Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by not-my-account 941 days ago
Hm, what would this mean for Apple Card users? Would it be shut down? How about those who have Apple Savings Accounts?[0]

[0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/04/apple-cards-new-high-...

6 comments

I'm assuming it will be just like any other time a card portfolio is sold or transferred (Costco Card: Amex -> Citi, REI Card: US Bank -> Capital One, GM Card: Capital One -> Marcus (which is Goldman, ironically I think they want to get rid of this card too), etc...). Unless Apple discontinues the card completely, they will choose a new bank, that bank will take on the existing portfolio, everyone will get new cards (maybe numbers depending on how they did the BINs)...but with the physical card not having a visible number, the apple pay card being able to be automatically updated, and the virtual card's number being right there in the app it should be pretty painless.

Since Apple manages the whole thing through their own app and not a Goldman Sachs app, it should be fairly seamless as everything should look the same and you won't need to make a new login or worry about how to start paying a new bank. If there's new cards to be issued it's likely it will just show up in the Wallet app and they'll mail you a new physical one. Last year Apple moved the Apple Cash card from Discover to Visa and most people didn't even know that happened. There was even a button to switch it over sooner if you wanted to.

With the Savings Account I expect it will be similar as long as they can find a bank willing to offer a similar APY. Especially for people who just use it with the Apple Card and don't deposit directly to it using the routing/account number, you probably won't really notice.

source: all speculation, but I have worked extensively in payments for years and have launched banking products.

Great benefits for Apple Card users to have Apple abstract all the drudgery away. Experience is the differentiator, back office is a commodity.

What’s left is to make Apple Cash a deposit account with FedNow instant payment rails access. Buy a distressed regional bank to get a charter if needed. Every iPhone user then becomes a potential banking customer (136M US iPhone users, compared to 66M JPMC household customers, for example). Interchange revenue will slowly decline (again, FedNow), which Apple can compensate for with the deposit spread.

There are lots of downsides to actually becoming a bank, though. It creates many restrictions on the kinds of things you can do, and unless it's the majority of your business, it's not something you want. Better to work with banks but not be a bank yourself.
I suppose it’s going to depend on how many willing partners are out there with an appetite to be beholden to Big Tech as the smaller partner with less leverage. Evolve just dumped a bunch of fintech partners over the last year (conversely, they were aggressive in who they were willing to partner with), and moving is not trivial. While Apple has deep pockets, I’m sure engineering time is better spent delighting users vs engineering around partner churning.

https://fintechbusinessweekly.substack.com/p/evolves-problem...

Depends if Apple really feels they can run a backoffice banking arm effectively and cheaper than a partner that is already at scale.

Underwriting credit & customer risk, handling edge cases, maintaining relationships with ATM networks, card networks and ensuring compliance with state and federal banking rules is quite an undertaking.

Goldman Sachs did not have scale like Chase, Capital One and others to create a diversified portfolio of clients, limiting their ability to hedge against the risks of a single platform or two dominating their involvement in this market. One bad software update by Apple could flood their support queues, and they can't afford to keep significant staff on hand to keep wait times below an hour (unlike a larger company, who is already staffed up to serve their non-Apple customers).

Is that still the case if the bank is a subsidiary?
Yes, the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 regulates "any company which has control over any bank".
Hat tip. This part is so important. It prevents a non-bank from taking over a bank with the implicit goal of lending money to themselves. This would be a real danger.
This is the perfect opportunity for them to acquire Apple Bank https://www.applebank.com/
I imagine they'll replace the physical cards as the existing ones have Goldman's name on the back. The transition could otherwise be nearly invisible, the Goldman name and actual card numbers don't show up often in normal usage.
New card better have the same weight and feel! It’s what made me want to sign up if I am being perfectly honest. I mostly tap to pay but enjoy getting the card out every once in awhile.
Ugh, please no! I think it’d be cooler if it was lighter and slimmer than other cards, not 4x as heavy.
Minor nit:

> Costco Card: Amex -> Visa

Amex -> Citi.

