advertisement
advertisement

Starbucks Reports 26 Million Mobile Transactions, A Good Sign Of Consumer Mobile Comfort

Written by Evan Schuman
December 7th, 2011

Starbucks on Tuesday (Dec. 6) released select mobile transaction stats for 2011, showing some 26 million mobile transactions. More meaningfully, the chain said it had tracked $110.5 million reloaded via the mobile app, which is a tiny percentage (4.6 percent) of the $2.4 billion put onto Starbucks Cards through non-mobile means. That said, it’s an impressive showing, even for a mobile app that doesn’t perform, technologically speaking, a mobile transaction at all.

The Starbucks mobile app merely displays the same barcode that exists on the customer’s plastic Starbucks Card. That means there is no wireless transmission, nor are any meaningful changes to the POS or card-swipe required. It does, however, require a change-of-behavior from the customer, and that might be the hardest and most valuable element.

What Starbucks is delivering is a clean, seamless experience for its shoppers, one that can be used constantly, given the always-there nature of most people’s mobile device behavior. Whether it’s more convenient or faster than pulling out the plastic card is arguable. With the plastic card, there’s no need to turn on the card, wait for its icons to display, deactivate airline mode (assuming it’s on, to save power and minimize radiation), click on an icon, wait for the app to load, login to the app and then navigate to the page where the barcode will be displayed. The fact that Starbucks has gotten consumers to do that 26 million times is indeed an accomplishment.

The more consumers use the phone in any way to help along a transaction, the more comfortable those consumers will be with real mobile transactions (think the wallet apps from PayPal, Google and, eventually, ISIS) when they materialize.

Starbucks consumers have already gotten fairly creative with unexpected ways to use the Starbucks app, such as for fee-free consumer-to-consumer payments.

Other stats released by Starbucks show a sharp increase in mobile acceptance, which seems to coincide with mobile rollouts from other majors chains this year. Said Starbucks in a statement: “In the first 9 weeks of the program, there were 3 million transactions and, for comparison, for the 9-week period starting in October, there were 6 million transactions.”

A figure not released was how many consumers are reflected in those 26 million transactions. If that number is being dictated by a relatively small number of mobile fans who constantly inhale their caffeine via an Android or iPhone, those transactions—which appear to average $4.25—might mean less in terms of consumer acceptance.

To compensate for the slower speed (see the mobile steps referenced above) of using a mobile device, a discount for using your card via mobile could easily send the numbers percolating upward. We know that times are tight, but there’s no room in a $2.50 regular coffee for a tiny mobile discount?


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Starbucks Reports 26 Million Mobile Transactions, A Good Sign Of Consumer Mobile Comfort

  1. Jay Gould Says:

    Starbucks’ mobile payments program has been a great success for the company, but is it really all that consumer-friendly? After all, customers can only link their phones to a Starbucks prepaid card and then use the service only at Starbucks stores. What would happen if every retailer took the same approach?

    I mean, would we want in the not-too-distant future to be using a separate app for each retailer and provide them personal information over and over again? Wouldn’t it be far safer and more convenient to have one or two mobile payments accounts with providers of our choosing and use whatever payment method (credit cards, debit cards bank accounts, etc.) we may feel like? http://blog.unibulmerchantservices.com/why-starbucks-platform-is-not-the-best-way-forward-for-mobile-payments

  2. Merchant Account Says:

    Starbucks Mobile Pay is linked to a prepaid card and I, as many others, just don’t want to be using such cards. There is no reason anyone who can get a credit card should use a prepaid one, which has no effect on your credit score and gives you no rewards. Moreover, why should I get any payment card, which can only be use at Starbucks? If I did that, I should probably do the same for Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s and many others? Where would that end? It simply makes no sense to me.

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.