MCX Postpones Rollout of Apple Pay Rival 'CurrentC'

[Thunderhawks]

I don't know if you are being satiric or not, but you may be onto something. If at anything, to force Apple Pay at all of their vendors to really push it out so CurrentC can just die and be done already once and for all.

Yes, of course satiric, since Apple is so bad at services.
Once Apple Pay, Samsung Pay and Google Pay showed up, these characters should have stopped any further expenditures.
I can't believe nobody from CurrentC tried an NFC payment to realize how archaic there solution is.

 

[Rigby]

The banks are the ones that give out the token, so the bank would have the knowledge of who has what token.

Of course they do; they couldn't process the transaction otherwise. But the claim was that they make that information readily available to the merchants, based only on the DAN. I really doubt that.

 

[tennisproha]

Not sure what seamless means in this context, and I didn't say the charge didn't go through quickly. Same as when swiping, which is the point. The advantage of NFC transactions isn't really convincing when the process is pretty much the same whether you tap or swipe. Some merchants will not require signatures for small purchases (usually under $20), swipe or tap, but that is probably bank policy, not theirs. I see the banks as being the main source of the nonsense, at least in the U.S., where chip and PIN is being rolled out with agonizing slowness.

I know, I didn't say you said so; I was just expanding on my experience.

As far as the issues we're talking over, it's more so the payment processors (i.e.: Visa, MasterCard) that are calling the shots rather than the banks. Payment processors are the first line of defense against fraud. As such, with Apple Pay, Apple becomes your payment processor. Again I can't stress enough to that if you're having issues with Apple Pay at a merchant, please contact Apple for support.

In regards to chip-and-signature (no chip-and-PIN in the US), that has been fully implemented in the US as of the start of 2016. If you're not using it somewhere, at this point, that merchant is to blame for not implementing it. And that merchant is also 100% liable for any fraud until they implement the new system. Like many retailers, many merchants won't really care to implement it until the fraud starts hitting their bottom line.

 

[unplugme71]

You only need to read the last paragraph to figure out why it failed: the benefits were for the merchants, not the users. It was a brain-dead idea to begin with.

And Apple isn't the only one that's successful with a new payment method - apparently Samsung Pay is also doing pretty well (though I wouldn't know from first-hand knowledge).

Exactly - You make a product or service for a user, otherwise you have nothing.

 

[Robert.Walter]

I know, I didn't say you said so; I was just expanding on my experience.

As far as the issues we're talking over, it's more so the payment processors (i.e.: Visa, MasterCard) that are calling the shots rather than the banks. Payment processors are the first line of defense against fraud. As such, with Apple Pay, Apple becomes your payment processor. Again I can't stress enough to that if you're having issues with Apple Pay at a merchant, please contact Apple for support.

In regards to chip-and-signature (no chip-and-PIN in the US), that has been fully implemented in the US as of the start of 2016. If you're not using it somewhere, at this point, that merchant is to blame for not implementing it. And that merchant is also 100% liable for any fraud until they implement the new system. Like many retailers, many merchants won't really care to implement it until the fraud starts hitting their bottom line.

This is rather contradicted by the recent spate of lawsuits against, and senatorial letters to the FTC about, EMV Co delaying a merchants certification to use chip+sign to place fraud costs on the merchant for a while, just as EMV appears to be frustrating a move to chip+pin in order to milk a 5¢ surcharge for handling signed receipt slips.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I know, I didn't say you said so; I was just expanding on my experience.

As far as the issues we're talking over, it's more so the payment processors (i.e.: Visa, MasterCard) that are calling the shots rather than the banks. Payment processors are the first line of defense against fraud. As such, with Apple Pay, Apple becomes your payment processor. Again I can't stress enough to that if you're having issues with Apple Pay at a merchant, please contact Apple for support.

In regards to chip-and-signature (no chip-and-PIN in the US), that has been fully implemented in the US as of the start of 2016. If you're not using it somewhere, at this point, that merchant is to blame for not implementing it. And that merchant is also 100% liable for any fraud until they implement the new system. Like many retailers, many merchants won't really care to implement it until the fraud starts hitting their bottom line.

I would be surprised if Apple had any control over the requirements to sign or verify the charge amounts. The merchants are treating (for the time being at least) all card transactions the same whether they are swipes or taps.

The main culprit in the chip card transition according to my wallet is the card issuers. The issuers haven't all bothered to replace the old mag stripe cards. Discover, for instance. At least they are working with Apple Pay now.

 

[garya73]

I know, I didn't say you said so; I was just expanding on my experience.

