Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!.POSTED.chiark.greenend.org.uk!not-for-mail
From: Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Newsgroups: misc.news.internet.discuss
Subject: Re: Apple Pay
Date: 08 May 2024 12:21:02 +0100 (BST)
Organization: University of Cambridge, England
Message-ID: <+vD*hGTJz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
References: <v1dmek$3c6h0$1@dont-email.me> <d5w_N.10813$N2J4.9221@fx43.iad> <v1eijr$3idmb$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: chiark.greenend.org.uk; posting-host="chiark.greenend.org.uk:93.93.131.173";
	logging-data="672"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@chiark.greenend.org.uk"
User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (Linux/5.10.0-28-amd64 (x86_64))
Originator: theom@chiark.greenend.org.uk ([93.93.131.173])
Bytes: 2004
Lines: 27

JAB <here@is.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2024 16:23:39 -0400, Auric Hellman
> <adhellman1@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Apple's cut is reportedly at approximately 0.15 percent of each
> >> purchase, which equates to 15 cents out of each $100 purchase.
> >> 
> >> https://www.macrumors.com/roundup/apple-pay/
> >
> >
> >Obviously they aren't expected to perform a service out of the goodness 
> >of their hearts, but that's a nice little profit considering software is 
> >doing all the work.
> 
> I assume it is  0.15 percent taken off of MC/VISA cut, which is quite
> a bit more.  In other words, no added expense to the merchant, and no
> cost penalty to iPhone user, as I understand.
> 
> Security wise, iPhone transactions are much safer than using a CC

This may be why.  If fraud is let's say 1% and Apple cuts it in half, it's
cheaper for the card company to pay them 0.15% and keep the remaining 0.35%
for themselves, than lose the additional 0.5% in fraud losses.

(no idea if that's realistic figures or not - banks don't like their fraud
figures being publically known)

Theo