Community

SMS advising does seem a nice feature, although it shifts responsibility to the cardholder for security - a nice avoiding step by the banks in the name of empowering cardholders  - it's your choice blah blah blah and if you don't contest it don't say I didn't tell you blah blah blah. All forgetting of course that SMS is not a guaranteed delivery messaging system and the whole system stops working at 12:01 on January 1st for around 3 hours...

Switching the cards on and off is very possible - in fact MasterCard announced their InControl platform not so long back which has a feature to do exactly this. Again though it shifts the burden of responsibility for security to the cardholder. You have the power ergo if you don't do it, it's your fault that you were defrauded.

I strongly agree with Stephen that using the power of the existing model has got to be the way forwards for CNP. Not only have we as an industry invested heavily in it, it also replicates the approach of retailers - where Clicks&Mortar businesses rival even the biggest web-only players. Additionally if you start anywhere talking about changing any physical infrastructure, then you are talking of a 10-15 year project. Realistically, how long has EMV taken to rollout? SecureCode/VbyV?

'So why can't we sell this in Canada or Mexico?'

'They make their cards out of potatoes not plastic? How backward...'

'Aah, they use chips'

PayPal for the real world, LOL, at least PayPal IS usable outside of the states. Mind you, with Twitter yet to make profit, it's not like Jack Dorsey seems to have gotten to grips with the concept behind business. Nice gimmick, but expect it to go the same way as Beenz, cassette tape and the Sinclair C5...

And of course the third party company should be run by Dean Proctor, master of the secret identity solution...

Once again you're off spouting all of this theoretical nonsense that has absolutely no grounding in the real world. Mobile phones are not a good basis for any all-encompassing scheme because NOT EVERYONE HAS ONE. Indeed saturation is high in many markets, but in a global population of 6 billion, only around half have an active mobile - even if you make the poor assumption that each person only owns one mobile (I myself have 2). And many folk, particularly the young, will change their phone at least every 12 months. So there is fatal flaw number 1.

Fatal flaw number 2 comes in your assumption that all the 'trusted' people that you've listed actually give a crap about identity theft. A bank doesn't care who you are if they get their money back. A doctor will treat you and get paid regardless. A dentist even more so. The Government only cares if you are taking money out of the system - and only then if you're better at it than an MP. In the real world banks have not addressed ecommerce fraud in the UK because it would currently cost them more than they're losing. Basic rules of a free market economy.

In fact, the only person that really cares about your identity is you. And so you have a choice to either prepare plan B and work out how to mop up when (not if) things go wrong, or turn into one of those anal folk that shred their mail and have seperate PCs for each application.

In the free market economy, Customers will declare their position through their actions. Banks like Capital One that are building their reputation on security and authentication will capture those that are worried about these things. Others will focus on ease of use and capture the folk with plan B. It's as simple as that.

Strange someone should mention Way as I was thinking the same thing. Only difference was that Way produced something that was EMV & PCI PED certified using a Siemens mobile and hardware module. However, the current global love for anything on the iPhone should be enough to make Mr Dorsey a few dollars even if his solution is old hat, old technology and laughed at by Canadians...

In the western world we have an increasingly aging demographic - which basically means that the world of consumers is becoming increasingly top heavy. With no offence intended to seasoned silver surfers out there, surely this continual pursuit of ways to pay that serve no purpose other than being 'cool' is the reason why cash is still used for the bulk of our purchases.

Perhaps the NBT should be some sort of walking stick based payment device or something else that resonates with those that actually remember not being at Woodstock.

It's fine going after 'the kids' if you are building something for 30 years time, but to capture the here and now it's more important to look at how to bring the luddites into electronic payments, how to secure the infrastructure without scrolling through 20 apps on an iPhone, and more importantly, how to pay for your bingo and still see how much change you have for a port and lemon in the interval.

There are a few wrong assumptions in the whole 'mobile payments' area that cause me to think it won't take off in the way banks hope:

1. More people consider their iPod to be an essential device than their mobile phone (particularly those in the under 24's bracket)

2. Banks are willing to fund transfer of the payment app every time somebody changes their phone - after all, it's not something I'd be willing to pay for.

If the banks are looking to step away from traditional plastic, then they will be heading into the exceptionally sensitive world of consumer gadgetry and be subject to the will's and want's of increasingly fluctuating consumer trends. I can see from the feedback in trials that 'card on the mobile' is popular, but is this because it isn't a card, or that people really like it for what it is?

Banks should consider making their card product more useful rather than disintermediating one of their strongest brand identifiers in favour of Nokia, SonyEricsson et al. After all, as the phone manufacturers have proven, if it does more useful things, it becomes more essential to a consumer.