Apple pulls plug on Goldman credit-card partnership
wsj.com
wsj.com
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/goldman-is-looking-for-a-way-ou...
The earlier story from June suggested Amex might take it over.
Pretty sure I must be misunderstanding you. Do you really mean to suggest that Apple's reaction to Goldman breaking up with them was to start briefing the press that they dumped Goldman first with the intention of somehow hiding or diluting the poor default performance of the card?
0. Do you mean charge off, or default, or delinquency? I think you mean charge off rate, so I'll address that, but let me know if not - you did say "default rate", which is almost always higher than net charge off (default is whenever a consumer fails to pay on time, net charge off is effectively bad debt hitting 6 months of arrears: after six months it's unlikely to be defrayed without debt recovery action). Anyway, assuming you meant net charge off:
1. Apple cannot possibly avoid disclosing the charge off rate of this program to potential partners during diligence. (Quite the opposite of a cover-up, the commercial agreement between Apple and any new partner will likely attempt to explicitly codify management's representations on this metric, and scope what happens if performance is not as described. Other than aggregate balance information I cannot think of a more important metric for an interested party to understand, nor one more likely to result in the demise of the agreement and fixed penalties for misrepresentation if it is presented deceptively.)
2. More importantly, the information you seem to think Apple is preoccupied with keeping out of the public eye appears to be publicly available in Goldman's SEC filings.[^1]
3. More importantly still, Apple is understood to have made several stipulations of Goldman at the outset of the deal which are likely to contribute to higher than average charge off rates: firstly, Apple and Goldman do not pursue debt recovery as aggressively as other card issuers, which is meaningful given that charge offs, unlike defaults, are judged over 6 months.
Secondly, Apple seems to have encouraged Goldman to "get to a yes" on lending to individuals who otherwise may not have qualified for a credit card. (Low credit scores, high risk demographics.)
These are likely to be points of negotiation with any new partner, but it's trivial to see why Apple card's net charge off rate (2.93%) is in line with subprime cards like Capital One (2.2%) rather than JP Morgan's 1.47% and BoA's 1.6% when you consider that they deliberately accept high risk profiles and deliberately avoid pursuing them as robustly as JP Morgan and co.
(BTW, saying "[Apple card customers] have double the default rate of other cards" seems misleading to me – I can only find one such example, and it requires me to round up to 2x, but I may not have the same data as you? I think this should at most be "some other cards", given that e.g. Discover is significantly higher than Apple at 3.5%…)
4. There's some evidence to suggest that net charge offs spike during the infancy of new lending programs like Apple card, because net charge offs spike when individual consumers get new credit cards (for a lot of reasons), before cohorts mature and a steady state performance is reached. (This is also a consideration in multiple predictive models aiming to forecast net charge-off rates.)
These are the good (to me) reasons that Apple is unlikely to be attempting to spin a yarn to the press to "save face".
Without any inside information, I can also see reasons to believe that Apple did terminate the relationship with Goldman proactively, although it seems to be indisputable that Goldman was attempting to exit the business:
a. It has been widely reported that the risk and ADM logic was so poor at launch that Tim Cook was unable to qualify for a card. This is not great for Apple's image.
b. There were multiple horror stories in the press about various forms of prejudicial evaluations: DHH's partner springs to mind. This is not great for Apple's image, particularly when they were preoccupied with making Apple card accessible to the widest possible range of consumers (i.e. high risk).
c. Goldman screwed up withdrawals so badly that Apple began issuing $100 "gifts" to people's accounts as compensation. This is not great for Apple's image.
d. Goldman's infrastructure is inflexible and Apple negotiated weird consumer-centric benefits (e.g. bills at the start of the month, not on a rolling basis: Goldman's customer support teams reportedly can't cope with this concentration of demand). Apple does not play particularly well with others on matters like this.
e. *Edit:* Totally forgot to add that Goldman's consumer credit division is literally being investigated by the CFPB "and other governmental bodies relating to investigations and/or inquiries concerning GS Bank USA’s credit card account management practices." Cool.
Finally, I'd say that Goldman's inner turmoil and urgent desire to exit its consumer businesses is another reason for Apple to want to get out early: consumer has been an unmitigated disaster for Goldman, racking up billions of losses/write-downs, prompting a very embarrassing strategic retreat and eroding much of shareholders' confidence in David Solomon.
