advertisement
advertisement

This is page 3 of:

Bribes Make Citibank India’s NFC Trial Work Well

March 10th, 2010

“Bengaluru is a technology hot spot where a large number of ambitious technology-savvy young Indians live and work. The innovative idea of using a mobile phone to make mobile proximity payments caught the imagination of many such customers who signed-up to try it,” the report said. “Young, educated urbanites with a natural affinity for advanced gadgetry are natural first adherents to any new technological innovation.”

Other than not wanting to carry two phones, the key complaints of participants were that far too few retailers participated and the quality of the phone itself.

As for the shortage of retailers, that’s a result of both the limits of any trial and the limits of any new technology. Catch-22: It’s hard to get a lot of retailers to sign up when there are very few consumers with NFC devices, and it’s hard to get consumers to sign up when there are very few places where they can make NFC purchases.

The most likely breakthrough will be some interested party—Citi and Chase, on the banking front, or perhaps some major carriers or handset manufacturers—funding both sides to artificially increase the numbers until natural momentum (hopefully) kicks in and it can grow organically.

The phone complaints may also be limited to the trial, as it made sense to partner with one particular phone. In a full deployment, there would presumably be quite a range of phone options.

The Nokia unit used in the Bengaluru trial proved, though, to be especially unpopular. “Those who did try to use the Nokia NFC phone to substitute for their regular handset or use it as a replacement handset expressed dissatisfaction with the device,” the report said. “Strong negative feedback was received on a variety of phone-related problems.”

Among the problems cited: “The Nokia NFC phone hangs up and then suddenly reboots itself, causing disruption and leading customers not to rely on the device for their regular communication needs” and “customers indicated that there were some basic problems with the Nokia NFC handset such as defects with the volume control or the speakerphone.”

“All this contributed to the image of forcefully overlaying old furniture with new varnish, of installing new features on an old machine,” the report said. “This inhibits the take-up and use of a new product, no matter how useful it may be, as the overall package is perceived to have basic problems that customers no longer have any tolerance for.”


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.