it in the US. The newly announced Google Pay (predictably) copies all the good innovations from Apple Pay, but given the fragmentation of the Android market, only a small percentage of users have compatible devices. 3) Retailers with NFC capabilities refused to allow Apple Pay because a) they want to hoard and monetize customer data and b) they want a payment system that cuts out the banks and their fees. 4) While Android has much greater marketshare than iOS globally, in the US they are virtually tied. More importantly, though, iOS users are far more engaged, spend far more money, and are overall far more attractive customers than Android users, hence the reason why the former receive far more attention from developers.
  • This is an Apple centric website. Maybe it would sound more palatable to you if he said mobile payments. But he's talking about Apple. These same shitty retailers wouldn't take Google pay either. The point is, the technology exists to make every purchase you make safe from hackers. I've been burned by a breach prior to Apple Pay and it makes people like me ecstatic to use something that protects my data from flawed systems or intentional malfeasance. Maybe you should be more concerned about why retailers would rather have your hackable data than protect you, their paying customer so that you will remain their customer. I've not shopped at the place that got my data hacked in over a year. I welcome safe secure mobile pay in its multiplicity of forms, as long as it services the needs of the holder of said device. Sent from the iMore App
  • Why weren't users using it more often? 1) Forgetfullness: 32% forgot it was an option.
    2) Awareness: 31% were unaware that merchant accepted NFC payments.
    3) Preference: 20% wanted to use a different payment method (cash, a pay card unsupported by the platform, or something connected to a rewards program ).
    4) Inability: 15% didn't have the phone on hand or the store didn't accept Apple Pay. Of the 85% who still hadn't used Apple Pay, most cited reasons that can be attributed to ignorance. 1) 37% thought they had no reason to change
    2) 31% were unfamiliar with how system works
    3) 15% were worried about security
    4) 11% had never heard of Apple Pay when they completed the survey.
  • Does it say who the 28 merchants are? Would love to stay away from them.
  • "As to the retailers, some said cost was an issue when it came to accepting Apple Pay. This read as sophistry to me. U.S. retailers already need to upgrade to support what is, in Canada and Europe, the widespread security and convenience offered of pin-and-chip and near-field communications. (NFC)." This has been well-documented. Retailers do not wish to pay credit card transaction fees. At smaller establishments, per-transaction credit card fees take a real bite out of their small margins. At larger establishments who benefit from economies of scale, the credit card fees do not much harm their margins, but it is still hundreds of millions to billions of dollars per year that they have a strong interest in avoiding. You earlier bashed me for "reality distortion field" and buying into propaganda concerning a company being benevolent when it comes to Google; the same is true of Apple with Apple Pay. Apple sided with the credit card companies - and the banks that issue them - in a very real high stakes financial dispute with retailers. But instead of coming out and saying: "well the banks and retailers are fighting over billions and billions of dollars in credit card fees and we're siding with the banks because they offer us the path of least resistance and one that gets our product out there the quickest because we saw what happened to Google when they refused to take sides, failed to court the banks or the retailers and instead wound up being blocked by both AND the carriers, so we are going to claim that our siding with the banks is in the interests of consumer security and privacy." Of course, the banks benefit from Apple Pay. Of course the credit card companies benefit from Apple Pay. But the retailers do not. As a matter of fact, Apple Pay makes it even less likely that people will use cash or write a check or use a debit card for small transactions, which hurts the retailer even more. It is easy to call the retailers greedy when you aren't the one forking over billions to the credit card companies. Truthfully, the credit card companies are just as greedy for wanting their transaction fees, and Apple is just as greedy for simply picking sides and applying PR pressure to the retailers. This is how it works: Apple is pressuring the retailers to implement THEIR solution that results in MORE PROFITS for Apple, MORE PROFITS for the banks and credit card companies but LESS PROFITS for the retailers, and this makes the retailers the bad guy? Please!! Yes, retailers are going to be required to implement NFC. (Although the requirement is not immediate. Upgrading to NFC terminals is VERY EXPENSIVE, a capital outlay of hundreds of billions for large retailers that have to outfit tens of thousands of cashier and self-service checkout lanes - and millions for the mom-and-pop shops that have to do the same, and in the latter case I imagine that this requirement will run them out of business by the way - they have every incentive to put it off until the very last