I can't think of many reasons why Apple would want to continue the agreement through 2029, particularly given that Goldman somewhat publicly shopped the sale of the program to American Express.
Goldman Sachs is not very good at consumer banking and does not want to do it. That makes them a lousy partner for Apple's consumer banking proposition, and I suspect this story is exactly what it sounds like: Apple putting Goldman out of their misery.
[^1]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/886982/0000886982230... p168, states the net charge off ratio on consumer credit cards to be 2.8%.
As anyone who has dealt with vendor integrations would tell you, when one side has a list of demands about how something should work, you know it's going to be a headache. Though I am still legit confused as to how GS ended up being the partner (beyond the cynical "every other company laughed Apple out of the room", which is not a great sign for Apple either!)
I have no inside info, but like you I know that GS is pulling out of consumer stuff in general. Let's just say that in a relationship where GS was constantly, constantly, constantly leaking complaints to the press, it's not a huge logical jump to think that GS would want to end such a relationship.
This is all just gossip of course. None of this matters, and I have no horse in the race. It's just fun to think about.
Perhaps we misunderstand each other. This is what you said:
> Apple wants to save face because "the leads we brought GS have double the default rate of other cards" is a bad look for future partners.
I believe that I demonstrated that this conspiracy theory – which is entirely unsubstantiated, and which seems to have been largely refuted given that the charge off data is public – cannot possibly be the reason.
Do you still believe that Apple is somehow trying to conceal charge off rates, having read my post?
> it's not a huge logical jump to think that GS would want to end such a relationship.
This is a very reasonable point, but it is not the one you made. It's totally fine to not be au fait with the minutiae of consumer credit reporting at Goldman Sachs, but it would help me to calibrate what your contention is if you could address specific points instead of abstracting to generalisations when it appears to me that you are entirely misinformed.
Would suck for retailers though. Amex fees among the highest when compared to other networks and issuing banks.
On the consumer side, I tend to see Amex as not widely accepted. Especially drops when traveling.
As a B2B SaaS owner, I don't accept Amex, because they make me jump through extra hoops. I process all cards through Braintree, but Amex requires an extra agreement directly with them, and they make the process of signing those agreements really difficult and obnoxious. I have better things to do with my time.
I did a quick search, here's a partial list of what was required:
· Please provide a scanned copy of Passports for authorized signers and Beneficial Owners.
· Please provide a scanned copy of Certificate of incorporation
· Please Provide a Completed Multi Currency form, Attached
· Please provide a completed and Signed Side Letter, Attached
· Please provide a completed and Signed W8 BEN form, Attached
(BTW, I am not based in the US, so "W8 BEN" reads like Klingon to me).
I am a B2B SaaS business based outside the US. Tax withholding is not applicable between my customers and me, or at least it is not my responsibility. VAT is solved by reverse charge.
I do have payment processing set up (with Braintree). The above AMEX requirements were on top of that — a completely separate procedure, just because AMEX feels different.
As to the W8 BEN discussion, be careful with your biases: it might seem "obvious" to you that everyone needs to comply with whatever IRS requires of US businesses, if you live in the US. But I have customers in 44 countries. If you are American, before you state that something is obviously required, take a look at this (from recent E-mail):
"Self-Certified Filled Form 10F will be required"
"Permanent Account Number or Aadhaar Number of the assessee if allotted"
"Period for which the residential status as mentioned in the certificate referred to in sub-section (4) of section 90 or sub-section (4) of section 90A is applicable"
Still looks obvious? Those are from India, and I'm pretty sure these requirements seem totally obvious to my Indian customers.
...is "extra hoops" and "really difficult and obnoxious"
> (BTW, I am not based in the US, so "W8 BEN" reads like Klingon to me).
If only there were technology to look up what 'W8 BEN' means in seconds
For a lot of transaction sizes it isn't really worth the extra effort, particularly as filling in forms like the W8 BEN E is the kind of work people tend to pay their accountant - quite possibly more than the value of the SaaS subscription - to do. (As someone who happily prepares his own tax returns once a year, the W8 BEN E is not a particularly straightforward form to fill in for comparatively little benefit)
And the most incredibly annoying thing about it is that for most UK companies (dont' forget if you are a limited company you need the W-8BEN-E variant!) you probably only have to fill in about 5 short fields. So it only really needs to be half a page. However working out which fields is virtually impossible and I'm still not entirely sure I fill it out correctly.
