Australia may recently have said “G’day” to Apple Pay, but when it comes to the country’s overall embrace of Apple’s NFC payment platform, well, let’s just say that a few more shrimps could be tossed on the proverbial barbie.
That’s because, despite now being available to Amex customers Down Under, Australia’s Reserve Bank is being pushed to examine anti-competitive behavior due to Australia’s major banks allegedly freezing out Apple Pay — and thereby denying choice to customers in terms of digital payments.
Australian Labor spokesman on digital innovation, Ed Husic, has written to both the RBA and the Australian Bankers’ Association, arguing that retail banks have “effectively boycotted” Apple Pay.
“Australian consumers should not be denied the ability to make payment choices that are openly available to consumers globally,” he wrote. “No doubt some will argue this move by the banks is anti-competitive – I am certainly concerned that it denies consumer access to a secure, efficient payment platform.”
Husic isn’t an Apple shill, either. In the past, he’s been a vocal critic of the company’s pricing.
What’s he asking the RBA to do is to find a way to break up the monopoly that banks in Australia currently have on payment products.
“I would urge the RBA – more specifically the PSB [payments systems board] to consider the introduction of enhancements to the national payment systems framework to encourage greater tech neutrality and enhance consumer choice.”
Mastercard is reportedly keen to make Apple Pay available in Australia, although rival Visa is siding with banks. As with other countries like China, one of the big issues with adopting Apple Pay seems to be the fee that Apple is asking for.
In the U.S., Apple reportedly earns around 15¢ for every $100 of transactions, while transaction fees come to about $1 per $100. In Australia, meanwhile, banks make the equivalent of just 50¢ per $100 — although Apple is still demanding the same 15¢ cut.
Source: Sydney Morning Herald
Luke Dormehl is a U.K.-based journalist and author, with a background working in documentary film for Channel 4 and the BBC. He is the author of The Apple Revolution and The Formula: How Algorithms Solve All Our Problems … and Create More, both published by Penguin/Random House. His tech writing has also appeared in Wired, Fast Company, Techmeme and other publications.
76 responses to “Australian banks accused of freezing out Apple Pay”
The big 4 Australian banks make massive profits each year (around $7 billion each), so you can see how this would send them to the poorhouse. I will almost certainly refinance my home loan next year and they won’t be getting my business.
Our banks here is Australia are money hungry pricks who only care about their profits. They all need to be investigated.
Apple makes massive profits too! Samsung and Google are acceptable to the banks because they aren’t asking for a cut of the banks’ fee; indeed, rather than the banks pay Apple a fee, Apple should pay the banks a fee for the right to use the banks’ payment system to promote their iPhone product …
Apple Pay: a solution to a problem that does not exist …
Most Android phone still do not have secure one-tap fingerprint readers for one-step payments and Android Smartwatches are still taking their sweet time catching up to the Apple Watch with one-tap mobile payments.
No wonder Apple Pay dominates Google Wallet/Pay to the tune of capturing two thirds of all mobile payments revenue after only a few months in existence compared to Google Wallet being around for years prior.
Those banks that have signed up for Apple Pay love how much more secure Apple Pay is than tap to pay cards or pin and code or of course swipe cards. That’s why they have been so keen to sign up and have been more than happy paying Apple that tiny 0.15c in the dollar surcharge in the USA. Australian Banks and Apple just need to negotiate a reasonable fee sooner or later or they’re going to see more defections to AMEX and whichever other banks jump into bed with Apple.
Apple Pay: a solution to a problem that Google failed miserably at providing a compelling solution for years.
“As those of you who follow PYMNTS know, we do a quarterly survey of ~2,000 consumers with iPhone 6 and now 6s phones. We don’t ask them what they might do when it comes to using Apple Pay to pay or remembered doing, we actually see what they have done in the stores where Apple Pay is available for them to use.
“And quarter after quarter, what we’ve found is that those consumers who can (have the phones and shop in stores where it is accepted), really don’t use it much at all. Usage has stalled. After looking at this for a year, 5 percent is about the extent of the usage after more than a year in the market.
“That means that of the transactions where Apple Pay can be used – consumers and merchants both equipped with the right handset/app and POS environment, 5 percent of them use Apple Pay to checkout.”
Read about it and weep, Apple fanboys (and shills) …
PYMNTS survey is more a factor of how archaic the US payments scene is than anything else. With still far too few merchants stuck in the Dark Ages not supporting NFC tap and go payments, uptake is obviously going to be slow. Once we start getting data from markets like the UK where NFC readers have a far larger penetration we’ll see how it goes.
Mind you, until the limit on contactless payments is increased from the anaemic 20-30 pound limit in the UK/Eurpoe to acknowledge the far greater security of the Apple Pay architecture, uptake will probably be slow there for the time being. Apple is patient though and from the start said they’re in it for the long haul.
Of course needless to say, Google’s mobile payments share is way behind Apple despite the multi-year head-start which makes one realise there’s a bit more weeping going on in the Android camp.
