
Banned from Google Ads for Using Apple Card - zxlk21e
https://smartprivacy.io/learn/i-got-banned-from-google-ads-for-using-apple-card
======
jonknee
Google's classic canned response of "We've confirmed we're right, we will not
tell you why and this is the last reply you'll receive" is one of the most
infuriating things I can imagine. I make my income primarily through AdSense
and live in fear of that email one day.

In this scenario it seems pretty obvious that their automated fraud AI messed
up, but the customer service person is probably also automated. They have so
many people working on insane moonshots, but don't spend money for customer
service for their core products (in this case people literally trying to give
you money!). Just bizarre.

~~~
zeta0134
This whole practice reeks of being downright fraudulent. Especially with a new
technology like Apple Card, which folks will understandably not have a strong
familiarity with. I get that Google needs to combat fraud and all that, but
they should at _least_ inform the customer of why such a drastic action (a
permanent ban! !!) was taken with almost no warning.

Really, any respectable company in this situation would simply flag the
account for a billing problem, deny the card, and let the customer try again.
At which point, any legitimate customer will go, "Oh, guess they don't take
Apple Card" and use something else. It's the same effect (account can't be
used, "fraud" with the Apple Card if it exists is dodged) but is not nearly so
user hostile as this... mess.

Google's opacity here seems like it could only really have one benefit to the
company: They can shut down _any_ account they don't like, and since they're
always vague with the reasoning, they don't necessarily have to _have_ a valid
reason. Their whole "you know what you did" approach is just uncertain enough
to cause the victim to doubt themselves and be unlikely to mount a defense. I
don't know what their actual motivations are (I know it's popular to hate on
Google, but I have a hard time believing they're pulling stunts like this on
purpose) but it _looks_ bad no matter how you slice it.

~~~
quanticle
I think an application of Hanlon's Razor
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor))
is applicable here. Google is in an oligopolistic position (along with
Facebook) in the online ads space. Therefore, they face zero consequence for
having extraordinarily poor customer service. As a result, they optimize their
customer "service" to minimize work for themselves.

I ran into a very similar situation with my gas company. I'd fat-fingered my
bank account number in their online form, so they weren't able to debit my
account. Instead of notifying me of this problem, they simply locked my
account and threatened to cut me off for non-payment. Even after I'd called
the company and appealed, they still prevented me from paying with my bank
account for 12 months and forced me to pay with a credit card (which incurred
an additional $3.75 "convenience fee").

~~~
pgcj_poster
I don't think Hanlon's Razor applies to large companies. Individual humans
tend to have reasonably powerful moral compass's, but make a lot of mistakes
due to lack of information, focus, and error checking. For humans, it makes
sense to assume "stupidity" rather than malice. On the other hand, companies
like Google have tons of the smartest people in the world making decisions,
but they tend to put profit over morality whenever possible. In a sense, they
have to, or else they'll be out-competed by someone who does.

For large companies, I would almost go so far as to propose that one should
"never attribute to stupidity what can adequately be explained by malice."

I have no opinion about this particular instance. I just find that HN tends to
bring up Hanlon's Razor a lot in defense of corporations.

~~~
blub
Agreed, but I don't think this sentence is true: "In a sense, they have to, or
else they'll be out-competed by someone who does."

No they don't. It would be fine for everyone if instead one of being one of
the richest companies in existence they would only make the top 10.

------
alanfranz
Beyond the fact that I don't understand why a virtual card should be a
problem, I think that this era of "we can deny you a service and tell you
nothing" should stop. It's one of the biggest issues of the modern internet.

I understand that laws are different around the world. In Italy, whatever is
defined as a "public exercise" \- anything offering its services to the
anybody, be it a shop, a store, a cafè, a restaurant, MUST offer those
services to anybody who a) can pay and b) satisfies any global and well-
expressed condition (e.g. more than 18 years old, properly dressed, etc). You
cannot just deny service to a random customer without a VERY GOOD reason. If
you want to serve members only, you can build your private club. Then you're
able to do almost whatever you like, but you cannot advertise or promote your
activities to non-members.