minute.) But that does not mean that they are required to implement Apple Pay or any other solution that requires them to pay credit card fees. They are perfectly free to search for some other solution that allows them to avoid the credit card fees, including one where the customer's bank account is drawn instead, or perhaps one where an intermediary is used and pays the credit card fees for them (such as PayPal, where the interaction between the credit card company or bank is handled by PayPal, who then pays the retailer). Your claim that the only reason why stores do not want Apple Pay is because they want the data is disingenuous to the point of dishonesty, when in fact these same stores also block Google Wallet. Data may be valuable to these companies, but avoiding credit card fees is even more valuable. If the retailers are smart, they will work something out with PayPal or some other company in a way where that other intermediary will be able to pay the credit card fees while still making money. Or they will create some sort of running "same as cash" account that customers can upload money into and use for NFC payments. Another strategy still: these retailers could form their own bank or their own credit card so that any "fees" would be paid to themselves. Whatever happens, do not think that these retailers are going to just roll over because Apple throws around the "privacy", "security", "convenience" buzzwords and uses their PR machine to try to bully them. There is too much money at stake, and they won't have Apple Pay (which again is nothing more than a mere collusion of Apple and the banks/credit card companies, not some altruistic virtuous endeavor on Apple to make the world a better place and to protect and serve their beloved consumers) forced on them until it is absolutely demonstrated to them that their own solution is unworkable. After all, not all of the customers of these retailers are going to use Apple Pay anyway: what percentage of the population has an iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus or an iPhone 5 and an Apple Watch? Either way, these retailers are going to have to support multiple solutions anyway. If they can arrive at something that works that cuts out the credit card companies, they can just refuse to support Apple Pay and force their consumers to use whatever system (or systems) that they adopt.
  • Thanks for educated commentary to balance out this uneducated article. Posted via S6 Edge
  • There you go again. At this rate you're going to be on the New Reads shelf at your local library. The comment section isn't a place for your article length opinions. If you're going to do that, start your own website or blog. Nobody came here to read your novels.
  • Long, yes, but insightful and rational compared to Rene's tunnel-vision and biased writing on these subjects.
  • Well put. I almost didn't get to this point because of that book. Sent from the iMore App
  • "Retailers do not wish to pay credit card transaction fees. " In the US do you really have all these retailers who refuse to take credit cards? All the contactless part of Apple Pay and similar things adds is convenience and security for the users - it makes no difference to the shops who will eventually end up with modern card processing devices to handle C&P payments regardless of contactless payments coming in or not.
  • The shops may have to pay additional fees on top of the standard credit card fees. I'm in the process of implementing Apple Pay and had to switch credit card processing companies to avoid paying for tokenization. Both Wells Fargo Merchant Services and ChasePay require the merchant to use a third party service (Freedom Pay) that charges $39/month and $0.06/transaction. That's a big expense if the merchant's transactions are small on average.
  • Are you sure retailers are going to be required to add NFC support? I thought it was only "chip & pin" that is going to be required- but both are usually included in one upgraded device. Sent from the iMore App
  • Itprogrammer - you are delusional. PAYPAL is the last card I reach for and has the worst customer service and they charge the merchant just like any credit card company does. I would not want for any merchant or service to have direct access to my bank account. I and most others like the idea of buying now and paying 20-30 days later without being charged a fee.
  • Meanwhile the likes of Canada, Europe and Australia have moved onto NFC based contactless payment long ago while the U.S. is dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Sent from the iMore App
  • As with many other things. Did someone say healthcare?
  • @ITprogrammer, you wrote: "Retailers do not wish to pay credit card transaction fees." This has nothing to do with Apple, as merchants already pay those fees to banks for each and every credit card transaction. Apple does not charge merchants a fee for Apple Pay. Many retailers already have Apple Pay-compatible NFC payment systems but they intentionally blocked Apple Pay because they want to push their own proprietary system, CurrentC, to cut out the banks while still hoarding user data. CurrentC will fail because it provides none of the convenience, security, or privacy of Apple Pay. it was a system created entirely to meet the needs of merchants while ignoring benefits to end users.
