Tech

Apple’s “Buy Now Pay Later”Service: Everything You Need To Know

Published

2 years ago

March 29, 2023

AlishbaW

(CTN NEWS) – Apple is entering the buy now pay later market with a few tweaks to the current model, including no credit card payment option.

The product will be available to some customers this spring, and the loans will be reported to credit bureaus in the fall.

Here’s what you should know.

Since the outbreak, the option to “buy now pay later” has gained popularity, particularly among young and low-income consumers who may not have easy access to conventional credit.

If you buy online for clothes, furniture, sneakers, or concert tickets, you have probably noticed the option to pay in smaller payments over time.

Companies such as Afterpay, Affirm, Klarna, and Paypal already provide the service, usually with late fees for missed payments and the option to make installment payments with a credit card or bank account.

Apple’s version, integrated with Apple Pay and facilitated by MasterCard, will require consumers to use a debit card and a bank account to make those payments, and will not impose flat or percentage late fees, according to the company.

On the other hand, missed payments will ultimately result in the consumer losing access to these types of loans.
According to Mastercard spokesperson Raul Lopez,

Apple’s buy now pay later product will also offer fraud and consumer protections via MasterCard’s current pay-by-installment model, and will charge merchants fees that are “competitive to other installment products in the market.”

WWDC 2022: Apple's attack on the competitive "Buy Now Pay Later" market

HOW DOES THE BUY NOW PAY LATER PROCESS WORK?

Buy now pay later services, marketed as “interest-free loans,” require downloading an app, connecting a bank account, debit, or credit card, and signing up to pay in weekly or monthly installments.

Before approving borrowers, some businesses, such as Klarna and Afterpay, conduct soft credit checks that are not reported to credit bureaus. This is also how Apple’s offering will work.

The majority of users are authorized within minutes. Scheduled payments are then immediately deducted from or charged to one’s bank account or card.

Generally, the services do not charge more than the customer would have paid up front, so as long as payments are made on time, there is no interest.

However, if a client pays late, they may be charged a flat fee or a percentage of the total amount due. These can cost up to $34 + interest.

If a customer fails to make numerous payments, they may be barred from using the service in the future, and their credit score may suffer.

In Apple’s case, the company stated that there will be no flat or percentage late fees, only the chance of missed payments being reported to credit agencies and losing access to the loans.

Apple said users can contact support if they want to defer payments or set up an alternative payment plan. Several services enable customers to postpone payments in this manner.

ARE MY PURCHASES SAFE?

Lending Act, which governs credit cards and other types of loans in the United States, does not cover later services.

That means it may be more difficult to resolve disputes with merchants, return items, or recover money in instances of fraud. Companies can provide safeguards, but they are not required to do so.

Mastercard provides Apple’s security measures.

The National Consumer Law Center’s associate director, Lauren Saunders, advises borrowers to avoid linking a credit card to purchase now, pay later apps whenever feasible.

If you do, you will lose the benefits of using the credit card and the possibility of owing interest to the card business.

She advised using the credit card directly to get those protections. “Otherwise, you are getting the worst of both worlds.”

Because Apple does not allow consumers to connect a credit card to its buy now pay later product, the consumer avoids stacking debt in this manner.

WHAT ARE THE OTHER DANGERS?

Due to the lack of centralized reporting of buy now pay later transactions, those debts may not show on your credit profile with major credit rating agencies.

Because lenders do not know how many loans you have set up with other companies, more companies may allow you to purchase more items even if you can not afford them.

Payments made on time are not disclosed to credit bureaus, but late payments are.

“Right now, buy now pay later can not help you build credit, but it can hurt,” Saunders explained.

According to Elyse Hicks, consumer policy counsel at Americans for Financial Reform, a progressive nonprofit, people may not think about whether they will be able to make payments in the future.

“Because of inflation, people may believe, ‘I will have to get what I need and pay for it later in these installments,'” she explained. Will you still be able to afford the things you are affording now in six months?”