> ...is "extra hoops" and "really difficult and obnoxious"
Compare with how willing US citizens or businesses are to comply with similarly basic things when another country asks for them.
Even if I don't sell in the US. Even if I never go to the US. Even if I have no company in the US.
Imagine everyone in the US selling on Amazon needing to sign a German form, and a French form, and a UK form, and a Spanish form etc. with no intention to sell in these countries.
So yeah, sometimes it fucks things up.
It just so happens that the UK is therefore an incredibly easy place to dodge tax if you are so inclined.
Would be much better if Apple would get with MasterCard. Based on my experience, no issues anywhere.
Sure that works if you’re selling perfume or handbags, but if you’re a family restaurant then rich people and regular people eat the same quantity of food, your margins are low, why accept it?
Moreover Amex is pretty rare outside of certain markets. If only foreigners use Amex, and your business is not catered to foreigners, then you probably aren’t going to support it or in some cases even know what the hell it is.
The issue with other cards here(Germany) is, everything is fake credit, i.e. my Visa/MasterCard is just "Debit" and immediately books paid amount from my bank and some also comes with hefty monthly fees because they issue a shiny/designer "Debit" card. My bank indeed issues a real MasterCard but the monthly fees are unreasonable added on top of my already expensive checking account fees and it has very crappy app where trying to temporarily (un-)block my card needs calling their support and waiting in line while amex app gives me these features immediately on app.
Amex however gives me real credit(though they book the whole amount on start of next month) and also payback points in exchange for minuscle monthly fees but they have free same card with less sexy design which doesn't signal my ego correctly.
Plus, probably lower fees…
Get yourself an N26 account/card if it bothers you too much. It works as a Mastercard (still the "Debit" kind though), has no account fees and you can do basically everthing from within their app.
In Europe, banks don't like you taking out credit cards. Borrowing money is viewed as a weakness and it's best to never do it.
In America it's considered a virtue to have many credit cards and shuffle them so you can be seen to pay it off. Really weird.
Don't know about that, "Europe" is a big place. Credit cards are pretty common in the UK at least, and stuff like balance transfer cards (for shuffling) are too. Maybe not to American extents, but hardly a weakness.
In fact, looks like more people in Iceland, Norway and Switzerland own credit cards than the US: https://www.statista.com/statistics/675371/ownership-of-cred...
I don't believe this about Switzerland though. They are a very typical people that abhors spending money you don't have. But I think they may be counting debit cards there.
Steal (or mischarge) my credit card, run up 10k in charges, no problem. No money ever comes out of my bank account and I dispute the charges/report the card stolen.
Steal my debit card, run up 10k in charges...there's 10k gone out of my account until the bank resolves the situation.
I think money transfer plays a big role. Germany never had a culture of cheques and switched from money to money transfers early on (before WW1), so most stuff in Germany either I pay by money transfer ("Ueberweisung") or a company takes the money from my account ("Bankeinzug") - like mortages, cars, rent, electricity, travelling etc. In the US credit cards partially replaced cheques (and added credit, duh!), which was never something in Germany. The only use of cheques in Germany were traveller cheques when travelling - and then only to get money at the hotel.
Even for the catalog business people payed by invoice and money transfer (and the catalog companies gave you credit).
What is left, like groceries, is often paid in cash.
1) the backup is likely a high end rewards / corporate card whose fees are as high or higher than Amex for most categories of spend; and
2) it’s kind of weak for the last interaction with a business be them saying they won’t take your preferred form of payment because they imagine it boosts their margin by .3%.
rich people can afford adding two half strips of bacon for almost half again the price of the burger. they can also afford to leave a third of it on the table (daaaang that off-label semaglutide does magic) and then do it all over again tomorrow.
doesn’t mean they will. but they could. they have the means to do so.
that is what amex is advertising, even if it isn’t quite what they provide.
Also the damn thing never works in machines, like for public transport tickets :( Which is often a far better option than taxis.
I have to use that card for business expenses and I hate it so much.
