With POS Paper Supplies Vanishing, E-Receipts May No Longer Be Optional

Written by Frank Hayes
March 18th, 2013

Maybe digital receipts and coupons are something you need to start promoting—and fast. The second-largest supplier of POS receipt paper, Germany’s Koehler, still plans to stop shipping paper to the U.S. in April, after a December ruling by the Commerce Department that will increase tariffs by more than 70 percent. That could translate into shortages and will almost certainly mean higher prices for thermal paper, which is used in most chains’ POS printers.

U.S. and Chinese paper mills say they will eventually fill the shortfall from the U.S. exit of Koehler, which has been providing about 40 percent of POS paper. But in the meantime chain execs may be expecting IT to keep stores from running out of paper. Strange as it sounds, it is IT’s problem—and the second-easiest option is digital receipts.

The easiest and most obvious fix is to print less on each receipt. Chains have been running a lot more paper through those POS printers in recent years (on a recent trip to one chain, a two-item cash purchase generated 17 inches of receipts and coupons). The problem: Receipts now contain both marketing pitches and legal boilerplate, including disclaimers and return/exchange policies, along with more transaction details than in the past.

As a result, just cutting back what’s printed on the receipt now involves pushback from Marketing and an even tougher fight from Legal. Marketing is sure its offers and coupons are essential, but Legal can cite cases that were lost because of a missing disclaimer. Once those interdepartmental fights are resolved, you’ll still need to test and push the new receipt format to store POS systems—and, if possible, delay going live with it until it’s clear receipt paper is either too pricey or too scarce.

Your other options: getting customers to voluntarily leave without a receipt—Sears (NASDAQ:SHLD) and Kmart have offered that for a while—or ramping up your digital receipt efforts. If you’re already doing digital receipts as part of a loyalty program, flipping the policy from “can receive E-mailed receipt” to “will E-mail receipt unless otherwise requested” may be enough to cut paper usage significantly.

You may still want to have cashiers hand each customer a barcoded mini-receipt, so if buyer’s remorse kicks in before the E-mail receipt arrives they’ll still be able to do a return. That also reduces concerns about shoplifting and fraud—at least customers will have something to show LP if there’s a question at the door. That won’t completely cut out paper receipts. But cutting them by 40 percent? That’s doable.


Comments are closed.


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!

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...

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.