Amex was both the issuer and the network (they're vertically integrated, so to speak). The shift saw Citi become the issuer on the Visa network.

my bad! updated, I was thinking Citi but Visa came out after typing Amex right before. thanks!
>Unless Apple discontinues the card completely, they will choose a new bank

That's the problem. All other banks turned Apple away because Apple was demanding some significant concessions. Goldman agreed to them because at the same time they were trying to break into the consumer business.

Apple will have to cave.

That was before Apple had however many card customers they now have.
I had the Uber credit card which at launch had something like 4% cashback at restaurants/bars/uber trips.

Uber progressively slashed the benefits overtime to the point where it just had some generic 1% cashback. That was through Barclays and eventually they shipped me some vanilla master card with no benefits.

I hope the Apple card doesn't follow a similar path.

Ah yes I remember the black Uber card. IIRC you got $50 annually for subscription services along with some other unheard of perks.
The rumor is that Apple Card will move to Amex. WSJ says 12-15 months, but AppleCard is contractually obligated to use the MC network until 2025.

I can't imagine they'll close all those accounts, so likely we'll see some sort of migration leading up.

This would be a bit of a detractor for me, Amex is not as widely accepted, especially when traveling in Europe. Mastercard is accepted virtually everywhere in the EU and UK.
I hate that it works this way, but perhaps an Apple-Amex deal is what is needed for businesses to start accepting Amex.

Edit: typo

What would that change?

Amex acceptance in the US is basically ubiquitous, and how would a new type of Amex change things abroad?

If the Amex partnership includes global (or at least, European) expansion (which seems more plausible than with GS), it may generate extra pressure on vendors to accept it. iPhone market share is quite high in Europe(~35%), and I’d guess mostly comes from high spending sectors (e.g. 56% in Swirzerland, 50% in UK). I would try to attract their business.
It would definitely help Amex, but I'm not convinced that Apple would inflict the significantly worse acceptance on themselves without significant upside.

That upside might be Amex's uncapped EU credit card interchange, but that would very likely not apply to a co-branding scheme with Apple: https://www.headforpoints.com/2018/02/08/american-express-eu...

The Apple card was only available in USA. So market share abroad is not really relevant. Card margins are much lower elsewhere so its not such an attractive product.
There's little incentive to change. Retailers also know their clients who use Amex, are aware how little it is accepted and are likely to have a backup alternative they can just use.
lower fees is what is needed for businesses to start accepting amex.

visa and mastercard are 2-3%, amex is 5-6%. there's no upside for merchants to accept transactions where they have to pay double the processing fees

This is not true. Anyone in the US who has told you this is confused or getting ripped off by a predatory ISO (the companies that offer credit card processing).

Numbers below are only looking at the percentage, not the flat per txn fee or the other fees like assessments, etc... Only apply to the US. Also assuming you do less than 1 million a year in card volume.

First let's look at actual merchant services costs:

Stripe, Braintree/PayPal (online) you pay the same fee for all cards. Around 2.90%

Wells Fargo (in-person) charges the same rate for all cards until you are high volume. Around 2.40%

Chase (in-person) charges the same rate for all cards until you are high volume. Around 2.60%

Bank of America (in-person) charges the same rate for all cards until you are high volume. Around 2.65%

Now let's look at the actual amount the card issuer charges for a restaurant to accept a card (assuming you're working with an ISO that does OptBlue, all the above do). The markup you pay your merchant services provider is added on top of this.

Amex: 1.60% - 2.85%.

Visa: 2.10% - 2.70%.

MasterCard: 1.85% - 2.00%.

This reply is awesome. How do you know all of this?
The difference is not that high. In fact, my understanding is “Visa Signature” and “World Mastercard” (which are most of the premium credit cards) normally cost about the same as Amex. At worst it may be about 1% more not double.
You're correct, take a look at my other comment for a breakdown.
Compared to european payment cards with their 0.125% total fees, Amex' 6-7% is a steep ask.
Card fees are capped in EU, and I wonder if amex has any way of going around that. (0.2% debit, 0.3% credit)

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/fees-for-...

Yes, they go around that because they are considered a “three-party scheme”

https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/48519/why-are-a...

High fees are what Apple uses to offer such “great benefits” with their existing card. If they want to expand to Europe, the only cards enabling that would be Amex, or Diners (which is even less accepted I think).