Supposedly this exclusively allows them to negotiate down the fee really low.
...otherwise WalMart and other major retailers (Amazon?) would have partnered with a single credit-card network to benefit too
Only nutters use Amex whilst travelling (or at least non-US nutters)
The double-conversion gotcha is a real killer.
Everything gets converted back via USD.
So for example, if you have a EUR Amex card and you go to the UK, the AMEX flow is: GBP -> USD -> EUR.
And they take, IIRC 3% from you on each leg of that double-conversion.
The only remaining “gotcha” that I run in to is sometimes a shop will try and get you to pay for something at the point of sale in USD instead of the local currency since they can (within reason but exorbitant) set the exchange rate. Tip- pay in local currency.
Not as far as I'm aware. It certainly happens with GBP-issued and having briefly looked at some of the agreements, it happens with various Asian issued cards too.
To clarify:
- If the transaction is in your "home" currency, you get charged in that.
- If the transaction is in USD, you get charged in that.
- Everything else is subject to double-conversion
Example wording below from the GBP card (the last phrase of the last paragraph is the important one). I see they no longer charge double-fees, but you will still loose out on the double currency conversion because there will be a double-spread on there: If we receive a transaction or refund for processing in a foreign currency, we'll convert it into Pounds Sterling on the date it's processed (which may be different to the date of the transaction or refund).
This means that the exchange rate used may differ from the rate that applied on the date of your transaction or refund. Exchange rate fluctuations can be significant.
If the transaction or refund is in U.S. Dollars, we'll convert it directly into Pounds Sterling. In all other cases, we'll convert it into U.S. Dollars first and then into Pounds Sterling but we'll only charge one non-sterling transaction fee.The Swiss Amex is a bit special anyway because its operated by Swisscard which is a JV between Credit Suisse and AMEX.
Even now with contactless and chips (Amex has discovered chips right?) the only places I see Amex logos are 4+ star hotels and very posh restaurants. So it will be kinda useless outside the US.
Can't speak for the rest of Europe.
I’ve found the main difference being cash only venues versus card+cash accepted.
I just got back from Japan and traveled to Tokyo, Kyoto, Osaka, Hiroshima, Kawaguchiko, Miyajima, and it was somewhat rare to find a business that accepted cards but didn’t accept Amex, much to my surprise!
You don't have to run faster than a bear, just faster than the person next to you.
Genuine question.
I can not imagine that a cosumer or mass market product would be any better - certainly not going from their niche presence in the consumer market to apple scale number of customers.
Sorry... just musing on this topic because this is giving me a laugh.
Do the marketing/cs costs really outweigh the margin? Or is it some issue with how the assets backing the account are invested?
Tighter margins. Lots of low-paid call center staff and low-paid managers to crack the whip. Folks at Goldman would rather be on the golf course doing shady deals with Trump and Musk.
Operating a savings account like this one should be close to just picking money off the free money tree. It's wild to think that it costs them more to operate this than the margin they take off it.
Not everyone uses offerings in the manner the offerer expects. As software types, this is familiar territory. If you design a thing with only the happy path in mind while never allowing for that path not being followed, you’re in for a very rough time.
Their Android app was actually quite nice.
[1] https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-fun...
Meanwhile the FDIC insured savings accounts at the bank next door are just fine in the midst of this total and complete market meltdown, and those account holders decide it's time to diversify and pick up some cheap stocks.
That's just one scenario. “Low risk” is not the same as no risk, and the difference isn't important until it suddenly is.
I’m very certain that even in the crazy case you have outlined, SIPC insurance would cover up to a half million. Some brokers provide additional insurance beyond the regulatory requirements.
I think everyone recently learned about FDIC because of SVB etc., but I think it’s important that people are also aware of SIPC, and especially to consider that there is no crypto currency exchange that offers any such insurance of any kind, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/investing/cryptocurrency/cryp...
Customer assets at brokerage are required to be held by a 3rd party custodian. Customer assets are not held at the brokerage itself and cannot be touched. An executive cannot merely "dip into customer funds" to cover a bad investment. Brokerage firms are regularly audited for this exact scenario. If your assets were to go missing, the SIPC would liquidate assets of the firm itself as necessary and cover the rest up to $500,000.