I suppose US law is different, although I think to remember that there're some
rules against discrimination. Either the service is available to anyone, or to
noone. If some infringement happens, it must be explicit and there must be the
chance to appeal to a judge. Otherwise, how can this be non-discriminatory?

~~~
skykooler
There's rules about discrimination for specific reasons: you can't
discriminate based on age, race, gender, etc. "Which credit card" you use
isn't one of those categories, so it's legal to discriminate based on it. (And
is often done, though not to this extent; many places, for example, will
accept Visa and Mastercard but not Discover.)

~~~
jaclaz
>so it's legal to discriminate based on it. (And is often done, though not to
this extent; many places, for example, will accept Visa and Mastercard but not
Discover.)

Sure, but one thing is:

"Sorry, I cannot accept Discover, do you happen to have another means of
payment?"

and another one is:

"Sorry, I cannot accept Discover, and since you presented one of those cards
to me once, then you are prevented for the rest of your life to enter these
premises again".

~~~
weinzierl
From Google's point of view it's more like:

"Sorry, I cannot accept this bill, and since you presented counterfeit money
to me once, then you are prevented for the rest of your life to enter these
premises again".

I'm not saying this is right, but I think it's the more apt analogy.

~~~
kadoban
Except it's in no sense of the word "counterfeit", right? So the analogy falls
apart pretty hard for me. It's more like that old Taco Bell $2 bill story.

~~~
pb7
It may not be counterfeit but if Google has a wealth of data indicating that
this usage pattern results in fraud then it might as well be the digital form
of counterfeit.

~~~
YawningAngel
Not really. They might refuse to accept it for policy reasons but that doesn't
mean that attempting to pay with it is a bad-faith act akin to paying with a
counterfeit bill.

------
geerlingguy
> If you're planning on using the Apple Card for anything important, think
> again.

That was the final line in the article, but from reading the rest of the
article, it seems like the overarching problem was not the Apple Card, or the
idea of virtual CC numbers... but more that time and time again, Google will
shut down your [YouTube|Gmail|Ads|Cloud|anything] account with little or no
notice, and arbitrary, non-contestable rulings, and there is absolutely
nothing you can do about it after the fact.

I was nervous about staking anything financially important in the Google
ecosystem, but after seeing this kind of post every week, there's no way I
would tie any important business venture into Google's ecosystem.

~~~
mleonhard
Companies producing Android apps have no choice.

~~~
zwerdlds
F-Droid is one alternative to the Play Store.

~~~
thekyle
Or even just distribute it via their website like Fortnite.

------
jacekm
The stories like this can be heard every now and then and I think we all agree
that Google's customer support could be vastly improved. But taking a step
back, I am finding this particular story slightly suspicious as the site seems
a little bit weird to me. The domain is only 4-months old and the entire site
is almost empty, it consists of just a couple "reviews" of mostly VPNs and
password managers and the author himself admits to participating in referral
schemes. And despite advocating privacy he uses google analytics and one more
tracking system on his site. The story he published is the only post that is
not a review. If I had so much experience as he claims I would have better
places to post my rant rather than at a newly created website. I can imagine a
scheme where one posts a sensational story just to drive the traffic to their
affiliate links-based business.

Now, having said all of this - I do NOT accuse author of anything, their story
may be true, it actually sounds plausible. I'd just like to remind you of
another google ban story [1] that made headlines some time ago and was later
debunked by Google.

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/8kvias/tifu_by_gettin...](https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/8kvias/tifu_by_getting_google_to_ban_our_entire_company/)

~~~
6gvONxR4sf7o
When these things happen, the pattern is always 1) shit happens, 2) company is
unhelpful in resolving 3) victim writes it up and it ends up getting some
publicity (e.g. front page of HN) 4) company says they're sorry and fixes the
problem.

As I read OP, I wondered what I'd do. I guess I'd have to write it up on my
mostly empty, pretty much dead blog. It would look weird and out of place on
my mostly empty blog.

Then I look to the comments and see you calling them out for doing what I was
just thinking I'd have to do.

~~~
pvg
That's not the pattern 'always'. There are lots of such cases where the
writer's account turns out to be inaccurate in key details. Sometimes
inadvertently, sometimes less so. And companies don't always swoop in to
apologize and resolve the issue.

------
scblock
Wait, so Google once again proves how much they suck at customer service, and
the conclusion is to be wary of Apple Card? That seems like a stretch.