Yeah, I had an Amex card and it was pretty useless in Europe. Admittingly that was more than five years ago so maybe things have improved by now.
The fact the Apple card was a Mastercard and had no foreign transaction fees was largely the only reason I opened it, as I too find my Amex a pain in the ass in Europe. If it does become an Amex card, I will likely close the account.

    no foreign transaction fees
In an FX transaction, what is the difference between a trading fee and a wider spread? Nothing. (Why do people keep falling for this?)

What you really want to see is a combined promise. For example: No fees, plus 1% or less FX spread on major currencies. (My preferred credit card promises that.)

Honestly, it is very hard to pay a total of less than 1% on foreign transactions. Still, this is pretty cheap, given the convenience.

The FX spread is fixed at around 25-50bps for Mastercard/Visa due to a settlement long ago. The foreign transaction fee is an additional charge on top of that, usually 3% of the gross transaction volume in USD.

The banks don't control the exchange rate, it's determined by the card network. So yes, when a card advertises 0% foreign transaction fee, it really does mean that they don't take an additional charge on top of the spread (which they don't control or profit from).

It's in fact quite easy to pay less than 100bps for a foreign currency transaction; everybody with a 0% FTF card is doing it right now (especially for high volume corridors like EUR/USD).

> No fees, plus 1% or less FX spread on major currencies. (My preferred credit card promises that.)

You bank can't promise what they don't control; Visa and Mastercard determines FX rates, and they're below 100bps because of an old settlement. So the bank is promising you something they had no role in creating; you're the one here falling for the marketing, not everybody else.

You can look up what MasterCard's conversion rate is: https://www.mastercard.us/en-us/personal/get-support/convert...

For a major currency pair, like EUR-USD or JPY-USD, you can see that it's less than a tenth of a cent off the 'real' rate.

> Honestly, it is very hard to pay a total of less than 1% on foreign transactions.

I would argue that you are not looking hard enough if you're paying 1% on FX card transactions.

All you need is a multi-currency card from one of the Fintechs, that will get you down to 0.5% or less without any effort.

Of course if you're the sort of person who likes taking cash out of ATMs on holiday then you'll have to look harder, since there is usually a surcharge on ATM withdrawls. But even then its not impossible.

For me, Apple Card is mostly only interesting for the discount on Apple. I carry it as a backup otherwise but don't use it.
In France, the fees required to accept Amex are still way higher than MC/VISA. They are still not widely accepted and not a lot of persons know about Amex.
The fees are higher everywhere. Their pitch is "our fees are higher, but we have higher-end customers who spend more", which roughly tracks with reality. But a hot dog stand isn't gonna have whales but an upper-end store might, so it's not surprising to see less support it.
The hot dog stand might actually accept Amex.

High-end businesses accept Amex, because it's worth it. Major chains can probably negotiate good deals. Tiny/seasonal businesses often use middlemen like Zettle that charge high fees and accept almost every payment method imaginable. Those in the middle who use traditional payment terminals and pay list prices may still avoid Amex due to the high fees.

I thought the EU had regulations on credit card fees? As I understand it, the Amex isn't widely supported because Amex's fee-heavy business model wouldn't be allowed to launch.

Visa's highest tier cards (Visa Infinite cards, such as the Chase Sapphire Reserve), already have higher fees than the Amex Platinum. The difference is, Visa won't let merchants ban single cards (you have to accept ALL Visa cards), while banning Amex meaning you are banning mostly high tier cards and losing nothing on the low end.

The EU regulations are on interchange fees that are paid between the issuing and the acquiring banks.

With Amex, Amex themselves are both the issuer and the acquirer, so there is no interchange to regulate.

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...

At least it might solve an issue a friend of mine has. He really wants an AMEX card, due to traveling, but you can only get corporate cards here, AMEX doesn't deal with private individuals and won't issue you a card. I suppose he can just get an Apple card then.

The beauty if going with AMEX, if that's what they'll do, it that it's a one stop shop. No need to go through a bank to issue a credit card, just deal with the credit card company directly. Currently the card is pretty much useless, but it does fit Apples way of doing things, cutting out the middle man.