The actual risk is of a MMF "breaking the buck" and being unable to return your money. In 1994, a fund went under and was only able to return 94 cents on $1. In 2008 a fund went under because of its toxic Lehman Brothers holdings. This is why you should understand what is inside of that fund before investing in it.
For example, VUSXX is "is required to invest at least 99.5% of its total assets in cash, U.S. government securities, and/or repurchase agreements that are collateralized solely by U.S. government securities or cash." These are not unregulated funds either; the SEC has been significantly increasing the scrutiny and regulation of MMFs both recently and historically.
The question you really should be asking is whether you think US treasury bills are sufficiently safe, not whether Vanguard is doing something both obvious and illegal.
When I saw what they were doing, I withdrew all my money, and they even built a little popup into their mobile app... "Stay and we'll give you the rate we promised you all this time!"
I don't have the time or patience for Comcast-style tactics with my savings account. I moved it into Robinhood Gold and am getting 5%, fully insured, with no stress about them trying to screw me over with an account shell game.
[0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/04/apple-cards-new-high-...
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.
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.
https://fintechbusinessweekly.substack.com/p/evolves-problem...
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).
> 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.
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.
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.
I can't imagine they'll close all those accounts, so likely we'll see some sort of migration leading up.
Edit: typo
Amex acceptance in the US is basically ubiquitous, and how would a new type of Amex change things abroad?
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...
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
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%.
https://www.mastercard.us/content/dam/public/mastercardcom/n...
https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/vis...
The payment processors I'd be looking at offer merchants rates of 0.125% for girocard, 1.39% for VISA/MasterCard, and 6.2% for AMEX.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/fees-for-...
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).
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
The foreign transaction fees are steep.
(It will help you if the merchant says "we don't take Amex" but their terminal actually does, though. Surprisingly common at small shops.)
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.
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.
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!)
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?
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.
Banks are pretty shady business but have power enough to lobby their get-out-of-jail card and codify it in law.
The hiding your CC# feature is cool, the card is unique looking (but I use Apple Watch Pay most times anyway) and the 3% extra off Apple products is a good retailer specific feature, but not my daily driver anymore.
Not sure I'll miss it if they switch to an even less savory servicer.
Can I assume everyone commenting here has a WSJ subscription?
Nope.
But you can assume more often than people on internet comment based on just reading headline / TLDR summary or maybe first paragraph and then jump on to commenting. And I may just do same as my apple news+ subscription expired last week. I didn't feel too motivated to pay increased monthly sub with no annual option to save a few bucks.
I was able to read it fine with the current version of the Bypass Paywalls chrome extension.
https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clea...
Since I've been aware of this story for quite some time, the fact that it finally happened is all that really matters to me (which the headline covers, assuming it's correct). I probably know all the details already, unless something really unexpected happened.
There was a late addenda to the agreement; as a concession on behalf of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon agreed to DJ at Tim Cook’s eventual retirement party (for half of his normal fee).
I wonder if there is another issuer(s) lined up for the card and the savings account.
The savings account doesn't have the highest interest rates, but I like how my Apple Card cashback can go right into the savings account. It's kind of like a set it and forget it type of thing.
I'm hoping this isn't the end of the Apple Card or the savings account though. It's nice getting 2% CB on Apple Pay and 3% on Apple products.
Getting (effectively) 6% back on everything is a real boon. I know there are even higher rates out there, but this feels so effortless that I would hate to see it go away.
It's not that hard to get 5% back on Apple products if you're willing to buy Apple gift cards from a grocery store, either.
I agree, those benefits are easily obtainable elsewhere. I do like the automatic 0% interest on all Apple purchases. Not that I need it but it’s nice to keep the money if there is no reason to pay all upfront.
Everybody mentions the positive features about Apple Card, but I’d like to point out that besides the really good cash back, the card is quite bare bones. No extended/doubled warranty on purchases, no purchase return protection, no device drop protection..
I've been 100% satisfied with the Apple Card & Savings.
Mostly these days it's used for Apple payments like iCloud for the extra percent back in cash.
Goldman Sachs is not setup to be a direct consumer bank. This caused a lot of problems:
* The ease of sign up / approval led to a lot of subprime approvals that might not have gone through with a more established lender. Not only did this cause GS to lose money on delinquent accounts, it prevented the Apple Card from ever becoming a status symbol.
