The New York agreement will most likely fail just like the Hong Kong agreement. I dont know why some people try the same things and expect different results.

For people like Bitpay and Purse who benefit alot from a capacity increase, since part of their buisness relies on cheap transaction fees, they ought to support BIP148. When SegWit activates it will immediately begin to clear the backlog and lower fees. And despite these agreements to hardfork and activate segwit their way it is not compatible with the current state of the network, meaning no capacity increase in the forseeable future.

Therefore Bitpay and Purse and similar companies should take an interest in BIP148 because it is the only thing that doesent lead to status quo. And if we keep status quo for the rest of the year, large portion of Bitpay and Purse.io userbase could be priced out and their buisness will suffer as far as i can tell. Who is going to buy a steam game with a $3 transaction fee? Altho you save 15% on purse, who is going to use it with $3 transaction fees or more?

The way people are using bitcoin is changing fast becausae of the blocksize limit, and altho it is not necceserily a bad thing overall, it could be for Bitpay and Purse.

tl;dr Bitpay and Purse are making the wrong move if they intend to have bitcoin scale. BIP148 is the only realistic option right now.

For those interested you can learn more about BIP148 at http://www.uasf.com

Have a nice day.