As far as the issues we're talking over, it's more so the payment processors (i.e.: Visa, MasterCard) that are calling the shots rather than the banks. Payment processors are the first line of defense against fraud. As such, with Apple Pay, Apple becomes your payment processor. Again I can't stress enough to that if you're having issues with Apple Pay at a merchant, please contact Apple for support.

In regards to chip-and-signature (no chip-and-PIN in the US), that has been fully implemented in the US as of the start of 2016. If you're not using it somewhere, at this point, that merchant is to blame for not implementing it. And that merchant is also 100% liable for any fraud until they implement the new system. Like many retailers, many merchants won't really care to implement it until the fraud starts hitting their bottom line.

Both my Target Debit and Target Credit cards are chip + pin.
[doublepost=1463547173][/doublepost]

I would be surprised if Apple had any control over the requirements to sign or verify the charge amounts. The merchants are treating (for the time being at least) all card transactions the same whether they are swipes or taps.

The main culprit in the chip card transition according to my wallet is the card issuers. The issuers haven't all bothered to replace the old mag stripe cards. Discover, for instance. At least they are working with Apple Pay now.

Target has. Only the chip works. There is no magnetic strip on the back. Now if they only accepted Apple Pay in the stores...

 

[AZhappyjack]

Both my Target Debit and Target Credit cards are chip + pin.
[doublepost=1463547173][/doublepost]

Target has. Only the chip works. There is no magnetic strip on the back. Now if they only accepted Apple Pay in the stores...

No worries for me. I don't shop at Target.

 

[sudo1996]

"utilizing unique feedback from the marketplace"
aka
"seeing that it's no longer 2008" or "seeing that everybody hates our guts"

 

[JGRE]

Here is what's interesting to me (emphasis mine):

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160516005842/en/Walmart-Introduces-Walmart-Pay-Arkansas

So if Walmart already has 20 million people (?!) using the Walmart app monthly, just adding a "Pay" feature to the list of features people already use it for doesn't sound quite as crazy as CurrentC rolling in and trying to get everyone to use an app that they were never using before.

Funny, according to wikipedia only 2.9 million people live in Arkansas yet Walmart claims 20 million active users???????????

Edit: Hold on, they also rolled-out in Texas which has 27 million people. So out of a population of app 30m, they claim to have 20m active users: **** yes this is amazing......but very hard to believe if you discount childeren elderly and the fact that people live together in families. Who are they kidding?

 

[Wondercow]

That's just silly. Chip cards are demonstrably MUCH slower than swipe, and that's without adding a PIN. With a PIN, I would say it's on the order of 10-20x slower. I have used chip & PIN throughout Europe and seen it attempted at Target in the US, with disastrous results (in terms of wasted time). Here's the difference between Europe and USA: Europe is still a quaint little place that operates at a pace and volume an order of magnitude slower than the US. Chip and PIN is fine at a local pub in England, a quaint restaurant in old town Prague, or a drugstore in Paris. It doesn't, however, work at a US megastore like Target, which does in one hour the volume of transactions that any of those places do in a week. Chip & PIN just doesn't scale to US consumerism. At least not without a lot of pain. Europeans tolerate chip & PIN because they plan to sit and sip wine and chat for 2 hours at the restaurant after dinner - while in America, the Cheesecake Factory wants to process you and get you out the door FAST to make more revenue off that table. Same with retail store purchases. More speed = more revenue. We buy stuff as fast as they can sell it.

If the chip and PIN is slower than swipe and sign you're doing something wrong.

 

[rezwits]

I have just been waiting for freakin Starbucks, for over a year now, and it's starting to piss me off... I know I would spend twice as much many as I should, so I shouldn't be pissed but, I can learn to control myself if they get the system in store, this (Starbucks waiting) sucks...

 

[aristobrat]

Funny, according to wikipedia only 2.9 million people live in Arkansas yet Walmart claims 20 million active users???????????

Edit: Hold on, they also rolled-out in Texas which has 27 million people. So out of a population of app 30m, they claim to have 20m active users: **** yes this is amazing......but very hard to believe if you discount childeren elderly and the fact that people live together in families. Who are they kidding?

I think they're saying they have 20m active users (per month) for the Walmart app.

The app itself has been out for years, and is available to anyone (not just TX and AR), and has features like price check, pharmacy refills, item finder (tells you specifically where in the store what you're looking for is located), coupons/ads, shopping list, etc.

Only one of the features (the new Walmart Pay) is limited to TX and AR.

 

[TallManNY]

I have just been waiting for freakin Starbucks, for over a year now, and it's starting to piss me off... I know I would spend twice as much many as I should, so I shouldn't be pissed but, I can learn to control myself if they get the system in store, this (Starbucks waiting) sucks...

