advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Mobile Web Performance Erratic At Best: Nordstrom, QVC Good; Levi, REI Bad

September 2nd, 2010

Other issues are even trickier. For example, Levi Strauss has a corporate site at levistrauss.com and an E-tail site at levi.com. Navigate to the first one on a smartphone and your screen will fill–slowly–with a montage of dozens of small images on a page that’s clearly designed for a PC screen. But go to the second one, and the screen comes up much faster with a reasonably designed mobile site.

We know this is what happens because we tried it on an iPhone, where an initial search for the Levi’s site led us to levistrauss.com. For customers who don’t already know the address of the site they’re trying to get to, the wrong site could be worse than useless; it could convince the customer to abandon the retailer’s site.

Slow or wildly inconsistent response times are a problem when customers are using their phones to shop at home or work. But it’s a catastrophe when, as they’re increasingly doing, shoppers bring along their phones to use as a decision-making tool.

Say a customer is facing a row of TVs. Chances are, that customer has already eliminated some by doing research on the Web or mobile sites in advance. But in the store, it may still come down to a handful of choices. And store personnel will never be as trusted as non-employee reviewers.

So out comes the smartphone. The initial advantage goes to the store the customer is standing in; that retailer’s site is the likely place to find product information and customer reviews for each of the models that are for sale in this store.

But if that information isn’t available–or the customer can’t get to the retailer’s M-Commerce site or it takes too long to load–the customer may decide to search for reviews. That could take the customer to a third-party site or even to a direct competitor.

That’s right. The smartphone can bring your competitor into your store, and maybe even take away the sale.

Suppose you decide you don’t want to offer your competition the opportunity to disrupt your sale, so you make it hard for smartphones to get a connection–either Wi-Fi or 3G–inside your store. What then? Lots of customers will step outside to look for a connection. That’s even more disruptive to your sales process. And once a customer steps outside, that customer may just keep walking.

So you have to support this opportunity for the competition. And when you do, you’re competing against both your direct competitors and third-party review-and-comment sites, some of which may include negative comments about you as a retailer.

That’s the change that sneaked up on retailers in the midst of the smartphone explosion. In the space of a few years, your brick-and-mortar store has changed from a haven from competition–once the customers were in the store, you controlled their experience–to a place where customers have much more control over the experience and retailers have much less.

This is the world you have to support now. The merged channel is no longer something you can think about doing someday. Your customers have already moved there. Until you catch up, they’re beyond your control.


advertisement

One Comment | Read Mobile Web Performance Erratic At Best: Nordstrom, QVC Good; Levi, REI Bad

  1. Richard Nedwich Says:

    Good article, thanks.

    One possibility that comes to mind to level the playing field, or make the shopping experience ‘handset agnostic,’ is that most smartphones are coming equipped with WiFi. Retailers *can* control that experience by offering highly available, reliable and good performing WiFi connectivity to their in-store shoppers. Borrowing from the business hotel market, one could be presented with a Welcome screen from the retailer – being directed straight to your mobile home page. You even have the option to restrict access beyond your own web site, but assuming you don’t, at least you have ‘home field advantage.’

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.