Community

Or just make the payments from ANY card that you have regstered on any modern smartphone or watch or health-tracker with the funtionality - or even people who doing this with wearables. 

In the picture, it looks like he is holding some element of hardware too: which looks a little cumbersome - as this maybe an external induction-coil or battery.

Also note that the process of doing what is described above will likely (depending upon the bank) be in direct breach of card terms and conditions and open you up to some significant liabilities in the even to all sorts of breaches in security and fraud. So do this at your peril.

Accordingly, I am going to ignore this article as pure 'guff' and potentially dangerous with costly consequences; and propose that others should do so too. A responsible publication shoudl also want to lead on these risk-based aspects of this rather than writing this like an accolade.

It is of note that HM Treasury launched its consultation only 11 months ago for ideas on how to reduce cash further - reporting that it was down to 15% commerce in 2015. 

It is strtnge that the HMG wants to BOTH remove cash and make us more cashless and seeks support for initiatives to do this AT THE SAME TIME as seeking to provide greater access to cash.

Or is this a case of left-hand needing to talk to right-hand. Or just a need for a single strategy?

Absolutely how it shoudl happen: it is rather starange that no-one seems to realise this though and to be addressing this issue.

Interesting - this infers that we all need to pay for the frauds that need to be stopped rather than funded. Why don't we start by following and recovering the money?

Mmmmmm. Marketing hype only. If they wanted to stir things up and reflect current use, they might also have dropped the magnetic stripe; and perhaps the signature panel (or put that on the front under the logo - with the hologram. Even then the Hologram is no longer needed (in a 100% CHIP on line environment!).  But then the card scheme rules woudl have been impossible to get past because of their fall-back requirements and interoperability. 

So, as others have said: it is all just desperation to get into the news rather than anything tangible.

@Ketharamen Swaminathan - Is it not all well handled now within the new ISO 20022 - giving the banks the ability to formally 'receipt' the payments for us all as consumers (assume that you are talking about this as a consumer): and this is then (ISO 20022), I believe more advanced in its implementation in your part of the world?

This is scalable in the extreme (not sure who is writing this anonymously). Given that the BRC / BIRA and others claim that their processing costs are in the £billions; the benefit is there to be realised and shared through commercial redistribution of the savings. And becaus ethe infrastructure is now all broadly in place, innovation providers will have the capability now to use, evolve and develop the new infrastructure(s).

The main thing that the article got wrong is the assumption that Mastercard was going to displace its OWN trandactions, which it corrected later by explaining how it would actually be displacing the transactions of Visa. Note that Mastercard is registered with the FCA as a PISP TWICE, and Visa not at all!

What poppycock!

Competition will drive down any additional revenues/margins after the expenditure and initial costs have been spent. This is how it always works.

The technology leaders will be the 'winners' as they will attract the market share and customers and the lower delivery costs (so still also about costs!). 

And it won't necessarily be all about the BIG BANKS, but about new entrants and new subsidiaries and other parties that disintermediate.

This is a bit of a 'non-story', as it has not drawn out any/all of the wider aspects of the potential changes that will occur. One cannot review the impacts in a vacuum, as too many other factors will impact the changes in the real world. 

It has not been easy to resist thinking that stories from leaving members of staff who predicted that this sort of thing woudl occur had any substance. It has been much easier to dismiss such predictions as simply the product of disgruntled, dishillusioned leavers. Now I have to question whether this was all hype and that this was a 'one-off' and will. never be repeated; or whether the doom-sayers were right and that this is the start of a new type of nightmare.  We will see!

EXACTLY - spot on comment above:

1. Business cases in major banks cost a lot of money and take a lot of time to resource and pay for. Some things just need ACTION. £3,000 is nothing in the context of the costs of the cost of replacing the £10 note with a new plastic one.

2. Every marketing agency, and doubtless the one used by BoE or their own internal people; MUST be advising the Bank to align themselves with the modern / current channels of communications for its customers: and more specifically towards social media to get messages out. The Bank HAS to adopt these technologies.

3. Compared to traditional media messaging that the Bank could use, such as TV adverts, broad-sheet adverts and other radio/tv interview messaging: this would likely have been part of a packge that was MUCH, MUCH much cheaper than the traditionally required communication, reached more people and been noticed in a deeper way.

It seems to me that sometimes people who make these information requests do so without thinking through the questions that they are asking (probably thinking that they are being clever in asking without thinking about the wider issues): i.e they are just adding costs onto the 'system' and hence for all of us as taxpayers, and making our civil servants become less effective by making them double think every little decision.

We have to have accountability, but this is nonsence. STOP IT please.