With Apple again pulling in 360% greater online payments revenue than Android users as over Black Friday it continues to be the case that Apple users generate far greater revenue than Android for e-commerce providers so no doubt mobile payments will continue to be all about Apple with Google remaining a footnote.
I accept that you don’t like facts but you really should peruse the results of that survey by PYMNTS a little more closely (“Issuers To Apple Pay: Just Say No!”)—you might just learn something about how little non-fanboys care about mobile wallets in general and Apple Pay in particular …
Apple Pay—a solution to a problem that does not exist—LOL …
So, no answer to the fact that PYMNTS survey merely reflects the slow uptake of modern NFC readers in the USA eh Phil? With Apple dominating Google in the mobile payments field despite Google’s multi-year attempts you seem to be smarting?
Apple Pay – the solution to the problem of insecure, slow, traditional payments options.
Clearly, you are incapable of absorbing the results of that survey; it’s got nothing to do with the “Stone Age” state of payments in the US; it’s a survey of people who had the opportunity to use Apple Pay and did or did not use it; next you will be complaining that the survey is of only 2000 people; I suggest that you read and reread those paragraphs again, more slowly …
“As those of you who follow PYMNTS know, we do a quarterly survey of ~2,000 consumers with iPhone 6 and now 6s phones. We don’t ask them what they might do when it comes to using Apple Pay to pay or remembered doing, we actually see what they have done in the stores where Apple Pay is available for them to use.
“And quarter after quarter, what we’ve found is that those consumers who can (have the phones and shop in stores where it is accepted), really don’t use it much at all. Usage has stalled. After looking at this for a year, 5 percent is about the extent of the usage after more than a year in the market.
“That means that of the transactions where Apple Pay can be used – consumers and merchants both equipped with the right handset/app and POS environment, 5 percent of them use Apple Pay to checkout.”
And you refuse to understand the reasons why usage may be slow in the USA for the time being. If most of your retailers don’t accept your mobile payments it is no surprise many might instead revert to the swipe card that works everywhere until retailers get their act together and join the 21st century.
Meanwhile Google’s solution stagnates even more. Apple has patience.
As I have previously said, you apparently are incapable of absorbing the results of that quarterly survey by PYMNTS; what more can I say; you probably also believe that the world was made in six days …
Still denying that the lack of merchants supporting Apple Pay in the USA are no doubt the major reason for limited usage in that nation eh? You can see the results but not the cause, that’s unfortunate.
Back under your bridge, Mr Troll. You know usage of such a system is a choice, right. Not everyone will choose to use it.
And is that not what I have been saying; the research shows of those that could, only 5% did; clearly, Apple Pay is not going to take over the world …
All the hot air pouring out of the Apple Dept of Spin is cooling …
So bitter for one so young. Do you get along well with other trolls, or do they think you’re wasting your time as well?
No bitterness here; but I suffer fools poorly; and I base my opinions on reason, logic, facts, ie, knowledge, not unquestioning “faith” …
“Troll”? I’d rather be accused of being troll than an ignorant fanboy or a paid shill; now, which category do you fall into?
Still resorting to insult and invective instead of logic Mr Cohen? You’re still stuck looking at effects rather than going the next step and understanding the cause. Once nations that have far greater availability of NFC readers get easy access to Apple Pay we’ll be able to make a more substantial of success or failure. At this stage of course Google Wallet/Pay is far more of a “failure” than Apple Pay.
“Still resorting to insult and invective instead of logic … ”
Me not using “logic”? Do you understand the meaning of the word? Your argument appears to be based solely on your “faith” belief that the Apple iPhone is going to take over the world, and ignores the reality of the demonstrated low use of Apple Pay to date by those who have had the opportunity to use it.
“Once nations that have far greater availability of NFC readers …”
Now, does not that state already exist in Australia, where EMV cards have been ubiquitous for ~10 years and NFC terminals almost so for some years now?
Do you not think that the major banks may possibly have done their research and found that the demand for Apple Pay, and the benefits to the banks, is simply not sufficient for the banks to consider paying Apple a fee to allow Apple to use the banks systems to promote their iPhone products. Now, as said before, if Apple was instead to pay the banks a fee or even to offer their Apple Pay service for free, probably the banks would be quite happy to enable Apple Pay for those few who would bother to use it …
Further, there are differences between the U.S. and Australia with regard to caps on the transaction fees that the banks can collect; for instance, in Australia, interchange fees that the Australian banks may receive are statutorily constrained to a maximum of “0.5 per cent weighted average”; so, why would those banks (other than the considerably higher-fee-charging Amex Bank) want to pay Apple an 0.15% fee for a solution to a problem that, in the minds of the great majority of people (even 95% of potential Apple Pay users), simply does not exist?