  • Just a little correction, PayPal does not "somehow" pay the fees, you do when you use PayPal, read your statements. Your article is insightful, but I still see it as genius business strategy on the part of Apple, and I don't mean that sarcastically, to simply fall into line within the banking/credit card systems so that it does not add another layer of fees on top of existing ones, to use its payment services. This is kind of what PayPal does, but again, check your PayPal statements and tell me you're not getting charged those fees, because I am.
  • LOL you are really going to go out of your way to curb your spending habits just because they don't offer NFC readers at some stores so you can use your phone instead of a credit card like you have been for years? XD what makes this even more funny is you and lots of hardcore Apple fans dismissed mobilr payments and said it wad a gimmick before Apple adopted it after everyone else. LOL how things have changed on your perspective on mobile payments in such a short time...
  • Could the change of heart be in the details? No other mobile payment system offered anonymized credit card numbers. No other mobile payment system offered one time PINs. No other mobile payment offer exceptional fingerprint authentication. Apple Pay offers all of these things. This is why I am excited about & use Apple Pay as often as possible. I am just as happy that others now offer similarly secure systems. Together we can propagate mobile payments and make it the standard! Sent from the iMore App
  • Um...Google Wallet does. Apple Pay functions EXACTLY the same as Wallet except it has biometic authentication via Touch ID whereas Google Wallet uses pin authentication. Google Wallet has used Host Card Emulation since the fall of 2013 (the anonymized credit card numbers you referred to), a year before Apple Pay was even a thing. The truth is this....Apple Pay is encountering the SAME difficulties Wallet has (retailers rolling out NFC payment terminals). It is just finally now that the Apple camp is starting to see the same roadblocks in America with mobile payments that others already had. And if these studies are accurate, a very tiny percentage of people have tried Apple Pay AND continue to use it on a regular basis, just like Wallet. It has nothing to do with the services being bad. It has to do with a paradigm shift in this country's feelings about mobile payments and NFC and of course more retailers installing systems that support it. I know it is a me-too kinda service, but because they bought Loop Pay, Samsung Pay may actually become the real winner in all of this as its mobile payment system will actually work WITHOUT need for an NFC reader (not sure how, but it works with existing POS systems at stores). If this holds to be true, that can be huge (I am a Nexus fan so I would rather see NFC that Google Wallet/Android Pay and Apple Pay be successful instead)
  • Google Wallet, which rolled out years before ApplePay and the recently announced Android Pay, failed to secure broad partner interest owing to Google's insistence on its servers tracking every transaction, among other reasons. ApplePay and Android Pay use updated technology that emphasises more anonymous, secure token based methods than Google Wallet.
  • I don't think you get it...Google Wallet functions EXACTLY like Android Pay and Apple Pay. It has the SAME Host Card Emulation/Token-based payments. The only differences between Pay and Wallet is Pay will finally get biometric authentication for transactions as Android M finally gets a native fingerprint API and the Android Wallet API will allow third party apps to use the payment system from inside so basically Google acts as the payment processor. Before, you had to use Wallet to do it. The whole Android Pay thing is a rebrand for the most part of an existing system which has the features you mentioned.
  • VAVA, You're spot-on with the technology, but as far as Google's (as well as the retailers, merchants and forensic accountants) unquenchable desire to track users' spending activity is concerned, their implementation has had Google's partners taking a long, hard look at the travails of book publishers under Amazon's boot at the current time (Hatchette, for instance) to see what certainly could befall them further down the line.. Not for nothing are the futurists and futurologists proclaiming that the world of banking is about to get seriously disrupted, starting with mobile payments. In five years, Brett King says, the biggest banks in the world won't be banks; they'll be tech companies. These partners' best mobile payment efforts like the hapless CurrentC pale into insignificance before Google's fearsome data collection, AI and number-crunching prowess; and yet the lure of more profits, targetted advertising and the like (which is what Rene is talking about) will be the bait that hooks them (and their users) into the dystopian future that our increasingly nosy, intrusive governments will do nothing to curtail. http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/06/05/bold-bet-that-banking-industry...
  • If you've read all of the posts carefully I think you will see we have been over Google wallet ad nauseum, let's please move on - at least to Google pay. Google wallet is moot.
  • They were not the reasons put forward by the the turncoats that didn’t want NFC.
