advertisement
advertisement
advertisement

The Latest Grocery Chain To Ditch Self-Checkout Adds Theft And Other Issues To The Debate

Written by Evan Schuman
September 27th, 2011

In the ongoing battle of words over retail self-checkout with Kroger and Albertsons—with each side arguing to its customers that true customer love means rejecting/retaining self-checkout—the latest comes from a 75-year-old $1.5-billion regional grocery chain that was late to the game in beginning self-checkout and right in the middle of the rush to jettison it. But even though the chain certainly argued a customer service reason for the swift chain-wide exit, it also said that it couldn’t stomach the high theft rate.

The Big Y chain, with 61 stores in Connecticut and Massachusetts, announced this month that it would kill all of its self-checkout lanes. “In the battle of Service vs. Self Checkouts, service won,” the chain said in a short statement. In a conversation with a chain executive, though, the decision sounded a lot more complicated. To be blunt, it didn’t seem as if the chain had ever been all that fond of self-checkout, which it first deployed back in 2003.

“We were one of the last chains to get into the self-checkout game. We were really dragging our feet,” said Claire D’Amour-Daley, the chain’s VP for corporate communications.

Beyond an anti-customer-service perception, D’Amour-Daley cited several concerns, including the struggles of fresh produce identification, coupon issues, theft, payment choices and compliance fears with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.

The theft issues were both intentional concerns (true stealing) and unintentional concerns (customers who, for example, misidentified the type of orange they were purchasing and said it was a cheaper variety than it really was). But, D’Amour-Daley added, “more was intentional,” with some thieves knowing the best [busiest] times to get away with thefts.

This month also saw one of the world’s largest retailers, Tesco, get involved in the self-checkout drama, pledging to add self-checkout to its stores in parts of Central and Eastern Europe, including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary. Tesco’s started with self-checkout in 2002—a year earlier than Big Y—with its U.K. stores.

The difference in customer service perceptions is explained mostly by looking at the different geographies and specialties of the retailers involved, along with the nature of their customer demographics.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 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.