You still don’t comprehend the idea that many people will give up using Apple Pay at all because more often than not it doesn’t work for them in a nation (the USA) where NFC readers are not ubiquitous. That is why trying to extrapolate PYMNTS survey to nations like Australia where NFC readers are everywhere is not logical.
Apple has already negotiated far lower rates with UK banks so what makes you think Apple hasn’t already placed similar lower rates on the table to banks in Australia? It would not be at all surprising if a smaller Aussie bank breaks rank to offer Apple Pay as a differentiator and then we’ll get a much better idea of what the usage rates are like when a vastly greater percentage of retailers offer the service.
Judging from previous experience where smaller competitors offering the iPhone or other Apple services have been so successful that the larger holdouts have eventually capitulated for fear of losing even more customers, I think the bigger Aussie banks will cave in eventually.
You
are naïve if you think that the Australian banks, having made a considered
decision to not pay Apple a fee for its Apple Pay interface, will ultimately
reverse that decision of any basis other than a fee-free arrangement. There is a
lot more to retail banking than simply supplying a service that, demonstrably,
few so far seem inclined to use.
Then, for those fanboys that must have Apple
Pay there is always the option of applying for an Amex card; the only problem
then is finding merchants that will accept Amex. Bear in mind too that Amex is
not a retail bank; every Amex card holder still has to have a bank account with
one of those obstinate retail banks in which to store their surplus funds.
Regardless it will be interesting to see what ultimately are the statistics
produced by Amex’s embrace of Apple Pay. Methinks they are going to be
disappointed as I suspect most Amex users would prefer to be seen directly using
their “platinum” card.
Then, if you are so keen on using a mobile to make
payments you can always get a new Samsung …
Please. As if Banks and every other business in the world don’t make a decision as a negotiating tactic that can change in a minute. They’ll come around, just like Verizon did, just like China Mobile did, just like DoCoMo did and just like virtually every bank in the USA and slowly but surely the UK have.
When the most lucrative user base in the world is a potential customer base, you change. Considering 5% of the 770 million active iOS users in the world is still almost 40 million users, any business would be foolish not to target them.
First of all, Apple Pay is not available to all 770 million iOS users; only those with the latest iPhone or iWatch; and then it appears to be potentially only ~5% of those …
Second, Apple didn’t develop Apple Pay to benefit the banks or the banks’ customers; they developed Apple Pay to better promote the sale of more iPhone/iWatch products …
That is the commercial reality. It follows then that the banks may well be interested in negotiating the payment of a fee by Apple to the banks to allow Apple to better promote their latest iPhone/iWatch products on the back of the banks’ payment systems; if I was a banker I would be interested in such a deal …
Declaration: I do own Commonwealth Bank shares; otherwise, I only have a layman’s interest in the workings of the payments industry …
Now, what’s your declaration “melci”? Are you simply one of the Apple “faithful”—or are you an Apple shareholder/employee/contractor/shill”?
With Apple selling close to 292 Million TouchID equipped phones and tablets and Apple Watches just in the last 12 months alone, 5% of which is still 14 million users. And this figure doesn’t count the millions of TouchID equipped devices sold since the introduction of TouchID in 2013.
Remember that Apple Pay’s Apple Watch NFC capability works even with the old iPhone 5s and also works online on web pages (no need even for NFC).
Of course this assumes slow uptake due to lack of NFC infrastructure which isn’t a problem in other countries like Australia.
In terms of my declaration – I don’t touch the stock market with a barge pole, work in a university surrounded by Apple, PC and Linux devices and enjoy a mature debate where I see one. :-)
Defections to Amex? You have to be joking, of course …
Sorry to break it to you Philip but it’s happening already and as I say, as soon as Apple signs up more banks in Australia and Canada we’ll see how much more pressure the big Banks feel.
Again, as you have demonstrated recently on a nonsensical SeekingAlpha article (“Apple The Biggest Threat To Visa And MasterCard”—LOL), you again here demonstrate that you have little idea of what you are talking about; obviously, you can only be a naïve Apple fanboy, and there is nothing inherently wrong with that; only that you don’t allow facts get in the way of your fanboy delusions …
Apple Pay—a solution to a problem that does not exist—as too are all the other digital wallets …
Resorting to the ad hominem attacks when logic fails you eh Phillip?
Apple Pay is significantly easier, faster and more secure than tap to pay cards, pin and code and swipe cards.
Just tapping your Apple Watch on an NFC terminal to pay means no reaching into your pocket to get out your wallet – no having to use two hands fishing around for the card while trying to hold your shopping – no more fiddling to get the card back in your wallet and pocket as you juggle your purchases.
Paying at stores that have Apple Pay, as long as you have your Apple Watch on your wrist you can leave your bulky wallet at home and not have that worry.
In terms of security, anyone could steal your PayPass tap and go card and make dozens of purchases before you realise it is missing. That is why the TouchID Fingerprint reader on the iPhone is a vastly more secure option. Since you only have to hold the iPhone with your thumb on the Reader/Home button, it is also faster than having to fish your credit card out of your wallet after getting your wallet out of your pocket.