WHY DO RETAILERS PROVIDE BUY NOW PAY LATER OPTIONS?

Because the products boost cart sizes, retailers accept the backend fees of purchase now, pay later services. When consumers have the option to pay for purchases in installments, they are more likely to purchase more goods in one transaction.

When Apple unveiled its buy now, pay later service, 23-year-old Josiah Herndon joked on Twitter about “paying off six carts of (things) I can’t afford with Apple, Klarna, Afterpay, PayPal Pay in 4, Shop Pay in 4, and Affirm.”

Hendon, an insurance representative from Indianapolis, began using the service because being approved for a credit card was too difficult due to his age and lack of credit history.

Since then, he has used them to purchase expensive garments, shoes, and other luxury items. In order to avoid missing payments, Herndon aligns his payment schedules with his paychecks.

WHICH PEOPLE SHOULD USE BUY NOW PAY LATER?

Buy now pay later loans are a comparatively healthy, interest-free form of consumer credit if you have the ability to make all payments on time.

According to Saunders of the National Consumer Law Center, “If they work as promised and people don’t have difficulty managing their finances, they have a place.”

However, according to her, if you want to improve your credit score and can make on-time payments, a credit card is a superior option.

The same applies if you want robust legal safeguards against fraud and clear, centralized loan reporting.

Consider whether purchase now, pay later companies’ fees will outweigh the penalties and interest charged by a credit card company or other lender if you are unsure whether you will be able to make timely payments.

WHAT EFFECT WILL ECONOMIC INSTABILITY HAVE ON BUY NOW PAY LATER?

As the cost of living rises, some shoppers have begun to split payments on necessities rather than just big-ticket products like electronics or designer clothing.

A Morning Consult survey conducted last fall discovered that 15% of buy now pay later customers were using the service for routine purchases such as groceries and gas, raising concerns among financial advisers.

Hicks sees the increasing number of delinquent payments as a sign that buying now and paying later may already be adding to consumers’ unmanageable debt.

According to a July report from the Fitch rating agency, delinquencies on the apps rose significantly in the year ending March 31 of last year, reaching as high as 4.1% for Afterpay, while credit card delinquencies remained relatively stable at 1.4%.

“It will be interesting to see the increasing popularity of this over these different economic waves,” Hicks said. “What is happening now is the immediate fallout.”

RELATED CTN NEWS:

How To Create A Strong Password: Tips And Tricks To Keep Your Accounts Secure

How To Concert AVIF to JPG: Step And Best Practices

Augmented Reality vs Virtual Reality: What’s The Difference And Which Is Better?

Tech

US: A Judge Mandates that Google Allow Competing App Stores to Access Android

Published

1 month ago

October 8, 2024

Salman

(VOR News) – The ruling is that Google, the greatest technology firm in the world, is required to make its Android smartphone operating system available to merchants that supply applications that are in direct rivalry with Google’s. This decision was reached by a judge in the United States of America.

The Android Play store, which is owned and operated by Google, was found to be an example of an illegal monopoly arrangement by a jury in the state of California on Monday. The finding was reached by a jury. Monday is the day that this decision was come to.

An earlier federal judge ruled Google’s search engine illegal.

This finding, which came after that decision, has forced the company to suffer yet another setback. As a result of the corporation having already encountered its initial obstacle, this decision has been established. This particular decision was made by the judge during the month of August, when the month was in progress.

In light of the fact that the decision was made, what exactly does it mean that the choice was accepted?

In accordance with the verdict, Google is obligated to make it possible for users to download Android app stores that are offered by third-party competitors. For a period of three years, the corporation is prohibited from imposing restrictions on the usage of payment mechanisms that are integrated into the application.

In addition, it is important to keep in mind that Google does not possess the right to impose restrictions on the utilization of ways to make payments online.

Additionally, the verdict makes it unlawful for Google to give money to manufacturers of smartphones in order to preinstall its app store. Smartphone manufacturers are prohibited from doing so.

