Google Wallet

[ChuckG73]

How the heck can Verizon block Google Wallet?  What happened to the customer being able to choose? After my contract is up I will be leaving Verizon and going to another provider that does not try and control what apps I use. 

Chuck G

[Ann154]

And a new discussion thread on the peer to peer customer forum is going to help how? Go read the other dozen or so threads already discussing this topic that reside in this community forum. Sprint has the exclusive for the application. Until that changes, the possibility of the application being available on the Verizon Wireless network is unlikely.

[ChuckG73]

Wow how about you do some research before you spout off an answer.  Also if this forum was better organized and set up I would have.

check out http://blogs.computerworld.com/mobilewireless/20781/verizon-tethering-settlement-google-wallet

It is all Verizon's doing not some agreement with Google and Sprint.

[Ann154]

That is the Block C settlement and isn't related to Google Wallet at all.

And SEARCH is your friend here.

[2insdad]

She rude and obnoxious in different forums and since she can't answer properly she tells people to go to another thread.  I know many people who,are using GW on VZW GN and are loving it.

[Tidbits]

2insdad wrote:

She rude and obnoxious in different forums and since she can't answer properly she tells people to go to another thread.  I know many people who,are using GW on VZW GN and are loving it.

15 or so threads on the subject.  It has already been stated numerous times.  Some people believe Verizon is blocking it.  FTC doesn't think so, Verizon doesn't think so, and Google hasn't stepped forward to say yes or no.  Because of Google's silence I believe this...  Google went exclusive with Sprint, and Sprint get's a cut for all sales, and if anyone jumps in and get's wallet Sprint get's a cut.  Verizon doesn't want to pay a COMPETITOR money for something they are also working on.  No business would do this...  Metro, and US cellular decided to pay up, but they don't have a payment option in the works, and their customer base isn't growing.  They may give up some cash in hopes to gain customers.

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/services_solutions/details.jsp?detId=google_wallet&catId=service_exc...

Sprint still advertises they have an exclusiveness to Wallet.  Google isn't stopping them.  When Verizon did the same thing with the Galaxy Nexus it was shut down in a short few hours.

[2insdad]

My favorite Verizon backer is back.  Who pays "the cut" of each sale?  So why not let us have google wallet UNTIL the other app is ready?

[Tidbits]

@2insdad Do you care to wager your life savings and your home that I don't get paid by Verizon for anything I say on here?  As I have said a million times I do not, have not, nor have any vested interest in Verizon.  I look at the whole facts instead of going what the media spews out.  I even linked you something that shows Sprint has EXCLUSIVITY from Sprint themselves, and Google since the release of Wallet as NOT asked Sprint to remove it.  So they MUST have some sort of deal.

Explain why the Nexus S unlocked, and unbranded did not have Google Wallet at the same time the Nexus S 4G had wallet?  Sprint had exclusivity.  Why is it no regional carrier can install wallet on their Android NFC enabled devices?  They have no vested interest in Isis so explain why is it?  Why is it Google has remained silent when the FTC was investigating Verizon for blocking applications from the Play Store when they have vested interest in Google Wallet to expand?

If you can find all the answers to that with document proof then I will back you up, but NO ONE has shown me anything to prove my statement wrong.  Google hasn't even stepped up to clear the air, and continue to remain silent.

FYI - I don't drink Google's Kool Aid either.  I will gladly use all platforms whether free or paid.  I am awaiting Tizen just to see how it fairs.  I have ran Meego, Symbian, Windows Phone, iOS.  I don't care what platform as long as it works. 

[pwsfinest]

While I agree that everything is not clear here, I don't think you can make the assumption that there is an agreement between Google and Sprint for exclusivity.  I think the exclusivity exists because the other carriers are developing Isis and don't want customers to have access to a competing product, which results in exclusivity by default.  While you want proof to show your statement is wrong, why don't you show proof that your statement is right?  The answer is because it's nearly impossible to prove a negative and you know that.  You make some compelling arguments, but it doesn't make you right.  Google may be remaining silent on the issue because they still have to depend on Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile to sell their products, both software and Motorola hardware.  There is a delicate balance between these companies and Google can't afford to make enemies over a VERY small portion of their company (Wallet).

Wallet is supported at MetroPCS (merging with T-Mobile, who "have a vested interest in Isis") and US Cellular now.  Doesn't sound like exclusivity to me.  Is T-Mobile/Metro PCS the only carrier to play both fields?  Google has hinted at iOS release for Wallet, as well.  Google doesn't like exclusive deals.  Google tries to make its software available to as many platforms and devices as possible.