Actually I find that their QR code system integrated with the Apple Wallet works fine. Yes you have to load your card in advance (so you are basically pre-paying for your month's coffee), but I load it with Apple Pay, so that is fast. I only go to Starbucks about once a week or so, but I always use their QR system.

 

[JGRE]

That's just silly. Chip cards are demonstrably MUCH slower than swipe, and that's without adding a PIN. With a PIN, I would say it's on the order of 10-20x slower. I have used chip & PIN throughout Europe and seen it attempted at Target in the US, with disastrous results (in terms of wasted time). Here's the difference between Europe and USA: Europe is still a quaint little place that operates at a pace and volume an order of magnitude slower than the US. Chip and PIN is fine at a local pub in England, a quaint restaurant in old town Prague, or a drugstore in Paris. It doesn't, however, work at a US megastore like Target, which does in one hour the volume of transactions that any of those places do in a week. Chip & PIN just doesn't scale to US consumerism. At least not without a lot of pain. Europeans tolerate chip & PIN because they plan to sit and sip wine and chat for 2 hours at the restaurant after dinner - while in America, the Cheesecake Factory wants to process you and get you out the door FAST to make more revenue off that table. Same with retail store purchases. More speed = more revenue. We buy stuff as fast as they can sell it.

Haha, you are so funny. You think that in Europa we only have small shops in which we sit down all and sip wine all day.

Perhaps you have only seen a very small part of Europe, but believe me we do have large shops, perhaps a bit smaller, but still large enough. In the Netherlands we had 3.2 billion PIN transactions is 2015 (http://www.pin.nl/wp-uploads/2012/10/p_1.pintransacties_per_jaar.pdf)

Btw, you can swipe (without PIN) amounts below a certain threshold and there is no way of doing this any faster. Even using PIN in stores is very fast and there is certainly not a 10x20 time difference. My experience with the US is that on average it is no faster or slower. Using a credit card with signature or a debit card with PIN doesn’t make any difference in speed, it takes up between 3 and 5 seconds. That pubs in London have slow terminals, is not an example for the whole of Europe.
[doublepost=1463576956][/doublepost]

I think they're saying they have 20m active users (per month) for the Walmart app.

The app itself has been out for years, and is available to anyone (not just TX and AR), and has features like price check, pharmacy refills, item finder (tells you specifically where in the store what you're looking for is located), coupons/ads, shopping list, etc.

Only one of the features (the new Walmart Pay) is limited to TX and AR.

Ok, but there are than two completely different things (we have the Appie app overhere). Now it looks like they use the argument in competition with Apple, Google and Android pay, which it is not. But than it is perhaps only me

 

[deeddawg]

However, I wouldn't want to drop my card and then have someone use it at the store before I realize it's gone.

If you drop your card, it's on its way to BestBuy or HHGregg or somewhere with a bit more payoff than a #1 Combo Meal...

 

[lederermc]

And how does this system help the consumer? Seems like swiping a debit card and enter 4 digit code is easier or equivalent.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

I hope they all catch colera and snuff it. This payments program lark is yet another cheating program, where the so-called provider takes nibbles out and thus earns billions. The stupid consumer thinks "Oh that is alright" because he doesn't realise that the product prices are notched up accordingly so that none of those in the vendor chain lose out. In other words it is another hidden cost applied to the unsuspecting citizen and should be opposed by everyone at all costs.

You are free to carry gold francs with you everywhere or attempt to barter your chickens for my goat but some of us feel 1.75% is an acceptable price for the value provided of automatic accounting of purchases, security of funds, convenience of not having to go to bank/ATM, etc, etc...
[doublepost=1463588016][/doublepost]

The banks are the ones that give out the token, so the bank would have the knowledge of who has what token.

I think the point folks are trying to make is that the bank has a record of where the purchase was made, how much was spent, and when but not the details of the specific products purchased. Knowing that someone made a purchase in your store is certainly valuable, as is contact data to then reach out to them, but knowing specifically what they bought and to develop a predictive profile is the real goal. Those data (identity, timestamp, and amount) could likely be reconciled against the product data the merchant has but that could be a difficult reconciliation exercise. Using approximate timestamp (there will be clock drift on one side or the other) and purchase amount will work very well in some cases but I'd imagine a high volume location with similar pricing across many products (McDonald's lunch rush where everyone is buying a $4.99 value meal of some sort - that price probably isn't correct but I don't eat much fast food). In theory I could see that being successful enough to have value for many businesses, it would require processes built for each accounting/ERP package though (vendors would build them) and not just as simple as "the bank has the token" though.