Furthermore, it prevents Google from the possibility of sharing the revenue that is generated by the Play store with other companies that are in the industry of delivering mobile applications.

In addition to this, the court has mandated the establishment of a technical committee that will be made up of three different people chosen at random.

The committee will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the reforms and finding solutions to any disagreements that may occur as a consequence of the implementation of the reforms while they are being implemented. This task will fall under the committee’s purview so that it may fulfill its duties.

However, certain components were allowed to be put into action until July 1st, despite the fact that the judge’s statement suggested that the ruling would take effect on November 1st. The statement was the basis for the ruling, which ultimately became effective.

Particularly, I wanted to know what Google’s reaction would be.

There is a fact that Google does not adhere to this directive, which has been brought to their attention. This document argued that the alterations that the judge had ordered to be made would “cause a range of unintended consequences that will harm American consumers, developers, and device makers.”

The judge had ordered the modifications to be implemented. The alterations were to be carried out as indicated by the judge’s ruling. The judge made it clear that he expected these revisions to be carried out in accordance with his guidance.

The company’s regulatory affairs vice president, Lee-Anne Mulholland, provided the following statement: “We look forward to continuing to make our case on appeal, and we will continue to advocate for what is best for developers, device manufacturers, and the billions of Android users around the world.”

On average, over seventy percent of the total market for smartphones and other mobile devices is comprised of mobile devices that are powered by the Android operating system. Both smartphones and other small mobile devices are included in this category.

In the event that the Play app store continues to be shown on the home page and that other Google applications are pre-installed prior to the installation of the Android application, smartphone manufacturers are entitled to install the Android application at no cost at their discretion.

Additionally, the Android application can be installed on devices that are manufactured for smartphones.

SOURCE: DWN

Tech

WhatsApp Now Features a “Mention” Tool for Status Updates and Stories.

Published

1 month ago

October 6, 2024

Salman

(VOR News) – Those who use WhatsApp now have the ability to mention other people in their stories or status updates as a consequence of a feature that was only recently enabled on the platform.

Previous to this point, this capability was not available. It wasn’t until quite recently that this capability became available to the public.

According to the information that was provided by the company, users now have the opportunity to tag close friends in their stories, and the person who is mentioned will have the option to go back and re-share an earlier version of that story. This information was provided by the company. The corporation was kind enough to reveal this information to us.

Because of a new feature that has been added to the WhatsApp app, users now have the opportunity to like individual stories and status updates.

This capability was previously unavailable to WhatsApp users.

A significant amount of progress has been made in this context. Alternative readers now have the chance to “like” a work, which is comparable to liking a post on Facebook. This feature was introduced in recent years. When compared to the past, this is a tremendous shift.

At one point in time, viewers were only permitted to observe the total number of views that a particular story had gotten. These restrictions were eliminated in later versions of the software.

Additionally, it is essential that the likes and reactions to a story be kept anonymous during the entire process. One of the factors that contributes to the general mystery that surrounds this characteristic is the fact that this is one of the elements.

The person who brought it to the attention of others is the only person who will be able to judge who enjoyed it and who did not care about it. These individuals will be able to make this determination.

A notification will be issued to the individual who was referenced earlier in the sentence and who was named in the story or status update that was discussed. A notification of this nature will be sent to the individual via WhatsApp.

This message will be sent to the user in question whenever that person makes a reference to another person while they are in the process of elaborating on a narrative or updating their status. You will receive a notification alerting you that you have been tagged in the narrative.

This notification will be delivered to the person who receives this message. In addition, students will be provided with the opportunity to re-share the tale for themselves.

It is important to note that if the names of individuals who have been referenced in a narrative or a status update are included in any of these, then the names of those individuals will not be accessible to any third party through any of these. In light of the fact that the identities of those individuals will be concealed from public disclosure, this is the condition that will be required.

While WhatsApp recently made the announcement that it will be incorporating this functionality, it is highly likely that not all users will have access to it at the same time.