  • I actually do. If you've ever had your data stolen and credit card compromised it makes you feel secure knowing that there is card tokenization. Now it restaurateur would get on board! Sent from the iMore App
  • "Of the more candid retailers, 28 said they weren't accepting Apple Pay because they couldn't get our data from it." That's why I switched from CVS to Walgreens. Because CVS doesn't accept Apple Pay and because they're trying to mash up a low-end Apple Pay wannabe. Why? To track their customers' purchases, shopping habits, and demographics. To hit them with better ads from their other customers: businesses who want to promote their products in and out of CVS stores. I used to happily flash my CVS card when I used to shop there, but now I just tell them "No, I'm not a member." The clerk swipes a generic customer card at the register for me anyway. Now I buy at Walgreens. With my Watch.
  • I'm sure they miss you Posted via S6 Edge
  • They miss me too. If it was just one person that switched, they wouldn't care, but as more switch and wherever there is a CVS, there is a Wallgreens, it is just as convenient. I have had my credit card info breached many times now. That is the reason I am using Apple Pay.
  • Sounds pretty retarded. I shop at places that give me the best deal. I couldn't care less about apple pay. Or using my watch to pay. I've yet to understand the excitement about this. Racking up reward points or getting the best deal overrides any desire to use apple pay.
  • Yeah... but... altruism... privacy... spend spend spend.
  • This. People vote with their wallets. When you visit a shop or website looking for a product you go to that product or category and search more often than not by price, (sometimes popularity). The payment method is probably last in the chain of decisions you make, you know below things like delivery, customer service, colour etc etc.. "Yeah, that TV is $20 cheaper down the road if I swipe my credit card but it’s not secure or convenient enough so I’ll just pay the extra with my watch thanks”. LOL.
  • I did the same exact thing. Not sure what you think, but I really love the switch. It's awesome that the loyalty card just pops up from the lock screen whenever I'm in the store, then finishing off with  Pay. But more than that, they're really friendly in there. I'm always asked, non-aggressively, if I need any help with anything. Just a much better experience overall. I wouldn't have known had CVS kept  Pay support.
  • It's even a little better than that, I carry an unregistered CVS card around of my own and get the same benefit without having to rely on the clerk.
  • Well said Rene, well said.
  • If you guys think just using Apple Pay is keeping these companies from tracking you, you're sadly mistaken.
  • How do you figure? Sent from the iMore App
  • Does google collect on every transaction like Apple does? Sent from the iMore App
  • I'm guessing that they do. Google does nothing for free! Sent from the iMore App
  • Apple does? Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • Obviously you didn't read the information about this when ApplePay was announced. The merchant is charged $0.00 additional for accepting ApplePay. Apple gets 0.15% of the *credit-card processor's existing fee* per transaction. So if someone buys $100 at a store, and the CC processor gets a 2% fee, the processor gets $2.00. Apple gets 0.15% -- three tenths of a cent -- from the CC processor -- for that transaction. The real problem here is crybaby retailers who want to muscle the credit-card companies out of the way, and want direct access to the customer's data. No f'ing way.
  • Well, I'm not going to type a dissertation on this like some others; seems to me that the merchants mainly want some of the very data that Apple isn't collecting (or wants). Which, you know... eh. It is what it is. They want the data, they want to advertise and track buyers for future sales, etc. understandable... but I applaud Apple for doing what they're trying to do. It's still early, the rollout is still ongoing (not even all Apple Stores take Apple Pay, or at least a few months ago they all hadn't). We'll see... when it gets more traction (or release) worldwide, and people WANT it, it'll flourish. I'm not using Current-C, or whatever it is. Sent from the iMore App
  • Too damn bad for the retailers. If things like Apple Pay don't truly take hold, I'm going back to paying entirely in cash. My purchasing habits are none of their damn business.
  • Visiting Lebanon now. My iPhone's Apple Pay works at a lot if merchants with wireless terminals. I think once these terminals catch on in the U.S., Apple Pay will be accepted more widely
  • And Google Wallet/Android Pay, or any other NFC-based mobile payment service that uses Host Card Emulation.
  • Google Wallet requires you to give Google your credit card numbers, allows them to track your purchases, and is a pain in the ass to use. Google Pay, the newly announced payment system copied from Apple, offers similar privacy and convenience as Apple Pay, but due to Android's ridiculous fragmentation, only a tiny percentage of the installed base has compatible devices.