Just because no one can prove you wrong doesn't make you right.  Using that logical fallacy, I'm now right because you can't prove me wrong, which makes you wrong. (But you must have known I was not a great fool; you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.)

[Tidbits]

pwsfinest wrote:

While I agree that everything is not clear here, I don't think you can make the assumption that there is an agreement between Google and Sprint for exclusivity.  I think the exclusivity exists because the other carriers are developing Isis and don't want customers to have access to a competing product, which results in exclusivity by default.  That doesn't jive with me with the simple fact when the Nexus S and Nexus S 4G were out only the Nexus S 4G had wallet.  If there was no exclusivity then why was the Nexus S excluded?  It is unlock, unbranded and not under any carrier control(much like the Galaxy Nexus GSM version)  While you want proof to show your statement is wrong, why don't you show proof that your statement is right?  When Verizon "claimed" exclusivity for the Galaxy Nexus Google took an hour to tell them to not do it and was quickly taken down.  Sprint has been advertising exclusivity for the past year and a 1/2.  If there was no exclusive agreement why didn't Google tell them to take it down?  Google didn't have to go exclusive with any carrier just look at the GSM version of the Galaxy Nexus as proof.  The answer is because it's nearly impossible to prove a negative and you know that.  You make some compelling arguments, but it doesn't make you right.  Google may be remaining silent on the issue because they still have to depend on Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile to sell their products, both software and Motorola hardware.  There is a delicate balance between these companies and Google can't afford to make enemies over a VERY small portion of their company (Wallet).

What balance? You know Google is also part of the group that wants to push mobile payments forward, and Isis is accepted where Wallet is accepted through wallet right?  I said it before IF Google didn't strike that exclusive deal Isis could have been integrated into wallet much like paypass is(it's the SAME

Wallet is supported at MetroPCS (merging with T-Mobile, who "have a vested interest in Isis") and US Cellular now.  Doesn't sound like exclusivity to me.  Is T-Mobile/Metro PCS the only carrier to play both fields?  Google has hinted at iOS release for Wallet, as well.  Google doesn't like exclusive deals.  Google tries to make its software available to as many platforms and devices as possible.

MetroPCS is still MetroPCS.  They are not T-Mobile as of yet.  So they do not have any vested interest in Isis.

Like I said Nexus S vs. Nexus S 4G.  The Nexus S IS EXACTLY the same as the Galaxy Nexus GSM version.  Explain WHY it did not have wallet at the same time the Nexus S 4G.  Explain to me why Sprint advertised from day one WITH Google that it had exclusivity if there was no deal?  It could have just recently expired for all we know.

http://www.google.com/wallet/current-partners.html

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/services_solutions/details.jsp?detId=google_wallet&catId=service_exc...

Just because no one can prove you wrong doesn't make you right.  Using that logical fallacy, I'm now right because you can't prove me wrong, which makes you wrong. (But you must have known I was not a great fool; you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.)

The simple solution is for Google to say something.  If Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T are being "anti-competitive" then the FTC would have looked into a long time ago.  People  have been crying to them since the Galaxy Nexus and the Nexus S didn't have wallet.  FTC knows something and didn't even bother looking.  When Verizon was being investigated why did they overlook it?  There can't be any "anti-competitive" move if Google made some sort of deal with Sprint which prevents other carriers for having that Service.

Now here's something to also think about.  What's the difference between Wallet, Isis, passbook, and...  Square?  They are all mobile payment systems some even let you accept payments through your credit cards.  Why can passbook, and square survive without needing carrier partners while Wallet does?

Google could clear the air, but choose not to.  They muffed and are paying for it right now.  The deal could be over or Sprint get's a cut and the deal is still there.  We do not know.

[pwsfinest]

I'm sorry that doesn't jive with you... it must be wrong.

The balance is between the carriers and Google (and all cell phone manufacturers) in general.  If the carriers get pissed and stop carrying Motorola products all together, then Google loses (unless they start their own cell phone company, which they certainly could do in the future as they seem to get into just about everything).  Google isn't going to jeopardize billions of dollars in cell phone sales over a mobile payment system.

The FTC and FCC ARE looking into why Verizon is blocking Wallet, especially after the $1.25 Verizon paid to settle the tethering app issue.  That took nearly 8 months to resolve, so the Wallet issue would not have been solved long ago, but they may have started investigating long ago.

So what's the conspiracy behind US Cellular since you think T-Mobile has no influence over MetroPCS, albeit with no formal merger finished?  They surely wouldn't let them side with Google Wallet when the customers will have to ditch Wallet for Isis when the merger occurs.  It's convenient for your argument that the "deal" (if it exists) "may have just expired".

