Hacker News Reader

Au contraire - security from credit cards IS better than the proposed competition from the retailers, which avoid CC fees by deducting your payment directly from your bank account.

Credit card security is better simply because it doesn't take your money directly -- the charge is added to a credit account that you then pay (or not pay if you dispute it).

While debit cards / bank accounts offer the same protection as credit cards, in that you have 0% liability for fraudulent/unauthorized charges, it still can take a period of time in order to "get your money back" after your account has been drained. That can pose serious problems if you are depending on that money to pay rent and other bills. Thus, the effective security of credit cards is in fact higher, because you are not parted from your money while you are waiting for the dispute resolution.

Sorry to pile on the "you're wrong" argument, but the existing replies don't address the distinction between ApplePay and CurrentC, and yes, ApplePay is more secure. CurrentC provides a central point of failure (and attack, for that matter), since they hold all the account details in their system. Contrast that with ApplePay, which doesn't even use the actual credit card number for the transaction, but instead a device-specific, remotely wipeable, single-origin system. ApplePay is definitely more secure, and I will actively seek out retailers who let me use ApplePay and avoid those that use CurrentC.

Why wouldn't you just shop where you want and use a credit card wherever ApplePay isn't supported?

Voting with my dollars. Retailers who have success with ApplePay will make no secret about it, and those that aren't using it have to compare their YoY numbers to the published ones of those using ApplePay. Using my credit card as normal doesn't send that message. Not that my spending alone is enough to sway an industry, but if enough people vote with their dollars, the message gets sent.

I guess I was really asking why you, as a consumer, care if a retailer supports ApplePay? Is the checkout experience that much better in your eyes vs an ordinary credit card? Or do you like the added security? Or something else?

All of the above. I don't like carrying my wallet, but I always have my phone, so being able to use it in place of my wallet is something I want. I love the added security - I shopped at each of the major retailers to have a breach in the last year, and got a new debit card issued each time, which is a huge pain the ass. And, in general, it pushes the industry forward, which is good for everyone. If ApplePay gains traction, so will Google Wallet, and Windows Phone will have the road paved to offer NFC-payments.

The credit card servicers aren't eating the losses - they offload these onto the merchants. So retailers are already eating the risk while also paying fees.

The customer end up paying for it anyway you look at it but at least the credit card insurance comes with it.

They're also getting the benefit of easy and quick payment.

If a big chain tried to go cash and check only, how well do you think that would go over? Even if they included debit cards, my guess is it would be a big problem. I bet shareholders would revolt. The only reason they may get away with this is Apple Pay isn't established yet so there is no perceived 'loss'. Another commenter was right that if Apple pay impacts their growth numbers they may be forced to reconsider.

> So long as this new system accepts that this is a cost of doing business and implements a customer service policy where the risk is spread among all retail participants, this would be competitive with the status quo.

If they do this, then essentially the retailers would be setting up a credit card company of their own. But why would we expect their fees to be lower than the fees from the existing credit card companies?