advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

MasterCard Pushing EMV PIN. Visa? Not So Much

February 2nd, 2012

Why not make it 100 percent as soon as the retailer hits the percentage of transactions? McGrath said the delays are necessary, because MasterCard wants EMV to be sufficiently widespread before fully kicking in the reductions. “There needs to be a certain level of penetration for this to be most effective,” he said. “We need the market to mature to a particular point.”

The liability hierarchy seesaw also does not kick in until October 2015, according to MasterCard. Note: That liability hierarchy in October 2015 excludes fuel retailers, which don’t get to participate in that program for another two years (October 2017).

The back-and-forth between the two top card brands on EMV specifics glosses over the fact that a fundamental investment argument has to be made to retailers that any of this is worth doing. Trinette Huber, the manager of Information Privacy and Security at Sinclair Oil, a $7 billion oil and gasoline company with 2,700 gas stations and convenience stores, made the argument on these virtual pages in November 2011 that both brands still have a lot of convincing to do.

After MasterCard described its roadmap and its incentives, Huber said she still is not convinced. “I don’t understand how threats of having to pay for fraudulent cards is such a great motivator. So, pretty words but no substance on why retailers should consider this an opportunity,” she said.

Verifone, which has a huge stake in the terminal side of this debate, opted to not be a cheerleader for the specifics of the MasterCard move, while taking a subtle dig at Visa. “We’re awaiting further details from MasterCard but, at this stage, they seem firmly supportive of Chip-and-PIN EMV, whereas Visa appears somewhat indifferent,” E-mailed Erik Vlugt, Verifone’s VP of product marketing.

Not so sure I’d say Visa was being indifferent. More that it is super-nervous about making sure American consumers don’t reject EMV the way they, for the most part, did not fall in love with contactless.

Randy Vanderhoof, the executive director of the Smart Card Alliance, said he sees both card brands in a very delicate position.

“The issuer has a really tough decision to make if they’re a Visa issuer. Am I going to continue to absorb all of this fraud by relying on signature?” Vanderhoof said. “Should I implement PIN, knowing that introducing PIN is going to make EMV implementation more difficult? There’s no question about that.”

Then again, if the intent is to eventually support PIN, isn’t doing it all at once the best way? As long as the consumer is going through disruption, isn’t that the least painful time to introduce PIN? “Now would be a good time to do it,” he said. Still, the argument about disruption also has merit: “Anything you layer on top of (the change) is disaster plus. Until we get EMV out in the field, we can’t tackle these other issues. It’s messy any way you cut it.”

The challenge won’t even be limited to training consumers to move from swipe (magstripe) to insertion (EMV). (Fortunately, few consumers ever got used to wave—contactless—so at least that behavior won’t have to be unlearned.) Vanderhoof gives the example of a consumer walking into a favorite retailer with his new EMV card for the first time. The associate patiently explains how the new card needs to be inserted. But when that consumer walks into the retailer down the street, the same card still may have to be swiped.

But that is not so different from today, where different types of terminals force consumers to swipe on top or on the left or to have the card facing a different direction. In other words, consumers are already used to having the card processing drive them crazy.


advertisement

2 Comments | Read MasterCard Pushing EMV PIN. Visa? Not So Much

  1. James L. Says:

    When our company switched from AmEx to MC for business travel expenses, I thought we finally had the opportunity for chip/PIN & signature cards to facilitate the travel in Europe. “They’re not available in the US yet”, I was told by the bank representative who conducted the training on the new related expense reporting website. It was interesting to see that the chip card with mag stripe was available to my colleages in Canada.

    I thought the idea with chip & signature was to allow its use in both US & EU markets. One card – dual authorization methods.

  2. Dan Says:

    I want Chip & PIN. With Chip & Signature, sure it has a an EMV chip, but then a fraudster could just steal my card, run it through the chip reader and then sign my name. The PIN adds an extra layer of security as only I (should) know it. At the very least, I would like to see a dual method wherein if the US insists on using Chip & Signature, our cards would work as Chip & PIN in countries where that is the norm. I am just sick of this back and forth. America needs to get off its high horse and comply with the world payment standards. Visa says Chip & Signature, MasterCard wants Chip & PIN and then Amex is mysteriously quiet. All of this talk….the government, banks, acquiring banks and card networks need to work together to make it affordable and easy to fast track EMV.

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.