Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 198 posts

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#171

Post by dartos »

StackRanker3000 wrote: post #158
dartos wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would basically deprive people living in small countries access to products from multinational companies, because nobody would want to risk 5% (or whatever) of their worldwide revenue to get 1% more market share. Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. How would selling products to smaller countries automatically incur fines for illegal activity?

I don’t think anyone’s saying it would be automatic. But the risk of running afoul of laws and regulations is non-zero, and if the penalties are too steep, then it may be a wiser choice to stay out of small markets entirely.

> But the risk of running afoul of laws and regulations is non-zero,

So the solution is to make breaking laws not truly punished?

Seems like companies should be damn sure they’re not breaking laws…

Of course not every fine needs to put the company in danger of bankruptcy.

Fines could start relatively small and grow quickly and exponentially with repeated offenses.

But they should act as a real deterrent.

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#172

Post by rootusrootus »

gruez wrote: post #102
rootusrootus wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very tiny one at that. $25M to Apple is a little over two hours of revenue, if my math is roughly correct.

Comparisons like this are absurd. Why should fines associated with a small segment of apple's business be compared to their global revenue? Is the implication that all offenses should be fined based on global revenue, such that if they broke some law in Liechtenstein that the government there should be able to demand 5% (or whatever) of apple's worldwide revenue?

What you are implying is that it is a cost of doing business. That is the only conclusion from making the fine relative to the product in question. If it is intended to be a deterrent from future abuse, as I believe fines are intended to be, then the company as a whole needs to see the fine as a viable threat to their profitability.

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#173

Post by halJordan »

tmpz22 wrote: post #167
uvas_pasas_per wrote: post #162

I cancelled my Apple/Goldman card after they were totally useless on a transaction dispute. Frontier Airlines gave me a "refund", and printed me a "receipt" for it, and then later refused to give me the refund. When I showed the "receipt" to Goldman/Apple support they would chew on it for 4 weeks and then come back with. "Judgement for merchant. Reason: no evidence." I'd say: what was that "receipt" they printed, jus…

Isn’t that what Goldman wants? IIRC they’re losing money on the card so they’d prefer to bleed off customers - just like the forced attrition so many tech companies are currently doing.

Their intent isn't really salient, the act is illegal regardless of why they did it

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#174

Post by matrix2003 »

shuckles wrote: post #53
dmonitor wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's only no interest as long as you make payments on time. I guess this is technically misleading advertising? It might also be that it only applied during specific circumstances (buying directly from Apple) instead of as a blanket offer. I've bought a few devices through this deal and personally am a happy customer, so I hope this doesn't kill it.

No, it was a separate payment method called “Apple Card Monthly Installments.” If you just charged a purchase to your Apple Card, it was not an installment payment. That’s probably the confusion the regulators were complaining about.

I think this is it as well. I have a card, and do 0% payments. It’s not that bad, but I see how it could be confusing.

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#175

Post by WorldMaker »

zippergz wrote: post #125
xyst wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goldman has been winding down consumer bank operations for awhile. Checking/savings account division (Marcus?) was sold off or dissolved

News to me, since I still have a Marcus account that is fully functional and the website says "Goldman Sachs" all over it. I've been expecting it to split off or shut down at some point, but no signs of it so far from my perspective.

Supposedly the handover isn't actually until "next Summer" though the deal to sell it to Barclay's seems "done" as of October (which the parent article also mentions): https://gmauthority.com/blog/2024/10/gm-and-barclays-announc...

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#176

Post by tmpz22 »

halJordan wrote: post #173
tmpz22 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that what Goldman wants? IIRC they’re losing money on the card so they’d prefer to bleed off customers - just like the forced attrition so many tech companies are currently doing.

Their intent isn't really salient, the act is illegal regardless of why they did it

Only if the fine is more then the profit

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#177

Post by iluvcommunism »

I don’t want to diminish others experiences, because I’m sure they’re just as important as mine. All I can say is anecdotally I haven’t had any issues with disputes…in fact the dispute experience for me has been better than other cards. The app makes it quite simple.

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#178

Post by [deleted] »

wkat4242 wrote: post #144
spacemanspiff01 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple reasons I rarely use debit cards, I use a credit card and pay it off every month: If it gets stolen/someone else uses it, all I need to do is tell my bank, and since I have not paid the debt, I am not out any money. It is on the bank. If I was using a debit card, it may take a month+ to be investigated/money returned. Emergencies/availability having available credit is useful, most of my money is in investment…

> If it gets stolen/someone else uses it, all I need to do is tell my bank, and since I have not paid the debt, I am not out any money. It is on the bank. If I was using a debit card, it may take a month+ to be investigated/money returned. But if the bank still claims it was you it is still in question and they still want their money back, with interest. > I do not believe that credit card accounts have a negative af…

[deleted]

Re: Goldman and Apple 'illegally sidestepped' obligations to credit-card customers

#180

Post by eric_h »

gruez wrote: post #126
dartos wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fine should be a deterrent. If the fine is too low, it’s just absorbed as a “cost of doing business” and ceases to be a deterrent.

>The fine should be a deterrent. That's a reasonable position to hold, but crappy comparisons like in the OP doesn't contribute little to the discussion. The fine might be tiny part of worldwide revenue, but how much money are they making off apple cards? If that's tiny as well then the argument is moot.

The tight integration of the Apple Card with their hardware also means it makes their hardware (iPhones) better. They can lose money on the Apple Card and make money if it means some people like the integration enough to buy into the iPhone ecosystem (sign up for an Apple Card and get an interest free loan to buy an iPhone? I can see that getting new customers)
Post reply on HN