~~~
nodesocket
Seriously, the problem is not with Apple and virtual card numbers (which is
awesome) but Google and their piss-poor customer service and lack of support
for even paying users. Can't wait until the justice department drops the
hammer on Google.

~~~
nodesocket
Looks like my prediction coming true
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20920731](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20920731).

------
StanAngeloff
Another day, another horror story and with that a further confirmation of how
profoundly broken Google's support is. I shall think twice before buying into
any Google products and so should you. Imagine having you entire company cloud
account suspended with no one to talk to... Or getting blocked from your
domain/Gmail and unable to communicate... Or getting kicked out of the Play
store when this is your only means of earning a living. These are not
hypothetical, these are stories from HN front page just this year. Frightening
and infuriating at the same time.

------
bovermyer
The author offers it as a warning against using Apple Card.

I read it as confirmation that Google would do well to focus on customer
service for once.

~~~
slenk
What's easier? Not getting an Apple card or changing Google.

~~~
FDSGSG
Why would not getting an Apple card keep Google from banning you?

~~~
slenk
It would only keep them from banning you for the use of a virtual
card...unless you used a virtual card of some other kind.

~~~
FDSGSG
Do you work for Google? How do you know that using an Apple card would result
in you getting banned for the use of a virtual card?

E: Yes, I read the article.

------
jxdxbx
Google's actual policies state that it accepts virtual
cards.[https://support.google.com/google-
ads/answer/2375433?hl=en](https://support.google.com/google-
ads/answer/2375433?hl=en)

~~~
chmaynard
Relevant section:

In addition to regular credit cards, you can also use a one-time use credit
card (also known as virtual credit card). It's commonly used as an alternative
to physical credit cards when making online payments. Google Ads accepts these
credit cards as long as they have a Visa or MasterCard logo. If you don't have
a physical credit card, contact your bank to see if they offer them.

Steps to use a one-time use credit card:

Sign in to your Google Ads account at
[https://ads.google.com](https://ads.google.com). Click the tool icon and
choose Billing & payments. Go there now Click the Make a payment button. Click
the "Pay with" drop-down and choose Add new payment method, then enter your
one-time use credit card information. Enter the amount you'd like to make a
payment for, then click the Make a payment button to review and finish your
payment. Be sure to include $1 more than your payment amount for card
verification.

~~~
slenk
> Be sure to include $1 more than your payment amount for card verification.

That seems like something that could be easily missed

------
laurentdc
Why the war on virtual cards?

My bank lets me create infinite "throwaway" credit cards that work for a
single payment or up to a certain expiry date. They're great for never having
to expose your real card number and keeping track of maximum spend. Are these
classified as virtual cards? I use them all the time for Facebook ads and was
planning to set up a AdWords campaign too, but now I'm worried

~~~
iampims
Which bank if I may ask?

~~~
X-Istence
Bank of America allows me to do this for my credit card with them.

------
lloeki
> Since this decision is final, the account will not be reinstated.

> I offered [to] set my primary payment method back to the previous card.

This is, to me, the most infuriating part: account is blackholed at the first
misstep, that you cannot even guess, with no possible redemption, and with
damages far beyond the initial misstep scope: if you use the same account,
payment issue on google ads, your photos are inaccessible. How does that even
make sense?

~~~
munchbunny
It doesn't. In my opinion this is no longer a frustrating experience, it's a
consumer protection problem.

------
FDSGSG
This has nothing to do with the Apple Card. Google loves suspending Ads
accounts for doing any changes to their profiles. I've had to go through this
BS at least 5 times.

Odds are this guy would've been banned no matter which card he switched to.

Given that smartprivacy pushes VPN stuff I wouldn't be surprised if this guy
had been using a VPN to log into his Ads account, which would be a sure way to
get your account fucked.

------
pixelbath
>Companies like Google have waged war on virtual cards

First, this seems a bit histrionic. That's a wide claim to make with a sample
size of _one_.

Second, the entire idea that the author was banned for using a virtual card
comes from a friend who spoke to another friend who allegedly works as an
"account manager" (presumably at Google?), who _themselves admit_ they can't
even see into the process.

~~~
ytpete
Agreed - especially as another post pointed out that Google's official policy
states they _do_ accept virtual cards: [https://support.google.com/google-
ads/answer/2375433?hl=en](https://support.google.com/google-
ads/answer/2375433?hl=en)

~~~
jimktrains2
That doesn't mean it doesn't increase the fraud score assigned to you/your
transaction. e.g. the same behavior could trigger a ban with a virtual credit
card but not with a physical one.

