advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Mass Transit Likely To Break The Contactless Payment Logjam

October 5th, 2010

Increasingly, everything is in place for contactless payments. The only thing in the way is an awareness gap—one that isn’t getting any smaller. And there’s no reason for it to shrink. Card issuers aren’t pushing contactless, retail executives don’t see an obvious benefit, and customers don’t even know it’s there.

Enter the giant contactless users such as transit systems. The Chicago Transit Authority sends someone through a subway turnstile or past a bus fare box 1.7 million times each day. That’s a lot of payments—most of which involve running a ticket through a scanning machine that has lots of moving parts. Moving parts break down. Contactless cuts out many moving parts. That means it’s very much in the interest of the CTA to push contactless as its main mode of payment.

And that’s exactly what’s specified in the Request For Proposals that the CTA just issued as part of its project to replace its fare system, due to be completed by 2014. The RFP not only directs the winning vendor to make contactless the primary way of getting through a turnstile, but also requires the vendor to launch a promotional campaign to encourage riders to use contactless.

That won’t just make the CTA the biggest contactless user in Chicago. It will also make millions of Chicagoans (and more than a few tourists) aware of contactless, many for the first time.

Or consider the 2012 London Olympics, which faces the same kind of problem of scale: eight million ticket holders who will have to file past large numbers of pay points during the course of the games. At that scale, saving a second per person really does matter. Saving a second each time a member of those huge crowds buys a ticket, a ride, a meal or a souvenir could be critical in getting those crowds where they want to go on time—and where the Olympic organizers want them to go.

That’s part of the reason Olympics organizers are promoting it as a “contactless event,” and pushing card issuers to get 20 million contactless payment cards into the hands of British customers by the time the Olympics arrive. It’s not so much that the Olympics loves contactless. It’s that the Olympics needs contactless.

And as Olympics attendees use contactless, that awareness gap will close. They’ll know contactless exists. And many of them will be inclined to use it more often.

No retailer individually could hope to make a major dent in the contactless awareness gap. Chances are, even a group of major retailers could take years to get millions of customers using contactless. The Olympics will do that in 17 days.

Transit systems and giant events might seem like the wrong way to go about transitioning to contactless. Yes, this should be something that retailers and card issuers can do for themselves. But they can’t. It’s going to be up to those big users to make customers aware of contactless. At least for now, retailers are just along for the ride.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

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.