Bloomberg:
Apple Inc. is ramping up a test of a digital-first credit card with Goldman Sachs Group Inc. by expanding its use to tens of thousands of the iPhone maker’s U.S. retail employees.
The move marks the first major trial for the card, which has been used for several weeks by a far smaller set of Apple corporate and Goldman employees.
Apple has asked employees not to discuss the card, although they are allowed to use it publicly to make purchases.
This is not unexpected and provides a good test bed for Apple. Minor point: why does Bloomberg call it a “Goldman Credit Card” in the headline?
I think because Bloomberg will do anything to take the spotlight off Apple (if it’s a positive). Also interesting that they referred to it as the Apple Card in the article
By calling it for its actual name: Apple Card?
Because Goldman is the issuer of the card.
The first word in the headline is Apple. The first word in the article is Apple. The first sentence in the article explains that Apple is ramping up a test of its “with Goldman” credit card.
How could it possibly be clearer?
Thanks for that. Apple is not a bank.
Yes, but I wonder if Apple’s financial holdings underwrite the risk on those cards and GS just handles the admin/regulatory side of the venture. This allows Apple to get into the banking biz and GS to get into the credit card biz. Remember Apple’s previous CFO, Pete Oppenheimer is a director over at GS. So you can guess who put this deal together.
The article literally calls it the “Apple Card” six times.
Then why not the headline?
Out of curiosity, what headline would you propose?
Very true points you bring up. Do you think that Apple’s sideways move into financial services is mimicking GE in the 90s, or Sears sprint to that with Discover; moves that eventually killed both of these super corps.
Right. And Apple better get it right this time if they don’t want to repeat history. Look at Sony now, just a shell of a company it used to be.
The allure of this revenue stream to stabilize their growth rate is more than enticing. What will keep Apple from ending up like GE or Sony will come down to shrewd stewardship from their leader. It could all tumble to pieces with a weak chief and bad economic timing. Just imagine if Apple’s board elected Trump to run the company. It would be an Epic …
How about
“Apple expand Apple Card test to thousand of retail workers”?
Simpler, shorter, and to the point.
No one called iPhone “AT&T phone” when they’re exclusive to. It’s misleading.
You wouldn’t use your headline if it was actually your job to attract readers. Putting Goldman in alongside Apple gets attention from people interested in Goldman as well as people interested in Apple. More clicks, more revenue. This is Bloomberg, remember.
What you said is quite true but I think it’s wrong.
Hard to think of a situation where this didn’t either get severely restricted (IBM finance) or go pear shaped in the end (GMAC, GE Finance, Sony). Eventually the finance org becomes successful, gains power because $$$ = power and then starts doing crazy risky things to keep the good times rolling. Unless you go the IBM route and severely limit their power and maintain that control.