M-Commerce Speed Differences Can Hit 13-Fold

Written by Evan Schuman
August 3rd, 2011

Nowhere in the electronic commerce world is speed more critical than with mobile commerce, where an extra few seconds on an Android can feel to a consumer a lot longer than those same few seconds on a desktop. And just to prove that the solar system has a sense of humor—or perhaps a sense of sadism—nowhere are performance differences more sharp than in retail M-Commerce.

The latest stats from Web performance tracker Gomez show some of the faster sites (including QVC and Amazon) sometimes delivering speeds 13 times faster than what their slower counterparts (including Target, HSN and Netflix) are delivering. In April, for example, QVC had an average response time of 2.2 seconds, while Netflix delivered 28.6 seconds. In May, QVC scored 1.5 seconds to Netflix’s 11.3 seconds and Office Depot’s 8.5 seconds. In June, QVC was clocked at 2.3 seconds and Amazon at 4.6 seconds, compared with Wal-Mart at 9.7 seconds, Target at 9.6 seconds and HSN at 10.8 seconds.

The explanations for the sharp differences are many, with some sites simply not trying, in the sense that their “mobile sites” are simply their regular Web sites as seen through a mobile browser. Still, from the customer’s perspective, that’s a fair comparison because it reflects what the customer will likely experience.

But one of the biggest slowdowns, according to Amir Rozenberg, a product manager at Gomez, is something designed to actually facilitate mobile performance: redirects. Many mobile sites try and get sophisticated and deliver a highly customized— and hopefully optimized— experience for shoppers. That might mean detecting the customer’s geography, mobile platform (and sometimes even more granular details, such as “different experiences based on the different versions of the iPhone”) and cookie-based preferences, in addition to delivering the best version of the site. “I’ve seen mobile sites with six or seven redirects,” Rozenberg said.

Other mobile acceleration efforts are more typical, such as minimizing JavaScript and CSS code. “You really want to reduce the redirects and to then cache those redirections,” he said. Analytics are also a major slowness agent, with Rozenberg suggesting that having analytics load later can be a huge help, admittedly at a data-cost.


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.