Everything else you respond with is the same speculation you started with and assume is correct.  Well, since I'm still using your logic and you haven't proven me wrong, then you're still wrong.  I like your logic.  It's flawed, but it lets me live in altered reality where I'm always right if I argue something that no one can prove.

[Tidbits]

Where's the proof that the FTC is looking into it?  I mean seriously if they were looking at it why did they not say something right then and there?  Why didn't Google say something right then and there?

I have already showed you where there was IN FACT an agreement.  Even when wallet first came to be NUMEROUS outlets even state "Exclusive to Sprint", Sprint even advertised it and STILL do.today I have provided the link.

So show me something that says otherwise which no one has.  I have link official sources and not one has linked an official source saying otherwise.

[Tidbits]

for example this guy says the same thing I am saying long before people started crying about it...

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/mobile-news/verizon-galaxy-nexus-cannot-use-google-wallet-sprint-only/5884

Google site which hasn't been updated still shows the Nexus S 4G as the starting device which left the Nexus S high and dry(which was no different than the GSM Galaxy Nexus)

http://www.google.com/wallet/vision.html

[pwsfinest]

I'll use smaller words this time.  If you are the only one that has something because no one else wants it, then it is, by default, exclusively yours.  US Cellular and Metro PCS have it.  If Sprint is STILL saying exclusive, then that's even MORE proof that you may be wrong and Sprint is making that claim without good cause. (You also may be right, but your logic that someone has to prove you are wrong and we have to assume you are right with little proof from you is ignorant.)  I've offered an equal amount of unproven speculation, yet I'm still wrong?  The FTC (and many other federal law enforcement agencies) don't always tell you that they are conducting an investigation.  The FCC has already said they are.  I'm glad I don't have to deal with you any more than this last sentence.

[Tidbits]

How long ago did wallet get released?  Why no Metro, and US cellular last year? What carrier had exclusive rights from the beginning?  Why was the Nexus S left out?  Seriously is it that hard to see?  You are looking RIGHT now, but this all started when Wallet was released.

If they were investigating it they would have included it WITH the tethering apps.  Sorry they are not looking into it any longer.

[2insdad]

How did you get paid from backer?  If the shoe fits ....

Remember how you defended Verizon not releasing Jelly Bean because you knew there was soooooo much wrong with it and Verizon was testing it and had found all sorts of issues?  They ended up releasing the same exact version.  Take a deep breath, step back and "allow" us mere mortals to be unhappy with Verizon not letting us have Wallet.  Just as was with the iPhone, Verizon is always left behind.  Let's make them fix that.  The Big Red is the largest carrier and they should be the ones getting the exclusive agreements.  Not Verizon not AT&T.

By the way, if there were an exclusive agreement, as you are sooooooooo sure there is, Verizon should come out and say it or are they worries Sprint is making them look bad?  Sprint released the same Jelly Bean Build weeks before and now wallet.

OK, now go ahead and defend Verizon and Blame Everyone else.

I am all ears.

[Tidbits]

like I said do you care to wager that I am not a backer.  Seriously let's put it in writing with a binding contract.

Funny wasn't the exact same version if you ever developed you will know what I am talking about...  So you still haven't shown me where Sprint doesn't.  Yet you can't and you resort to "he must work for Verizon or get paid for it".  So come on let's make the wager if  you are so sure of yourself  

[rcschnoor]

2insdad wrote:

The Big Red is the largest carrier and they should be the ones getting the exclusive agreements. Exclusive agreements are a 2 way street. If an agreement is more beneficial to the other company than it is to Verizon, why would Verizon enter into it?
 

By the way, if there were an exclusive agreement, as you are sooooooooo sure there is, Verizon should come out and say it or are they worries Sprint is making them look bad? Verizon should start publicizing agreements made by "other" companies? What kind of logic is that? After all wouldn't the agreement be proprietary to the 2 companies in the agreement, instead of a company which is NOT in the agreement?
 

OK, now go ahead and defend Verizon and Blame Everyone else.

I am all ears.

[B33]

Kind of makes me Wonder if things will change Quite a bit for sprint if they get bought by Softbank Tidbits) And as for Google Wallet if one's want to use it why couldn't they just go on the Website..

[Tidbits]

I think Google didn't even have to involve carriers, and shouldn't have.  That was their mistake and are now paying for it.  By signing an exclusive agreement it was what caused the problem.

If SB buys out Sprint all the agreements running will be the same.  Once they expire then that's a different story.

[B33]

Well i remember seeing and reading some of excerpts from the Deal Tidbits but wasn't sure if by sprint having this they're Customers could charge to Google Wallet or Something Like that...