And the Apple Watch is also far more secure as it senses when it is removed from your wrist and immediately locks the device, requiring a PIN the first time you strap it back onto your wrist.
Apple Pay – the solution to the problem of insecure, slow traditional payments options even if you try desperate to deny it.
Pray tell me what about my posts on Seeking Alpha were incorrect Mr Cohen?
Or do you not understand that EFTPOS providers do indeed provide an alternative to the credit card companies with lower surcharges and thus savings for retailers and consumers and thus represent a clear and present danger to VISA and MasterCard if Apple chooses to bypass them with Apple Pay.
I don’t recall you commenting on the nonsensical SeekingAlpha article that I referred to, and on which “melci” has made numerous uninformed Apple=fanboy comments; or are you simply acknowledging that you too are an Apple fanboy and therefore facts are of no interest to you?
And, what’s EFTPOS got to do with this? EFTPOS is owned by a consortium of Australian banks and major retailers; I would suspect that EFTPOS is no more interested in paying Apple a 0.15% fee on the value of its “debit” only transactions than are the major Australian banks on their MasterCard/Visa credit or debit card transactions. Regardless, EFTPOS’s transaction fee is similar to that of a PIN-secured point-of-sale “debit” transaction via MasterCard/Visa.
“… a clear and present danger to VISA and MasterCard if Apple chooses to bypass them with Apple Pay.”—LOL …
By that utterly nonsensical statement you demonstrate that you have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about. Do you really not understand that Apple Pay is not a payment system but merely a “mobile” interface to the MasterCard/Visa systems; and, it’s irrelevant that MasterCard/Visa have enabled Apple Pay; it’s the individual issuing retail banks that has to agree to pay Apple a fee, not MC/Visa …
Sheesh …
You don’t seem to be aware that “EFTPOS technology originated in the United States in 1981 and was quickly adopted by other countries.” “For EFTPOS, US based systems allow the use of debit cards or credit cards.”
You also don’t seem to be aware that many retailers here in Australia charge an extra 1.5% or thereabouts on purchases when VISA or MasterCard is used while EFTPOS debit cards incur no additional fee.
That is why Apple Pay using EFTPOS rather than VISA/MC is so interesting.
Fanboy, I happen to live in Australia too, I’ve had a real credit card merchant account with a retail bank on several occasions in the past; I’ve got a good layman’s understanding of how the system works. The Australia EFTPOS operation is effectively owned by a consortium of Australian banks and a number of major retailers; EFTPOS in Australia processes PIN-secured “debit” transactions only; EFTPOS survives at the whim of those major banks and retailers.
Regardless, whether EFTPOS transacts only debits, or credits also, is irrelevant; if it was a “credit” transaction, the banks want their risk premium, that usually in the range of 0.5 to 1.9%, and yes, in such circumstances merchants are entitled to recover that fee from the buyer Aldi surcharges 0.5%.
Debit transactions via MasterCard/Visa incur a similar fee to EFTPOS …
“That is why Apple Pay using EFTPOS rather than VISA/MC is so interesting.”
I think you are confusing Apple Pay with PayPal; now, which are you, an Apple Pay fanboy or a PayPal fanboy, or are you simply uninformed.
Sheesh, again …
OK, Melci, now that we have established that you don’t know the difference between Apple Pay and the clunky PayPal, let’s have a look at the proposed PayPal–EFTPOS situation; “PreyPal” apparently has joined EFTPOS, not to facilitate mobile point-of-sale transactions, because those still require a PIN, but as an alternative online access to buyers’ funds for a PayPal user’s online transactions; how EFTPOS is allowing “PreyPal” online access to bank debit accounts without a PIN is a mystery to me at the present.
Nevertheless, apparently they are going to get such access. Possibly “PreyPal” will be accepting any fraud risk and/or paying a higher transaction fee than otherwise for a PIN-secured point-of-sale transaction, but that fee still less than that for a credit card source, with the added advantage that EFTPOS transactions are in “real time” unlike direct debits via the banks ACH system.
Regardless, this partnership will benefit no one but “PreyPal”. PayPal’s small merchant account users will still be being paying PayPal’s usurious discount fee of up to 3.9%+30c. And you think that MasterCard/Visa are expensive …
Frankly, anyone that gives “PreyPal” access to their funds other than via a credit card (with the protections that a credit card affords) has got to have rocks in their head; any one that accepts a payment via “PreyPal” for anything of a value greater than that which they can afford to lose, likewise …
What’s PayPal got to do with the price of fish in China? We are talking about the possibility of Apple signing up with EFTPOS providers around the world as an alternative to the credit card providers. Simple.
One last thought, Melci, if you think that EFTOS is the answer to the supposedly high credit card transaction costs in the U.S., do tell me why the MCX consortium, in the U.S., is desperately trying to develop its clunky, independent, “CurrentC” system?
