Contactless Payment Evolving Slowly

Written by Evan Schuman
March 22nd, 2006

It was apparently a coincidence that two of the biggest names in contactless payment today, Exxon Mobil’s Speedpass and credit card leader Visa, both announced changes to their contactless payment system on the same day last week.

The changes were definitely minor tweaks, with Exxon Mobil deploying a much faster way to sign up for Speedpass (taking a weeks-long process down to a few minutes) and Visa rolling out a much smaller form factor, specifically a mini-card suitable for hanging on a keychain.

The two moves, literally aimed at making the two contactless efforts either faster or smaller, are the companies’ latest attempt to figure out what is slowing the acceptance of contactless.

Exxon’s Speedpass was one of the first successful deployments of contactless consumer technology, right along with the tollbooth accelerating EZPass.

Back in 2003, Exxon tried to extend that success well beyond gas stations and it announced with great fanfare major trials with the McDonald’s fast-food chain in Chicago, Stop & Shop stores nationally and a deal with Timex watches. The Timex deal was hard for me to take too seriously because it just seemed so Dick Tracy/James Bondish.

Fictional crime-fighting associations notwithstanding, Exxon quietly pulled the plug on all three trials after about a year and decided to stick with gas stations. The reasons are unclear, as a Stop & Shop spokesman said the trial went well and they wanted to continue it. But Exxon turned them down because of “business concerns.”

Exxon spokesman Don Turk pretty much agreed, offering the odd explanation that “we thought [the trials] were all positive” and that “there were positive results from the consumers.” But the company decided last year to focus all efforts on selling gas.

Exxon clearly began the trials to try and expand their program and all participants are officially saying the tests went well. So what’s behind the change of heart?

The official Exxon reason is unclear, but for many, it’s about how companies want to make money and how they decide to spend their time and resources.

EZPass is mostly a single-application service, which is less toll-paying than access control. Speedpass is more of a payment system, which can be quite strategic when it’s buying gas, but diluted when it’s selling hamburgers or Tide detergent. (The Timex deal was always a reach, so we won’t go there.)

Visa, on the other hand, is finding contactless as the next logical extension of its credit card business, so all it needs to do is focus on convenience, speed and accuracy.

Speed is precisely what Exxon found that it had to resolve. It was ironic that a service that is all about saving a minute or two at the pump, and hence is associated with speed and convenience, was hampered with a wonderfully 20th century registration method.

Customers had to either download or physically pick up a paper application for Speedpass, submit the application and wait weeks for the device to be snail mailed to them and they then had to call to activate the unit. That’s more like Speedfail.

The new process can be performed in about two minutes at a participating gas station, using a handheld Symbol wireless unit, which approves the application and issues the programmed contactless payment device right away.

Put together, these are good indications for retailers who are waiting for contactless payment to get real. As industry leaders clean up their offerings, consumers will likely get interested again.


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.