advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

The Square Mobile Conundrum: Data Goes In, But It Doesn’t Come Out

January 25th, 2012

So even when this feature is launched, it will solely be a way for Square to collect and retain data. This is crucial information. In short, those questions are coming from Square and do not represent the retailer. But your customers will assume and believe the opposite, that you are asking the questions and that you are receiving the answers. As Buzek discovered, perceptions are often not reality.

In this instance, the intent of all of the parties seems to be noble. But that won’t last long in retail. Should you insist on having your own interface atop the one from the third parties so you can control the data flow? At the very least, you need to train associates to make sure customers understand that the retailer is not asking any of those mobile questions.

The idea of data ownership during retail mobile activities—where third parties play larger roles than is typical—is hardly new. McDonald’s struggled with this issue some four years ago, during one of the earliest mobile coupon trials.

The issue of data ownership is going be crucial. Control of this data is the most valuable asset the third-party players will have. Indeed, they’ll have access to data about what the consumer is doing with a large number of competing retailers. The CRM data troves will be huge, they will be used however the third parties choose to use them, and not only will you likely have access to none of that delicious CRM but you’ll also be blamed for privacy intrusions the consumers discover. How’s that for a worst of both worlds scenario?

The whole point of many of the mobile payment trials this year, however, will be seamless integration. It will be designed to be as much of the normal retail environment as a POS card swipe is today. The difference is that today’s card swipes really are controlled by the retailer, with the POS vendor in the background. The initial mobile models flip that around. That’s not necessarily a horrible thing. But it’s something to be aware of and to consider during every element of deployment.


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.