advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Video Streaming At Pizza Hut, Sears, Wal-Mart: Will Video Kill The Retail Stars? (Well, Maybe Just Hurt Them A Little)

March 9th, 2011

“There was no way to estimate the potential usage. But if only half of our online customers used it after they ordered, we would be looking at tens of millions of streams,” Concors said.

On top of that, Concors—who, appropriately enough, has an additional title beyond CIO: he’s also Pizza Hut’s Chief Digital Officer—had other business concerns. Namely, videos are expensive and producers these days are getting ultra-anal about protecting copyright. That meant Pizza Hut needed to precisely control what videos were shown when—and for how long—and not every video on the chain’s server should be accessible by every consumer at all times. (Chief Legal Counsel and CIOs are the world’s most natural blood enemies.)

“The concerns around security are really around intellectual property. I didn’t want to manage the risk of people downloading trailers, clips or games that were not to be downloaded,” Concors said. “The video files do not reside on our servers. They reside on our partner’s infrastructure.”

Lawyers aside, the most concrete risk to the chain from the video project is the opposite of the benefit. If the benefit is that customers engender lots of additional good feelings about the retail brand, the opposite is if bad video performance makes those consumers think less of the retail brand.

With a viewership as large and young as Pizza Hut is likely to attract, such disappointment wouldn’t be that difficult to achieve. Unlike images and powerful Web designs and even streaming audio (whether on the desktop or on mobile), streams of high-quality video are impressively unforgiving. The eye will detect the most subtle hiccup or pause, something quite likely to happen when, for example, there’s a sharp spike in traffic during a SuperBowl commercial break. (Let’s not get into whether the commercials were more interesting than the actual game this year.)

Concors said such performance concerns had been contractually addressed by Pizza Hut. “I can’t get into specifics around the contract, but be ensured there were SLAs around performance and availability and usability among the various browsers,” he said.

If this movie mania effort succeeds, who knows where it could lead? Pizza options might expand beyond pepperoni and sausage to include romance, adventure and horror. (To avoid confusion with its product, Domino’s would likely have to remove the horror option.)


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.