For American Express it could also help make them relevant as a card company again. If they have plans to expand beyond the US, this might be a good way to do it. Companies will want to be able to accept Apples card, even if that means signing up with AMEX. Then in a few years, AMEX can start pushing their own branded cards which will now be more widely accepted.

Interesting. I had zero issues using my Amex in France and Switzerland this past summer. In fact, there was only one restaurant that I visited that wouldn't take it. I must have been lucky.
How long were you there for? Out of how many stores? Still, that’s a significant enough failure rate to be a detractor.
At least in Switzerland, Amex is still a pain to use.
I have used my AMEX in The Netherlands and Belgium…once.

The foreign transaction fees are steep.

I have to ask which AMEX. I used my Platinum overseas quite a lot (they give all AMEX cards free to US Military) and never had cause for complaint.
I agree, but would this still be the case if using it through Apple Pay vs swiping the physical card?
Apple Pay won't override the merchant's point-of-sale system's configured accepted networks; for example, it won't help you use an Amex at Costco.

(It will help you if the merchant says "we don't take Amex" but their terminal actually does, though. Surprisingly common at small shops.)

Yes. Amex is already on Apple Pay all around the world, and it’s only accepted at stores that accept Amex.
In the US, that situation has dramatically changed in the last 3 years or so.
My experience with Amex the last 5 years is that its just as well accepted in Europe as it is in US.

Not data driven, just been to a lot of countries for extended durations.

The random restauranteur or merchant that doesnt take it is just as rare and random in both environments.

2025 is 15 months away!
The rumor was GS was trying to sell the contract to AMEX. There was no indication that AMEX was biting.
I'm more interested in the savings account integration. I've found it super convenient. Too low APR for long term savings, but the convenience is worth the difference to me for short term savings parking. I keep $30K or so in it revolving for moving money around. Not to mention the cashback deposit right to the account.
> Too low APR for long term savings

What APR is your baseline for long term savings? I'm interested in where you see significantly higher APR savings accounts because the Apple Card Savings Account is 400x my previous savings account APR.

I don't have a savings account but buy CDs on a regular basis. For the next two years, I have something between 5% and 6% maturing every 3 months. Apple Card Savings is 4.15%.

So you can definitely do better than the Apple Card, but to some extent you're paying bankers to do what I do manually every 3 months. (You just pay them in "spread"; they're buying the same CDs I am, but keeping some of the profits to themselves. And letting you withdraw the money whenever you want, not just when the underlying CD matures. I get only a small amount of interest on my "what if I get fired and need to eat for 3 months until the next CD matures?" fund, sitting in my checking account.)

I never bother with actual savings accounts because in a year or two interest rates will be back down to 0.0000001% or whatever, in which case just holding the cash in my brokerage account is easier. (At least it gets swept into an overnight account that earns 0.0000015% interest! Wow!)

There’s at least 50 different online banks that are paying more than 4.15%. Check out depositaccounts.com. Off the top of my head, Ally, Capital One, Vio Bank, MyBankingDirect, SoFi, and a bunch of others. If you’re getting less than 5% it’s time to open a new account.
I have a HYSA with UFB Direct (5.25% APY) and if you use Wealthfront or Robinhood, their paid offerings have 5%-ish. Apply is like 4.5% or something. I've been meaning to move that out to one of the 5% accounts.
It's way better than my previous savings account as well, but still about 0.5-0.75 points lower than a couple of CDs that I have.

Not sure if that counts as significant or not, but I figure it adds up.

Apple Savings: 4.15%

CIT Bank 6-Mo CD: 4.88%

CIT Bank 18-Mo CD: 4.5% I think?

It's pretty easy to find 5% right now, especially with money market sweep accounts that invest in US treasuries.
As of this writing, Ally is still higher than Apple Savings account (4.25% APY vs 4.15% APY)
This is largely not a big deal - credit cards move to new servicers all the time, the customers are just transferred and you get a new card.

In the last 10 years the Costco credit card used to be serviced by AMEX but now it's Citibank. Fidelity credit card moved from FIA Card Services (Bank of America subsidiary) to Elan Financial and became a Visa. The AARP credit card went from Chase to Barclays. Those are just off the top of my head.

They will find another bank to back them (hopefully Chase), and most customers won't realize the difference.