------
tristanb
I use and love privacy.com - and the fastest way for me to not sign up for
your service is when you tell me I can't use one of the card numbers. It
happens occasionally, but no way in hell am I giving out my real CC

------
zupa-hu
You should contact Apple. I'm sure they 1) have the power to get through 2)
they are motivated to make the Apple Card work and instill trust in people.

------
ineedasername
Yet another example of how Google "support" seems modeled on the senseless,
frustrating, and destructive systems warned of in Kafka. Opaque rules and
literally inhuman inflexibility. The problems is Google can suffer any number
of these small scale gaffs without consequence, while any truly large account
would probably be given the courtesy of outreach before a blind suspension,
and real live support afterwards if it went that far. So for now they can do
this with impunity. However with the Spectre of Amazon ads on the horizon true
competition may arise, and Amazon has decent support. As things stand now,
anyone starting out would be well advised to steer clear of relying on any
part of Google services for critical needs.

------
WalterBright
I learned the hard way to always have at least two ways people can buy things
from you. Never bet your business on another business that uses algorithms to
arbitrarily disconnect yours and algorithms to respond to customer service
inquiries.

~~~
riku_iki
You cut yourself from a lot of opportunities that way.

~~~
WalterBright
Don't say you weren't warned :-)

~~~
riku_iki
This is how modern life works: almost everybody's life circumstances are
dependent on large institutions, which can screw you any given moment, except
if you chose to live in jungles. Doing business is taking risks, and one has
to be ready to lose.

------
philco
Has nothing to do with the payment platform you chose is my best guess. Has to
do with what you were paying to send ad traffic to, and possible
misrepresentation of facts on that page. Were you testing landing pages for
concepts where you didn't include terms of use, privacy policies or
misrepresented the state of your product?

That would be my best guess.

------
veeti
> And if you're planning on using Apple Card^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Google
> services for anything important, think again.

Fixed that for you.

------
supernintendo
> I'm not some huckster with a spam website.

Ironically, you could make the case that Google itself fits this description.

------
mabbo
This is what I find so interesting about Amazon going into the ads business.

(Bias note: I am employed by Amazon, but not involved in ads.)

Google make a lot of their money from online advertising. But they have a
reputation of not giving a shit about their customers, giving canned
responses, etc. Amazon, criticize it as you will, has a reputation for _good_
customer service (I literally give "Customer Obsession" training to new
hires). What happens if enough Google ads customers get fed up and try out the
competitor?

20 years ago, Google found a hose that money pours out of called "online
advertising". All they do now is improve that hose and desperately search for
another one. If someone comes along and siphons out a fraction, it could
actually hit them hard.

"If", of course. We'll see.

------
scarface74
_I 'm writing this to warn anyone else that intended to use the card online
that you may experience... difficulties. And if you're planning on using the
Apple Card for anything important, think again._

Isn’t the better conclusion after almost a decade of people dealing with
Google’s customer “service” and reading about how non responsive they are is
not to base your livelihood on anything Google related?

If your business plan is at all depending on Google, it’s probably a bad one.

------
joecool1029
Tangentially related... in one of my last convos with an American Express
business rep, they noted I set my cashback preference to advertising
purchases. I was informed by them that Google Adwords has a history of
'blackflagging' accounts. He said they could generate up to 100 cards with
unique numbers for free to my account and that it was fairly common for
agencies to have big split-ring binders full of cards tied to each client.

------
squarefoot
Bad PR and popularity backlash is what corporations fear the most. We should
wait for such things to happen (and then be quickly fixed because of the name)
to some really popular figure who will make it public, then grab popcorn and
watch Google, or any other corporation that screws "normal" customers, produce
spectacular stunts to escape the unavoidable negative press.

~~~
ineedasername
The thing is a popular figure, especially if they do semi-large numbers with
Google, probably wouldn't get banned before outreach and if they did would be
able to get decent support.

~~~
squarefoot
That would be the point. I want to read some day "Hi, I'm (insert popular name
here). How come that I get immediate answers plus support while other users
with the same problem either have to wait or are being banned?". That would
hardly happen, but hope is free.

------
hamandcheese
> All I can say is that it's likely that he was either using a virtual card or
> his identity was tied to a previously suspended account.

> After doing a bit of research, I discovered that the number that is
> generated in the wallet app (the only way you can get your card number for
> the Apple Card) is, infact, a virtual card.

This seems like the likely cause.

