Apple’s Movie-Ticket-Purchase Move Has (Broken) Promise For Mobile Payments

Written by Evan Schuman
January 30th, 2013

When Apple on Monday (Jan. 28) announced new features in its mobile OS—including what it described as “the ability to use Siri to purchase movie tickets in the U.S. through Fandango”—it seemed like the iPhone/iPad maker’s first movement into mobile payments. Alas, no.

Turns out that the system doesn’t give Siri (the phone’s virtual assistant with comically bad voice recognition) the ability to purchase movie tickets at all. It simply does what it’s always done, which is to find local movie showtimes. After that, it’s up to the user to click and tap on options, which will eventually bring up the Fandango app (assuming the user has already installed it). That’s more a marketing deal than IT magic.

But it does raise the question of why the app doesn’t deliver the type of true integration that it promises. Why not enable movie tickets to be purchased—without leaving Siri—and charged to the user’s iTunes account. If the customer has to create his/her own Fandango account, including keying in a payment card, where’s the convenience advantage in that? We know that Apple is avoiding NFC, but why is it avoiding integration with its own iTunes? Wouldn’t that be the most logical baby step to mobile payments?

Then again, giving something like Siri purchase power is frightening. Shoppers can—and do—tolerate Web pages that fail and require page refreshes to work correctly. And a failed graphic generates little more than a sigh. But a payment that is processed for the wrong amount—or charged twice—that’s the stuff of cancelled accounts, ruined reputations and sometimes even legal action. Less severe for the shopper, but a disaster for the retailer is the opposite problem: a transaction that doesn’t go through, meaning either that the product or the service isn’t delivered (unhappy shopper) or that the product/service is delivered for free (unhappy shopkeeper).

Given that, Siri’s legendary struggles with accuracy are not irrelevant. Even during our testing of this movie-ticket-buying feature, Siri repeatedly couldn’t understand the name of a movie. When the film sought was Lincoln, it assumed we meant we wanted movie times in Lincoln, Neb. When we used the Apple suggested “buy tickets” to prompt Siri to launch Fandango, Siri—somewhat understandably—thought we were terminating the interaction, hearing “buy” as “bye.” Other phrases were mangled without much logic. A search for Hansel and Gretel showtimes indicated that Siri thought we were asking about canceling Gretel. You don’t even want to know what it did with Les Misérables.

Siri’s fractured fairy tale version of voice recognition may be entertaining. But when it comes to giving it control of a Visa card or an iTunes account, maybe the idea of going slow has merit.


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.