advertisement
advertisement

Retailers To Mobile Payment Players: What’s In It For Us?

Written by Frank Hayes
October 10th, 2012

We were hoping this week to find out when Isis will finally launch its mobile payment trials in Salt Lake City and Austin. No such luck: “Imminently” is all Isis Chief Commerce Officer Ed Busby would say at a presentation in New York on Wednesday (Oct. 10). But Busby did pass along a comment that crystallizes the problem chains have with the mobile-operator consortium, as well as with Google Wallet and PayPal: “I have a friend over at Banana Republic. He always tells me, ‘Ed, why is it everybody is knocking on my door all the time saying they can give my gross margin away faster than everybody else?’”

That’s how chains see Isis and its rivals? No wonder retailers aren’t pushing mobile payments at POS. Coupons and promotions (which the mobile payments guys love) eat margins. Mobile payments aren’t offering much-hoped-for interchange relief, either. That suggests mobile payments players need to start scrambling. Should they help enable loyalty first and ride payments on loyalty’s coattails? Or make it easier to use phones as in-store customer trackers? Or promise to give chains more and better CRM data? We don’t know. But without something serious in it for retailers to encourage a serious retailer push, there won’t be any mobile payments—Isis or not.


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Retailers To Mobile Payment Players: What’s In It For Us?

  1. Trip Says:

    If explained properly, there are all kinds of perks from mobile payment acceptance. From remarketing purposes to better cash management, I don’t see how merchants would not be sold on that alone.

  2. Ann Grackin Says:

    Yes, but how many of these separate systems does a retailer have to join–right now there are several competing programs from Google, PayPal, Isis, MCX, the retailers own program (aka Starbucks) as well as directly from the credit companies. Consumers don’t want to download too many apps , re-entering too much security data to too many sites. The idea is fantastic–since the mobile carriers already have the customer online, why not weigh in and get a few pennies on the transaction? But much needs to be thought about. How do these all fit with out mobile programs and how to make that all pretty seamless, should be thought about. See it. Buy it.

Leave a Reply

Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 17,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.