Existing consumer privacy protections likely cover a lot of this already (you all told your bank they are not allowed to share your personally identifying information with partners or other third parties right?) but there may be gaps that could be addressed through regulation or legislation. This isn't highest on my priority list by any means though. I'm most happy about the protection from data breaches.

Edit: I must need caffeine, they could reconcile by transaction ID. Simpler but I still believe there would be privacy protection for your identity when it wasn't obtained from card data at the POS.

 

[American Hero]

Actually I find that their QR code system integrated with the Apple Wallet works fine. Yes you have to load your card in advance (so you are basically pre-paying for your month's coffee)

I'm not a fan of pre-payment unless it's for cell phone service, which offers the best deals over a contract/installment plan. I shouldn't have to pre-pay to use a loyalty program to save $.65 cents on my fifth coffee or whatever.
[doublepost=1463590452][/doublepost]

I think the point folks are trying to make is that the bank has a record of where the purchase was made, how much was spent, and when but not the details of the specific products purchased. Knowing that someone made a purchase in your store is certainly valuable, as is contact data to then reach out to them, but knowing specifically what they bought and to develop a predictive profile is the real goal. Those data (identity, timestamp, and amount) could likely be reconciled against the product data the merchant has but that could be a difficult reconciliation exercise. Using approximate timestamp (there will be clock drift on one side or the other) and purchase amount will work very well in some cases but I'd imagine a high volume location with similar pricing across many products (McDonald's lunch rush where everyone is buying a $4.99 value meal of some sort - that price probably isn't correct but I don't eat much fast food). In theory I could see that being successful enough to have value for many businesses, it would require processes built for each accounting/ERP package though (vendors would build them) and not just as simple as "the bank has the token" though.

Existing consumer privacy protections likely cover a lot of this already (you all told your bank they are not allowed to share your personally identifying information with partners or other third parties right?) but there may be gaps that could be addressed through regulation or legislation. This isn't highest on my priority list by any means though. I'm most happy about the protection from data breaches.

Existing laws should have held merchants liable for fraud costs anyways. Interchange fees should have been a set amount per $100 and not a percentage, for banks providing the service to merchants. Merchants should not be allowed to store a customer's information or habits in their system.

A federal law should have governed the use of card information held by merchants by not allowing them to do so.

Also, end to end encryption should have been a requirement once the technology came out.

EMV should have been a requirement 10 years ago.

If merchants didn't follow these laws, they should've been fined a hefty amount of money for their standards.

Instead we have a lazy government who'd rather spend their time thinking of ways to spend money in Iraq on building colleges and gas stations.

 

[Wondercow]

Interchange fees should have been a set amount per $100 and not a percentage

That's exactly what a percentage is

 

[American Hero]

That's exactly what a percentage is

Not a percentage of the sale, but a set amount per $100 sold.

So like,

$0.02 for every $100 instead of 3% + 0.25

So once my sales hit $100, I have to pay the $.02 and not when my sales hit $99.

 

[AppleFan91]

In the US, where NFC is still in its infancy, Samsung (as much as I hate them) has the best solution in that their Samsung Pay works even without contactless payment support. They'll have the edge there for years in the US until we finally move more to NFC

 

[tmiw]

In the US, where NFC is still in its infancy, Samsung (as much as I hate them) has the best solution in that their Samsung Pay works even without contactless payment support. They'll have the edge there for years in the US until we finally move more to NFC

I wouldn't be surprised if Samsung always has the edge in the US. The chip card migration is going so badly that I'm sure a lot of retailers will never turn on NFC out of spite.

 

[AsherN]

Not a percentage of the sale, but a set amount per $100 sold.

So like,

$0.02 for every $100 instead of 3% + 0.25

So once my sales hit $100, I have to pay the $.02 and not when my sales hit $99.

What you would see is $0.02 per $100 or parts thereof. So a $1.00 would cost the merchant $0.02 and $99.99 would cost the merchant $0.02.

And those fees would be much higher if they were fixed per $100. Remember that those fees are essentially the CC companies' loaning rate to you, paid by the merchant.

In Canada, debit transaction, which are handled by the bank and not CC companies, have a fixed fee per transaction. Because it's a processing fee. The card issuer never advances money on your behalf.

 

[Wondercow]

Not a percentage of the sale, but a set amount per $100 sold.

So like,

$0.02 for every $100 instead of 3% + 0.25

So once my sales hit $100, I have to pay the $.02 and not when my sales hit $99.

Gotcha; that makes a lot more sense