Regardless, if merchants don’t like the cost of “credit” transactions they have always been free to refuse same and accept only “debit” transactions, as did retailer Aldi in Australia, until retailers were given to right to recover that cost with a surcharge on the consumer.
One thing I am sure of is that Apple is never going to be the answer to any reduction in payments processing transaction costs …
All you have done is show another alternative to credit cards in the USA – the MCX Consortium who could indeed link up with Apple down the track when they realise CurrentC is dead in the water. Apple’s small surcharge is far lower than VISA/MC’s so could prove to be a compelling alternative that would finally bring modern tap-your-wrist to pay convenience and security to Walmart et al.
And, once again, you demonstrate that you have absolutely no idea of how the credit card system works or indeed what function the MasterCard/Visa systems actually perform; the only thing that you apparently have is an unshakeable faith that Apple will solve every problem for mankind—at a cheaper price—LOL…
You truly are naïve; Apple’s “small surcharge” is only Apple’s asking fee for supplying an interface on its iPhone and that cost it is NOT “far lower” than VISA/MC’s share of the transaction cost; and, in any case, Apple Pay is still only an interface to that credit card system; it is not a payments system in its own right; and, such systems have greater costs to run them than simply the cost of providing a point-of-sale “interface” …
“a compelling alternative that would finally bring modern tap-your-wrist to pay convenience” … dream on …
Come on Phillip, aren’t you capable of holding an adult conversation without the flying insults. It severely impacts your credibility as a mature commentator.
You don’t seem to understand that because the EFTPOS consortium cuts out VISA and MasterCard, if Apple did sign up with them then of course the credit card companies would be impacted. Not sure why you bring PayPal into the discussion as it is irrelevant whether they are part of the consortium or not.
Melci, Apple is not involved with EFTPOS that I am aware; if you have some information to the effect otherwise, do let us know. The reality is EFTPOS in Australia is a “debit” transaction only and now used by relatively few consumers; it’s simply easier use the “debit” function of a MasterCard/Visa credit card, if you are so inclined, and carry one less card; regardless, no one is interested in paying Apple 0.15% of the value of a “debit” transaction when that 0.15% fee is likely to represent a large portion of the otherwise nominal EFTPOS fee …
I seem to be now losing comments faster than I can make them; obviously the moderators agree with you rather than me; I see no point in continuing this debate any further; you are free to carry on in your deluded state …
So, no reply to how Apple Pay is far more secure, easier, faster and only requires a tap of the wrist vs both hands being required to phaff around pulling out wallets and cards while still trying to hold shopping?
I don’t care how much more secure or easier it is; the fact is, only 5% of those that could use it have bothered to do so …
And that my dear Phillip is why you seem to be blind to the problem that Apple Pay effectively solves. Whether there is lower uptake for Apple Pay in the USA at the moment or not because of low availability of NFC readers is irrelevant to whether Apple Pay represents a considerable improvement over POS credit cards in actual use.
So, no reply to how Apple Pay is far more secure, easier, faster and only requires a tap of the wrist vs both hands being required for
The difference is that banks are still (barely) providing a service, not selling a product. You don’t have to buy from Apple, but almost everybody with a mortgage deals with a bank.
I have no doubt that if Apple offered to provide the Apple Pay service at no fee, simply on the basis of being able to better promote their iPhone products, the banks would be agreeable; it’s a two-way street; Apple seems to think it’s a one-way street; dream on Apple-eaters …
The situation in the U.S. keeps being brought up; let’s see how long the U.S. banks remain agreeable to paying Apple a fee for only a 5% share of Apple’s minority share of the world’s smart phones; the remaining phones eventually offering a like service for a zero fee …
Phillip’s post seems to have vanished, but this is what my reply was to him:
You seem to be unaware that Apple’s 800 million iOS users are by far the most lucrative demographic in the world shooting far above their weight compared to the 1.4 Billion Android users out there.
In terms of third party e-commerce revenue, iOS users generate 400% greater revenue, 1,790% greater Advertising ROI, 92% of mobile phone industry profits and 70% greater developer revenue than all Android users put together.
Android users actually cost more money than they generate in advertising revenue and are only a small minority of business users (64% to 78% business market share). Even Google makes 70% of their global mobile search revenue from iOS users!
As a result, Banks and retailers would be utterly foolish to ignore this lucrative demographic which is why eventually they’ll cave in and negotiate an appropriate surcharge with Apple. It’s certainly possible considering the banks in the UK were able to negotiate a much lower tariff for Apple Pay than the US. Methinks the Australian banks are just being a bit too greedy. From your experience as a fellow Australian, I assume you would not be surprised by that?
No one has yet mentioned that, notwithstanding many of the American banks falling all over themselves in the rush to embrace Apple Pay, the Canadian retail banks have give Apple the same cold shoulder as have the Australian banks; Apple Pay is likewise available in Canada only via Amex Bank—LOL …
Simply negotiating positions. They and Apple will eventually negotiate an arrangement, particularly once the first small competitors jump in and start stealing customers. It’s happened before and it will happen again. No one can resist the lure of the world’s most lucrative demographic.
