Mobile Conversion Rates May Not Mean What They Seem To Mean

Written by Evan Schuman
August 22nd, 2012

When E-Commerce execs look at stats comparing mobile and desktop online shopping, one key goal is often to determine conversion, meaning how often consumers close the deal and buy something. But does typical conversion rate data really show that information when it comes to tablets and smartphones?

A report this week from vendor Monetate, for example, showed that desktop devices (laptops, PCs and Macs, primarily) in Q2 2012 typically converted at 3.34 percent, while tablets converted at 3.17 percent and smartphones came in at a measly 1.09 percent. (The study, says the vendor, is based on a “random sample of more than 100 million online shopping experiences using same-store data” and leverages data from many of its retail customers, including Godiva, QVC, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Best Buy, Sports Authority, Urban Outfitters and Brooks Brothers.)

The question is, though, what does it mean when a smartphone shopper doesn’t close the deal? Could that shopper actually be inside the store at the time and close the deal by taking the item to a checkout lane? Or perhaps that customer is on the train coming home from work and chooses to do the research, browsing and deciding on his or her phone and then saving the winning product to a shopping cart, with the intent of purchasing that night from a laptop at home?

That’s not such a far-fetched scenario. Some shoppers may still be nervous about sending their payment-card data across the phone’s wireless network. (Their desktop is likely to not be any more secure, but let’s not confuse reality with perception.) Also, there might be a password-retention program on their desktop, which could support automatically filling in their address and payment-card data. Or it might simply be that shoppers don’t want to pull out their credit cards on a crowded subway car, nor type in their address while sitting next to the scary-looking guy with the scar.

The implication of stats like these—ones showing a much higher conversion from tablets compared with smartphones—would suggest it’s the smaller screen size of the smartphone that is fueling what appears to be lower conversions. We’re not at all sure that is the case. But the smartphone’s smaller size makes it convenient for truly mobile efforts, in a way that an iPad, for example, is not. That means the convenient smartphone is also finding itself in places where payment card—and address—typing may not be optimal.

This question is similar to those posed years ago about E-Commerce, when people noticed a lot of abandoned shopping carts. “Just curious,” the knowing IT exec would ask. “What was the last thing most of the abandoned cart people did?” The answer: “Most of them seemed to hit the Find A Store option. Why do you ask?”


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.