~~~
eridius
Why does Google hate virtual cards though? It's an anti-fraud mechanism.
Google's declaring that using an anti-fraud mechanism is in fact an indication
of fraud?

~~~
lallysingh
Probably because you can hide the same underlying account number, so you can
burn virtual cards on new fraud accounts without the additional cost of
setting up new underlying accounts.

------
classics2
Reminds me of when I was permanently suspended from PayPal “for reasons” after
20+ years of constant patronage and good standing. Same black box mentality,
no human being made the decision and no human being would look at the
situation and fix it.

There really should be a catchy term for this sort of algorithmically
generated deplatforming.

Google ganking?

------
alyandon
Can Google even really know if a presented card number is a "virtual" credit
card or not? Could this be a case of a generated virtual card number matching
a card number that was previously used with an account that was shut down for
fraud and that's why Google immediately banned this unrelated account?

------
bfrog
The thing with monopolies is that they tend to abuse the privilege of being
one.

You are a consumer, buying their wares, and they could care less because you
really only have one option. They made sure of it by buying most of the
significant competition years ago.

Welcome to the modern era of internet monopolies.

------
qwerty456127
> After doing a bit of research, I discovered that the number that is
> generated in the wallet app (the only way you can get your card number for
> the Apple Card) is, infact, a virtual card.

> And if you're planning on using the Apple Card for anything important, think
> again.

Using virtual cards is a perfectly legitimate activity. I'm a client of a top-
tier bank in Europe and they always recommend to use a virtual card (they
would ask if you'd like them to issue) for everything online. This doesn't
seem like an Apple's fault (although it would be nice of Apple to clearly
inform you the card is virtual). Google should be sued for this.

------
MartianSquirrel
"Don't be evil."

------
mcbits
If indeed they're banning accounts for using virtual cards, I see a parallel
with the early days of Gmail. You couldn't use a Gmail account to sign up for
a lot of sites because short-sighted admins categorically prohibited all free
webmail accounts. In their minds, the only "real" email addresses were at AOL,
Earthlink, employers, universities, etc. Never mind that Gmail was invite-only
and probably a much stronger indicator of a legitimate person at the time. The
victim grows up to become the bully.

------
ineedasername
Everyone reading this that ever has a problem like this with Google support
should write it up and submit it to HN. Then we as a community should come
together and upvote the hell out of it. The more these things get publicized
in the industry the harder it will become for Google to do this without
repurcussions.

------
docker_up
Can there not be a law that states that Google can't just say "Your account is
suspended, and the decision is final, and we won't tell you why." This sounds
like the type of monopolistic action that we need to break by petitioning our
politicians.

Google, Facebook, etc need to be regulated.

------
Justsignedup
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You fell for the classic google trap:

They only pick up the phone if you are a paying customer. If your payment
isn't working you can go fuck yourself.

I know, a common mistake.

Seriously though, this is also the case with using their phone service, or any
other account. If your payment ever bounces, you lose EVERYTHING.

------
MikeGale
I have no idea whether this is relevant.

I noticed that the site has reviews of anti-tracking products like Ghostery
and Privacy Badger. (The reviews are a bit thin in my opinion.) Google may
view those as existential threats and work to remove that material from the
web.

------
abstract7
Google must be stopped from muscling its way into 'real' goods and services.
Can you imagine getting locked out of your [insert] with an automated response
and without recourse?

------
PerilousD
and yet you're still lining up to use Google? I dropped out of the Google ad
system many tears ago when I realized the game was rigged (in their favor) and
the only way to "win' was not to play. So when I read stories like yours which
pop up frequently for Google - I cant help but think you're probably an
intelligent person so "what's your point?"

------
therealmarv
Google bans app xyz, Google bans AdSense account. Everyday a new Google horror
story here. Does nobody from Google reads HN??

~~~
munchbunny
The Google employees who are paying attention likely don't have the power to
address the problem, and the Google employees who have the power to address
the problem either aren't paying attention or actively decided not to address
the problem.

------
awinter-py
traditional credit card companies waged contractual war with merchants for
decades to ban cash discounts

new payment tech will have a similar uphill battle to get people to treat them
equally

------
chacha2
SmartPrivacy.io uses Google ads?