I don’t want my buying behaviour data being held by Apple. My bank and my Credit Card provider are too many already. My bank, Commonwealth Bank, is a leader in innovation and already provides NFC payments (via debit and credit card) for more than 1 year now to most Android phones.
You’ll be pleased too hear then that Apple doesn’t keep any record of transactions (unlike Google who then uses that data to target ads at you).
The Commonwealth Bank’s app does not do tap your wrist and go NFC payments with the Apple Watch or with one-tap TouchID auth from the iPhone. Considering the 37.8% – 45.1% of the Australian smartphone market which has iPhones represents the most lucrative user base in Australia, the Commonwealth’s app is not going to cut the mustard I’m afraid.
Agreed, Apple collects no data on Apple Pay transactions; indeed, Apple Pay is no more than an iPhone interface to the banks’ NFC credit card readers …
But, it doesn’t look like Apple Pay is going to get the opportunity to “cut the mustard” at all, except with a few real Amex cards, in Australia or Canada …
The positiosn of banks in Canada and Australia are no more than temporary negotiating postures. It is inevitable that they and Apple will sooner or later come to an agreement considering the lucrative demographic that Apple users represent.
Neilsen reports that 40% of iOS users have incomes above 100K versus only 25% of Android users, while double the percentage of Android users have incomes below 25K.
Likewise, CIRP reports that twice as many iPhone users have incomes above 150K as Samsung users and 45% of Samsung owners have incomes below 50K versus only 32% of iPhone owners.
In addition, the fact that the iOS platform generates 1,790% greater Advertising ROI (people actually buying things off ads), 500% greater e-commerce revenue and 80% greater developer revenue than all Android devices combined demonstrates this as well.
No sane, money-hungry bank is not going to want to keep a piece of that action once a smaller competitor signs up with Apple and starts sucking away their most wealthy customers.
With your every comment, you are sounding more and more like a naïve Apple shill …
Regardless, none of your comments alter the fact that Apple needs the banks; the banks do not need Apple …
Nor that Apple Pay appears to be a proprietary solution to a problem that does not exist …
Careful Phill, you’re drifting back into ad hominem attacks again – watch out or they may bar you again! :-)
In terms of who needs who, it is the banks who make their money from financial transactions, not Apple. We’ll see who needs who when a smaller Banking competitor starts drawing away Aussie bank’s highest income customers once they are able to take advantage of a far more secure and easy way of paying for goods courtesy of Apple Pay.
Dream on …
Uhuh, another reply from Mr Cohen filled with cuttingly incisive logic, detail and references. Or perhaps not.
Oh well, have a nice day Phil!
“The verdict about Apple Watch satisfaction rate is out and it is certainly no sweet music to Apple Inc.’s ears. The latest Apple Watch survey by Wristly shows that 45% of Apple Watch owners stopped wearing the device in two weeks. Just about 30% of the surveyed Apple Watch dissatisfied owners reported wearing their devices occasionally.
…
“Due to the various unpleasant things in Apple Watch or its operation, 45% of owners stopped using the wearable two weeks after they bought it. Although some users tried to be more patient by using the wearable for more than two weeks, they eventually gave up on it.
“Wristly’s survey also established that 50% of the gray aluminum Apple Watch Sport owners keep their wearable in the drawer compared to 65% of owners of the steel Apple Watch model. …”
More Apple hot air cooling, apparently …
Oh dear, you’ve fallen for the mis-reporting of the Wristly survey hook, line and sinker haven’t you Phillip.
If you go read up on the survey proper you’ll find that Wristly reports a gob-smacking 97% satisfaction rate by users of the Apple Watch.
Wristly then looks at the 3% who reported dissatisfaction with the Apple Watch:
“In other words, this survey focused solely on that 3% sliver of unhappy Apple Watch buyers. The purpose of the survey was simply to shed light on why the unhappy customers were unhappy. (It ignores why 97% of the customers were happy.)
Wristly’s survey also showed that the dissatisfied have a funny way of being dissatisfied. 30% said that they still wear their Apple Watch and 41% said they’d consider buying the next version. Yet Fortune ran this story under the headline, “top reasons people gave up on the Apple Watch.”
So much for Apple hot air cooling. Oops eh Phillip? :-)
Well, at least I sent you scurrying to look for the survey, hey; gave you something to do …
No scurrying needed, that was already a well-known media beat-up. Anyone interested in the Apple Watch already knew about Wristly’s excellent surveys.
