advertisement
advertisement

This is page 3 of:

Is Whole Foods Launching Ultra-Smart Carts? Not Exactly

February 29th, 2012

As each item is selected, it’s scanned by the cart. This triggers several actions. First, the item is checked against the shopping list. Second, the item is queued for payment. And third, the item is virtually crossed off the shopping list.

In the Microsoft demo, the cart flagged that the pasta scanned had gluten in it and the cart thought the shopper had sought gluten-free. (The demo said the cart knew of the gluten conflict, because it was indicated on the shopping list. But such preferences—low sodium, no nuts, milk rather than dark chocolate, etc.—could also be part of the program preference the customer could have selected at initial setup.) It then told the shopper the exact aisle and shelf where the gluten-free pasta was housed, as it presumably has access to frequently updated planograms.

The cart then announces that the shopping list is complete. When the customer indicates that she is done shopping, the cart asks to charge everything to the customer’s account. Another verbal command tells the cart to stop following the customer.

If that last command is not obeyed, that could be a nicely humorous situation. How far would the cart go in following the customer?

Given that the cart can’t go out in the parking lot, there is a logistical issue. If a shopper has a very full cart of groceries and she wants to bring the cart to her car, will she have to transfer all of her groceries from the ultra-smart cart to a dumb cart that store management will permit to play outside?

Speaking of security, the demo didn’t address the typical in-aisle payment loss-prevention issues: How would a grocer verify that the items in the cart had all been paid for? Does the cart beam the data to a loss-prevention person stationed at the door with a tablet? Is spot-checking used?

Again, spot-checking is the type of tactic that stores such as Whole Foods—and Trader Joe’s and Nordstrom’s—would be very hesitant to adopt.

As for the relationship between Chaotic Moon and Whole Foods, Chaotic Marketing Director Jonathan Carroll’s comments pretty much agree with Whole Foods’.

“Chaotic Moon imagined and developed this entirely on our own, and sought a partner to assist with in-store testing and prototyping. Whole Foods was an ideal partner, one we already have a professional relationship with, and they agreed to work with us in prototyping this proof of concept and in testing it in-store at their flagship location here in Austin,” Carroll said in an E-mail. “We are not developing this for Whole Foods, we are developing it for ourselves in conjunction with Whole Foods.”


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.