* Goldman Sachs developed a reputation for almost never backing up cardholders in the case of dicey/fraudulent charges.The sense of security is a huge part of why people use a credit card for purchases. I myself terminated my Apple Card account over this.
* The card itself was just not competitive in terms of rewards. The UI/UX of the app and the deeper integration into the Apple ecosystem was nice... (if a bit confusing) but when I moved over to Chase I found myself not really missing it at all.
* Edit: Forgot one additional thing. Apple Card did not have contactless (tap) technology because they wanted to promote using Apple Pay. But whipping out your phone sucks compared to just tapping your card against a reader.
All I wanted was a simple, easy credit card. I didn't care about minmaxing bonuses etc... but when I moved over to Chase I realized I had been leaving a lot of money on the table.
All the other players but especially Chase and AMEX have very established reward systems setup.
It's possible that Apple wants to move banks specifically because they want to reposition the card and need a different partner to do it with.
I don't mean to diminish your negative experience, but it's not universal.
> The card itself was just not competitive in terms of rewards. The UI/UX of the app and the deeper integration into the Apple ecosystem was nice... (if a bit confusing) but when I moved over to Chase I found myself not really missing it at all.
The Apple rewards were quite a bit more generous than my previous card. I just looked at the Chase CC landing page and the rewards didn't look any better than my Apple Card. Which Chase card did you move to?
I mean, there were enough complaints about the dispute process (both the outcomes and the slow timelines) that Apple forced a policy change around it: https://9to5mac.com/2022/02/11/apple-card-disputes-transacti...
This isn't just sour grapes that I had a bad experience, it's a genuine reputation they developed. Compared to other companies that have much easier dispute resolution processes.
>Which Chase card did you move to?
Chase Sapphire Preferred, which has a sign on bonus (after minimum spend) worth $750. These companies with established rewards programs let you leverage points in ways that vastly outstrip their raw "cash" value. You can end up booking much more in travel etc... than if you were to just convert it to cash back.
It's not as simple and straightforward as the Apple Card, but it's also not rocket science. I generally just pay for all my expenses with the card and accrue reward points.
And I’d have said whipping out my card sucks compared to using the watch that’s already on my hand. (Of course that works with my other cards as well)
Whipping out a much smaller, lighter rectangle and simply tapping it on the reader and putting it back in your pocket takes less than a second
https://support.apple.com/en-lamr/guide/iphone/iphbd4cf42b4/...
(I love paying via watch but I think it’s good that most cards now do the same.)
Or being able to pay for stuff at resorts/pools without worrying about losing my card.
Apple Pay is the killer app for the watch for sure.
Rewards are much better on other cards, even if they're not as simple as cash dropped into your account on the daily.
Depending on your specific spending habits you might even come out ahead with the Citi Custom Cash, which offers 5% cash back on your highest spending category (up to $500) every month, 1% cach back on everything else.
I have a credit card with Bank of America which I earn 2.625% cash back on everything, no annual fee. However, that rate requires having $100,000 invested with Merrill Lynch. - https://www.doctorofcredit.com/bank-of-america-preferred-rew...
[1]Fidelity requires you to have an investment account open with them to sign up, no minimum balance is required.
That doesn't seem like a lot, but coupled with other spending it does help with going to visit my wife's family every few years. I cashed in 90k miles per ticket to get $500 business class round trip tickets on ANA last year. That means that roughly every 4 years we can do that trip for trivial travel cost.
I think once before the replacement card even arrived.
I was just confused how this could this even happen? as far as I can tell, apple pay doesn't have a specific card number to type into the internet.
This is because Apple (and Google, in the case of Google Pay) take a small small cut for each of those NFC transactions (somewhere like 15 basis points iirc, charged to the issuing card network).
Paying with your phone is pretty ubiquitous here.
Gas stations are worse. Maybe 1/3 in my area have pumps that support it.
Source: pure speculation
I had an Apple card for two months. In those two months, I had more inexplicably declined transactions than in the other twenty years with other cards combined. Every single time I called support and Goldman Sachs pointed at Apple and Apple pointed at Goldman Sachs and the problem never got resolved. They both did an astonishingly bad job.