Now you on the other hand are obviously scrabbling for something, anything negative to say about Apple…
“Between 6 and 7 million Apple Watches have been sold to date. During the fourth quarter (third since launch) I expect another 6 to 7 million units to be sold. That places the Watch launch at a higher sales rate than the iPhone (3.7 million in three quarters), even with the iPad (14.7 million) and slightly lower than the Mac’s *current* volumes (15 million in the last three quarters, 31 years after launch.) Selling 13 to 14 million of a new category product, in three quarters, priced at an average of $400 is extraordinary by any measure. Moreover that’s equivalent to over $5.5 billion in revenues that just appeared out of thin air.”
Yet another amazing Apple success story that you can’t seem to fit into your world-view Phillip.
And you still claim that you don’t shill for Apple—LOL …
…while you of course are a completely un-biased dispassionate observer who wouldn’t DREAM of racing over here to post something, anything disparaging about Apple the minute you stumbled across it without any fact-checking, would you. ;-)
Hey melci, how about this, the rest of the InfoScout findings …
“How We Paid on Black Friday 2015 …
“iPhone Users
“Apple Pay 2.7%; Credit or Debit Card 79.2%; Neither 18.1%”
“Android Users
“Mobile Wallet 2.0%; Credit or Debit Card 73.5%; Neither 24.4%”
Looks like the plastic card is going to be with us for a very long time yet …
I reckon it will indeed take a long time for Apple Pay (and Google Wallet etc) to get to critical mass in the USA as there are just too many impediments to its success at the moment. Just read any of the comments alongside articles talking about Apple Pay and every single comment from someone who has tried it complains about 90% of the retailers in the USA that they have tried still not supporting it with NFC readers out of order or taped over or completely missing. It’s going to take a long time to drag US retail into the 21st century.
Then there is also the fact of ridiculously low limits on mobile transactions where banking policy hasn’t caught up with the far more secure TouchID and AppleWatch authentication features of Apple Pay that mean far too many purchases are over the limit and can’t be paid for with Apple Pay.
Thirdly, I wouldnt be surprised if Apple Pay usage is low in Australia and Canada where only AMEX has signed up so far – a card which far too few retailers support means again that users will just give up trying in frustration after the second or third failure.
Then there is the fact that while Apple Pay is the real killer feature of the Apple Watch, tap your wrist and pay – even with the Watch’s record-setting launch beating out the iPhone and the iPad’s first 9 months on the market – it is still going to take quite a while for there to be enough out there to make an impact. As it is, even though there have been an industry-leading 7 million Apple Watches sold so far, that is still only 3% of the number of iPhones sold in the last 12 months. :-)
However, as I’ve said previously, once the major Banks in Canada and Aus finally sign up – no doubt pushed by smaller competitors jumping in ahead of them and stealing their customers – then we will finally get a real idea of the real take-up possibilities.
Apple has said they are in it for the long run so we wait and see.
Still, you refuse to accept (or comprehend) that the lack of usage of Apple Pay has little to do with the lack of NFC in the U.S. The availability of NFC in the U.S. surely has improved over the past 12 months and yet the usage of Apple Pay has dropped from ~5%, to 2.7% on Black Friday, a big selling day when the supposed greater “convenience” of Apple Pay should have had it doing better. Regardless, the research on the lack of use specifically states that Apple Pay was not unused due to a lack of NFC but was not used where Apple Pay was accepted, and yet 95% (or 97%) of users chose not to use it …
“As those of you who follow PYMNTS know, we do a quarterly survey of ~2,000 consumers with iPhone 6 and now 6s phones. We don’t ask them what they might do when it comes to using Apple Pay to pay or remembered doing, we actually see what they have done in the stores where Apple Pay is available for them to use.
“And quarter after quarter, what we’ve found is that those consumers who can (have the phones and shop in stores where it is accepted), really don’t use it much at all. Usage has stalled. After looking at this for a year, 5 percent is about the extent of the usage after more than a year in the market.
“That means that of the transactions where Apple Pay can be used – consumers and merchants both equipped with the right handset/app and POS environment, 5 percent of them use Apple Pay to checkout.”
Maybe, I should more accurately be signing off with, “Mobile Wallets”—the solution to a problem that does not yet exist …
Phillip, what you continue to do is confuse PYMNTS report of Apple Pay usage in the USA with the *actual desire* of the users themselves.
What Wristly has found is that a massive 96% of Apple Watch users WANT to use Apple Pay more, but are currently frustrated with lack of retailer support in the USA particularly. As I have said, Apple Pay is THE killer app on the Apple Watch and with the enormous early growth in Apple Watch sales we should see this push demand enormously going forward.
From 9to5Mac:
“A new survey of Apple Watch owners by Wristly found that 80% of those in the US and UK have already used Apple Pay, and suggests that this number could eventually hit 95%. The survey was limited to the two countries where Apple Pay is currently available.
The firm found that only 19% of Watch owners hadn’t yet tried Apple Pay, and of those only a quarter of them either had concerns or saw no benefits, suggesting that the rest were likely to try it at some later point.
