Small Gift Basket Chain Creates Practical Use For Streaming Video, But Will It Scale?

Written by Evan Schuman
July 9th, 2009

When San Francisco area online gift basket merchant Gourmet Gifts create a custom arrangement, the selection of items and positioning reflects that particular artist’s creativity. Unfortunately, it’s not always what the client had in mind. Site owner Debbie Quintana started toying with streaming video in March and discovered that its realtime transmissions allowed for the item to be displayed, rotated and then continuously changed as the client—on the phone—revealed what worked and what didn’t.

The overwhelming majority of retailers today that use streaming video use it as a toy, a fun thing that looks cool on the site but doesn’t have much practical purpose. (A rare major vendor exception was a Staples two-way streaming video kiosk trial in Canada last summer.) What is so powerful about what Gourmet Gifts is doing is that truly recreates the one-on-one interaction that would exist in a traditional in-store gift basket shop.

It’s often said that smaller retailers often figure out practical ways of using technology because they need the capabilities. And the lack of overhead allows for very quicky and low-cost experimentation. In Quintana’s case, she financed the streaming video trial out of her pocket for $200. It costs Wal-Mart 1,000 times that much to just think about a trial. (If a memo is actually written, you’re going to break seven figures easy.)

But can it scale? Even if you assume that most customers won’t need to use the service for every purchase, there would still need to be a camera setup for every several call center reps. And having to physically get the idea and tweak it while the customer is on the phone, that sounds challenging for a large chain.

And yet, there is something powerful about the idea. Could it reduce returns? Allow for a retailer to cut back on people verifying a package’s contents? Attract customers who crave the personal attention? Perhaps increase sales because of the perceived lower risk?

On the down side, such an arrangement would make outsourcing and telecommuting more difficult as the worker would need to have hands-on access to all products to be shipped. Also, color reproduction on lower-end cameras is highly inaccurate, especially when it’s paired with a low-end consumer monitor, potentially causing an increase in returns due to color mismatch.

Either way, it’s good to see some retailers trying to figure out the practical side of streaming video. If a retail CIO needs to be shamed into investment, how about this: Want to be out-teched by a gift basket store?


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.