advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Apple’s NFC Rumors May Be True, But Irrelevant. Mobile Payment Is Visa’s Call

January 26th, 2011

Many other efforts have tried tackling these payment issues, with Bling making a good-faith effort—against extreme odds—along with ISIS—the AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile effort—that started out touting almost no changes to the existing structure, including promising to not use existing telecom bills. The group seems to have backed off from its earlier position, as retailers expressed unhappiness.

StorefrontBacktalk IT Columnist Nick Holland this week made a powerful argument on why Google’s efforts to become a payment power won’t go anywhere. (This is Google as Google, as opposed to Google as Android phone creator.)

Holland’s argument is strong indeed, but he might have focused too narrowly on Google literally mastering payments. Google as a search powerhouse has the ability to make connections between consumers and retailers and payment players.

That connection power may prove to be much more powerful—and lucrative—than directly handling the transactions, so don’t count out Google just because it can’t out-payment Visa.

Then again, that’s the same argument Google and Yahoo made in the early days of E-Commerce—that they would be E-Commerce Gods and that retailers would be powerless to make any sales without their help. It seems that retail brands are a lot more powerful than that. PayPal is doing quite well, but Visa hasn’t been hurt by it.

The sad truth is that Visa, MasterCard and others have poured in billions of dollars over the years—with a lot of bank support—and created an immensely sophisticated payment network. Replacing it won’t be easy, and there are a lot of reasons to not even try.

Mobile payments will indeed happen, probably about 2 to 3 years from now in a meaningful way. But it won’t happen because of handset technology. The current payment players and the telco players and the major retailers will all have to agree to make less money than they want to, in an attempt to make the next evolutionary payment change.

Hence, the irony: Apple and Google and Verizon will be side-players here. It’s the Wal-Marts, Chase Manhattans and Visas that will make this happen. And they’re simply not yet ready.


advertisement

3 Comments | Read Apple’s NFC Rumors May Be True, But Irrelevant. Mobile Payment Is Visa’s Call

  1. Mark Says:

    Not true this side of the pond – apparently there are 42000 tills in mainly food outlets that will accept NFC payments. Not sure whther the max is £10 or £15 – the latter I believe.

    2 of the main networks are going in for it (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/27/nfc_ee/)

  2. Evan Schuman Says:

    Editor’s Note: Mark is, of course, absolutely correct. Our piece was intended to describe the challenges of payment, NFC and contactless in the U.S.. We should have made that more clear.

  3. david marsh Says:

    To your point about the huge investments that have been made in the existing infrastructure – I think that consumers and merchants assume that the new payment platforms will have equivalent security, and I am not sure that is a safe assumption to make. I think it remains to be seen if new models (like Square)that shift some of the risk in order to facilitate payment can be validated without significant fraud losses. Most payment processors (rightly so in my opinion) view mobile devices as untrusted devices with many new threat vectors. Will convenience outweigh the risks?

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.