This is despite the fact that WhatsApp recently made this announcement.

Despite the fact that WhatsApp has only recently made a public announcement that it will move forward with the deployment, this is the situation that has presented itself.

As soon as a short period of time has elapsed, access will be made available to each and every person on the entire world.

Additionally, WhatsApp has hinted that new functionalities might be introduced to the status and updates tab in the future months.

The purpose of these capabilities is to provide users with assistance in maintaining healthy connections with the individuals who play a vital role in their living experiences. This is done in order to give users with support in maintaining close relationships with the folks who are the subject of the inquiry.

It is with the purpose of supporting users in successfully keeping close ties with the individuals in question that this step is taken.

SOURCE: DN

Tech

Over The Planned “Link Tax” Bill, Google Threatens to Remove NZ News Links.

Published

1 month ago

October 4, 2024

Salman

(VOR News) – Google has sent a strong message to the New Zealand government, threatening to stop boosting local news content should the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill become law.

The law, put up by the Labour government and backed by the coalition in power at the moment, mandates that digital companies such as Google pay back news organizations for links to their material.

News publishers, on the other hand, charge the tech giant with “corporate bullying.”

Google says this measure may have unanticipated effects.

Google New Zealand’s country director, Caroline Rainsford, voiced her worries that the law, which is being referred to as a “link tax,” is not doing enough to support the media industry in New Zealand right now.

She underlined that Google would have to make major adjustments if the previously mentioned law were to pass, including cutting off links to news articles from its Search, News, and Discover platforms and cutting off financial ties with regional publications.

According to Rainsford, similar legislation has been proposed and approved in other nations including Australia and Canada, but it has not been proven to be effective there and breaches the principles of the open web.

She drew attention to the fact that smaller media outlets will be most negatively impacted, which will limit their capacity to reach prospective audiences.

Google says its alternative options will protect smaller, local media from negative effects.

Conversely, it conveys apprehension regarding the possible fiscal obligations and vagueness of the legislation, which it feels generates an intolerable level of ambiguity for enterprises functioning within New Zealand.

The New Zealand News Publishers Association (NPA) has reacted to Google’s warnings by alleging that the internet behemoth is using coercive tactics.

They specifically contend that the need for regulation stems from the market distortion that Google and other tech giants have created, which has fueled their expansion into some of the most significant corporations in global history.

The legislation aims to create a more equal framework that media businesses can use to negotiate commercial relationships with technological platforms that profit from their content.

New Zealand Media Editors CEO Michael Boggs stated that he was in favor of the bill, citing the fact that Google now makes a substantial profit from material created by regional publications.

He also emphasized that the use of artificial intelligence by Google—which frequently makes references to news articles without giving credit to the original sources—highlights the significance of enacting legislation.

Paul Goldsmith, the Minister of Media and Communications, has stated that the government is now evaluating various viewpoints and is still in the consultation phase.

He stated that the government and Google have been having continuous talks and will keep up these ongoing discussions.

However, not all political parties accept the validity of the Act.

The ACT Party’s leader, David Seymour, has voiced his displeasure of the proposal, saying that Google is a game the government is “playing chicken” with. He threatened the smaller media companies, saying that they would suffer from worse search engine rankings if the internet giant followed through on its promises.

Seymour contended that it is not the government’s responsibility to shield companies from shifts in the market brought about by consumer preferences.

The things that have happened in other nations are similar to what has happened in New Zealand.

Google has agreements with a number of Australian media firms that are in compliance with its News Media Bargaining Code. These agreements contain provisions that permit an annual cancellation of these agreements.

Due to the government’s decision to exempt Google from the Online News Act, the company has committed to supporting news dissemination by contributing annually to the Canadian journalistic community.

The New Zealand measure is consistent with global approaches aimed at regulating the relationships that exist between technology corporations and media organizations.

It’s hard to say what will happen with the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill as the discussion goes on. Google and the New Zealand media landscape are preparing for what might be a protracted legal battle.

SOURCE: TET