  • All processors charge merchants. This isn't news. Merchants will adopt new hardware only when they're forced through compliance. Once they do, payments will move to NFC. If consumers were intelligent they would demand these payment methods now as they are entirely more secure than traditional cards. Sent from the iMore App
  • Thank you! Sent from the iMore App
  • I'm in Canada and I have mobile payment on my Note 4 with TD Visa.
    It works everywhere that contact less credit card payment works, which is most places, but not all. And in the places it does work, there is a limit to your purchase amount. In a grocery store it might be $50. In the liquor store it's $100. From what I hear, when Apple pay makes it to Canada the limitations will be about the same.
    What I am saying is that mobile payment is a novelty. It will be a long time before you leave the house without your wallet. I can't count on mobile payment to be accepted at the small restaurant that I want to pop into for lunch or for the amount of my fill up at a particular gas station.
    Even when I do use my phone, I pull out my wallet to store the receipt.
    I do use the phone once in a while but it's basically to show off to tell the truth. Using the card is just as easy and just as fast.
  • So in Canada you can actually get cleared to buy more alcohol than food!? Sorry, but, WTF?! (Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled programming.)
  • The merchants decide the limit that they will accept on mobile payments. It's not a national policy. Posted via the iMore App for Android
  • You make some great points, Rene. Like you I'm becoming more and more conscious of the facts of my mobile security and not so willing to give it freely to anyone that has a great free product. I hope this trend of asking questions and demanding answers from these giant mobile companies about what they do with our data. This year alone I fell victim to the Target breach, Home Depot breach, and Aetna (Blue Cross Blue Shield Insurance) breach. I'm tired of signing up for credit monitoring services because a company irrisponsibly gathered and stored my data. I know this doesn't fully pertain to Apple Pay, but the fact is (like you mentioned) that when data is stored and sold there is a chance of that data being abused and even stolen. It is beyond me that someone can get my name, address, credit card numbers, and social security all in one place from one company and still that company hides behind their wall of silence. Great article. Keep them coming.
  • The key is they don't get the data without offering us something in return. Example. Walgreens. And Panera. Two early Apple Pay supporters. Two stores with a loyalty card that I earn rewards with. They get my data anyway. And my loyalty cards? Already in Passbook. Lowes will adopt Apple Pay, I am sure. And they have the My Lowes card. Mine, again, stored in Passbook. So this is how forward thinking companies will solve both issues. As a side story, Home Depot did support Apple Pay and other NFC payments up until recently. I spoke with someone in the CEO customer relations department the day all the "Home Depot shit off Apple Pay" before they later announced they were working in official support. I had emailed the CEO and got a call back in about 90 minutes. The woman explained to me that she wasn't sure of the details, but that she heard there was a system upgrade that conflicted with their NFC terminals. And assured me that prior to the Holiday shopping season, they would be an official partner. Yesterday I was purchasing materials to build a new deck for my pool and was talking to the Manager as I was checking out. I opted for the chip and "pin but sign" ( here in the U.S.) and he was like "great to see you using that. I wish more people did. And I mentioned I would be using Apple Pay if they still accepted it, but knew it was coming. He told me they had to shut off NFC payments because it was conflicting with the chip and pin system, and they had just recently turned that on, and that is when their unofficial support for Apple Pay stopped. He said the software they used had/has a bug, so they focused on chip and pin because of the changes coming this year, and will now be working to correct the NFC issues. So they have a valid enough reason, and at least this store manage knew what was happening, so sounds as though there is a plan in place. Sent from the iMore App
  • It's interesting that HD says that chip and pin conflicts with NFC. It must be a Home Depot thing. In their Canadian stores they also have only chip and pin as an option, no NFC. (I don't know about swipe and sign as I have not done that in years. Every card I have has a chip and every terminal I have paid at has chip and pin.)
    The thing is, many other stores here do have chip and pin along with NFC. But NFC is limited to small purchases. I guess the idea is that you'd be limited to smaller losses if you dropped your card on the street and someone picked it up and started waving your card.
    And that is why I doubt we'll see anyone paying for material for a deck at Home Depot with their phone anytime soon. That would be a $100 plus purchase, which is what the limit seems to be. A contact less payment is a contact less payment whether with a phone or with a card.
    For that reason, I don't see the traditional wallet going away any time soon.