Community

@Matt, good to know the graphic is off. Visa will make them change it as this will irritate the brand people.

You may want to check facts here. The graphic depicts an American Express card which begins with the number 3.

Visa's start with the number 4 and MC starts with 5.

I think you guys are both right. Fraud remains an issue and I would be curious to understand the chargeback/return process with The Home Depot stores. I think it would be worth a watch as they roll this thing out beyond the Silcon Valley test bed they've been playing in.

Not to mention that by the time everyone figures out how to cooperatively make a buck off the mobile ecosystem in such a way that consumers cannot live without, the saying will be:

Card, what card? I don need no stinkin card! What was I thinking? :-)

The whole chip/EMV migration in the US may continue as a compatibility accommodation for non-US issued EMV/chip cards. However, I suspect we'll be seeing the rise of mobile initiated transactions increase much faster. Could even fund the EMV/chip for what was that.... those card thingeys?

I'm just sayin......

I think this bit is somewhat misleading.

The USD $1 coins were originally mass-produced with the intention of replacing or displacing the US one dollar bill which does not last very long as the paper wears out quickly, relative to the metals in coins. It was an attempt at cost savings by the US Mint that did not work out as intended. The coins are cheaper to make and last longer than their paper equivalents.

However, the $1 coins proved to be an unsuitable and unpopular replacement for the one dollar bill and were not adopted by mainstream American public. Some/most did not like to carry the weight of all that coinage in their pockets! 

There has always been a collectors market for those interested in coins of all kinds, including those collecting the Presidents. That market has not changed with respect to this new decision by the US Mint.

I also wonder about dispute management and Non Sufficient Funds, especially with some family members!!  :-)

I agree about Senator Durbin's remarks. I have to wonder if it is just a smokescreen to divert attention away from his ill conceived bit of legislation that was probably written by the retail lobby that is so fond of him.

The debit fee change took effect on October 1. That would be outside of the third quarter reporting period, making Durbin's comments even more ridiculous.

The banks have obviously been watching their daily and weekly network fee reports to see how much interchange is not coming in anymore - post Oct 1, 2011. Essentially monitoring their losses and have come up with a means to recover their costs lost to Senator Durbins folley.

One step that can be taken by the operators of the ACH network in the US is to amend the fundamental NACHA rules that govern the use of the ACH network. Today, there is no definition for Fraud in the NACHA rules.

Traditionally, ACH has been set up and used by banks and corporations to move large amounts of money between and among themselves. This has all been accomplished by a basic gentlemans agreement in accordance with NACHA rules.

However, NACHA rules are not set up for consumer behavioral driven transactions and therefore do not provide for any kind of consumer perpetrated fraud.

I am thinking of chargebacks, incorrect account numbers (maybe on purpose?), rapid funds movement through several different bank accounts in quick succession, recourse for someone who has had their money stolen and they need fast resolution and there is none as a few examples.

As the financial community finds new and expanding uses for the ACH network, the NACHA rules likewise need to evolve along with the changing usage to enable proper protections.

If new NACHA rules are implemented, it will give the banks more leverage and movement to take action against fraudsters. Right now, banks are limited by the rules and the fraudsters are exploiting the holes in the NACHA rules.

Hi John,

Yes, I agree you may be on to something here. The list is typically used by financial institutions as a resource to review as part of their annual due diligence of their partners. The purpose of the PCI Compliant vendors list is for both card schemes to identify the parties that they acknowledge as having passed a PCI audit. Visa goes an extra step and sends an acceptance letter, which the banks also request of their service provider.

I also find it interesting that no one else has come forward with any additional information. There must be someone out there who could provide a global list from one of the card scheme's extranets. In the meantime, whilst we speculate, it is risky to assume if Sony is not on the list, they might not be PCI compliant without knowledge of how their relationship with the card schemes is structured. It is entirely possible that Sony are indeed working within established guidelines.

I find the silence to be an interesting commentary in and of itself.

Hi Keith,

Since I am viewing this list from the public MasterCard.com website, you may have a point. There is a different list via a MasterCard supplied user id for their extranet MOL (MasterCard Online) that I am more accustomed to viewing, which is the one stop shop.

If you are comfortable with different languages, you may want to give this a go yourself to do some checking in Europe. Here is a link to give you a start, the rest is intuitive but I do a search on "pci compliant vendors".

http://www.mastercard.us/?html_get=/mccomsrch/ui.jsp%3Fui_mode%3Dnavigate%26charset%3DUTF-8%26language%3Den-US%26facet%3DMCCOM.Personal%26facetCollectionID%3D%26structured_chart%3D%26question_box%3Dpci%20compliant%20vendors%26searchtext%3Dpci%20compliant%20vendors

This screen offers the selection of region/language. Once you have made your selection and are sent to the next screen I recommend you choose Issuers in the upper right hand corner. Then do your search for PCI compliant vendors.

I'm off to escape the 100F temps and headed to the beach for the rest of the weekend. Good luck!

MaryAnn

Both card schemes only keep one list for all approved vendors and do not differentiate across regions. Their lists will be very similar, with a few exceptions. 

The MasterCard list is just easier to find than Visa's. And you are correct, Sony is not on the list.