Report: ‘Follow the Leader’ Brings Trouble in Retail RFID

Written by Evan Schuman
March 25th, 2005

As the young RFID retail market moves through its experimental stages to eventual full deployment, many retailers “are finding problems and frustrations” because they are trying to emulate cutting-edge market leader Wal-Mart.

“There is no cookie-cutter approach to RFID,” said ABI research analyst and report author Sara Shah. “RFID manufacturers?many of them relatively new companies?don’t understand retail. And many retailers don’t understand how RFID can benefit them.”

Shah offered two retailers, Albertsons and Target, as examples. They followed Wal-Mart’s RFID strategy closely.

On the one hand, Albertsons’ and Target’s “mandate was very similar to Wal-Mart’s,” and “they do have similar supply chains and a lot of the same suppliers.” But there are clearly differences and, Shah argues, those differences have not been given the appropriate weight.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean that they had to approach RFID in the same way [as Wal-Mart], even though it may very well work for them,” Shah said. “We need companies to take a step back and figure out how they do things internally. Today, they are not thinking it through.”

This all sits atop the many different kinds of problems retailers are discovering in RFID trials, such as readability errors and backend operation integration. “There are a million [RFID] problems, and every company had a different set of problems.”

What retailers typically have done is hire large consulting firms. But they quickly discover that those integrators tend to be conservative, have little experience with new technology such as RFID and “are often content to let ideas mature before getting involved,” Shah said. “They are often less creative and imaginative.”

The retailer then gets fed up and switches the project?in midstream?to smaller integrators who have the experience and the flexibility, Shah said. But she warns that those retailers are invariably going to have to return to those initial large integrators in the next couple of years because they are the only ones with the resources to handle the huge, live deployments.

“The larger integrators haven’t had the chance to have much experience with RFID yet, but the smaller ones can’t necessarily scale for the larger rollouts,” she said.

Another key problem is the lack of retail understanding of RFID’s potential.

“Beyond supply chain management, nobody knows how many ways RFID can be used,” Shah said. “Known applications include security and backdoor theft prevention, contactless payments, advertising and promotions.”


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.