The data also found that owning an Apple Watch dramatically increased the chances of using Apple Pay …
By comparison [with the 80% of Apple Watch owners], the various surveys published in 2015 in the US assess Apple Pay usage level on iPhone 6 at around 15% to 20%.
Apple likes to use the term ‘magical’ to describe many of the experiences offered by its products, and it appears in this case owners agree with them – 51% saying that ‘magical’ was the best word to describe the experience of paying for something with their Watch, while 42% opted for the more prosaic ‘convenient’ (that was probably the Brits …).
Unsurprisingly, most Apple Watch owners said they preferred the watch to their iPhone when it came to using Apple Pay, just 9% preferring to use the phone.
And for any retailers unsure whether supporting Apple Pay would be worthwhile, a massive 96% of Watch owners want to use it at more locations, with 62% of them visiting supporting retailers more often.”
“Phillip, what you continue to do is confuse PYMNTS report of Apple Pay usage in the USA that with the *actual desire* of the users themselves.”
Clearly we have a different understanding of the meaning of words in the English language …
“… of the transactions where Apple Pay can be used – consumers and merchants both equipped with the right handset/app and POS environment, [only] 5 percent of them use Apple Pay to checkout.”
Clearly you don’t understand the concept that after the 3rd unsuccessful attempt at using Apple Pay, users will give up trying even at retailers who do accept it. People will not want to risk the disgruntled people in the queue behind them as they try then fail to use their iPhone and then have to fish around for their wallet.
You also neglect the fact that Apple Watches only make up a few percentage of overall iPhone ownership – an interesting parallel to the few percentage who continue to use Apple Pay.
As Forrester says, with far more ubiquitous availability of modern NFC readers nationwide in countries like the UK and Australia, we should see a very different picture once the figures start coming in (allowing for so far limited Bank uptake).
Ah, go on; tell me again that you don’t work for Apple; anyway, time will tell …
You’ve got a real chip on your shoulder there haven’t you Phil? Any more flawed anti-Apple studies you want to dredge up to have a laugh about?
Here is what Thomas Husson from Forrester Research has to say:
“I believe adoption in the UK will be faster than in the US for a number of different reasons:
* The NFC and contactless ecosystem is much more mature in the UK.
* There is no consortium of retailers like MCX with ConcurC led by Walmart willing to launch a competing offering. That said, Zapp is likely to be main competing service when it launches in October with the backing of Sainsbury’s, Asda, House of Fraser, Thomas Cook, HSBC, First Direct, Nationwide and Santander. Barclays, the one major UK bank not backing Apple Pay, just announced today they will also support Zapp at launch.
* The inclusion of Transport for London as a partner is a way to raise awareness and accelerate daily usage.
* Apple will benefit from a larger installed base of compatible devices (iPhone 6 and 6+) and from the awareness created by the media buzz from the US launch.”
EMV/NFC adoption in Europe is similar to that in Australia. Regardless, the reality is, “mobile wallets” appear to be a solution to a problem that does not exist; I will opine that Apple Pay will ultimately be no more successful that has been mobile payments on Android phones, as is being demonstrated by the current round of research; them both running at about 2-3% of users …
96% of Apple Watch owners say you are dead wrong.
The fact that you can’t comprehend that simply taping your wrist to pay while holding your shopping is far preferable to fumbling around for a wallet, fishing out a card with two hands, tapping your card and then putting it back in your wallet all while trying to juggle said purchases boggles the mind.
The fact that you also can’t appreciate the vastly improved security of Apple Pay and potential for far higher transaction limits compared to the 20-30 pound or AUD$100 limits on PayPass cards that can be stolen and used all day long without any authentication is also astounding.
There’s multiple problems solved right there – no wonder 96% of Apple Watch owners indicate they want to use this solution (that 41% of them call magical) everywhere.
Ah, you make it sound so hard to use a credit card! But, of course, you must be right; that’s why the InfoScout research showed that more iPhone users directly used a credit card (79.2%) than did Android users (73.5%) …
But, by all means, keep pumping out all that Apple hot air …
More Apple users use Credit cards because Apple users have higher salaries and have more disposable income than Android users which pre-disposes them to use credit cards for the higher values of their purchases.
As I might have mentioned earlier, Neilsen reports that 40% of iOS users have incomes above 100K versus only 25% of Android users, while double the percentage of Android users have incomes below 25K.
Likewise, CIRP reports that twice as many iPhone users have incomes above 150K as Samsung users and 45% of Samsung owners have incomes below 50K versus only 32% of iPhone owners.
In addition, the fact that the iOS platform generates 1,790% greater Advertising ROI (people actually buying things off ads), 500% greater e-commerce revenue (people buying things off the web) and 80% greater developer revenue (people buying apps and in-app purchases) than all Android devices combined demonstrates this as well.
So go on, tell me can you use your credit card while holding and arm-load of shopping by simply tapping your wrist on the terminal? No? Of course not. Ipso facto, Apple Pay on the Apple Watch is indeed vasty easier to use than a credit card.