Yep, it's comparing a single store method with a multi-store method. It's a stat that's mostly only of interest to the cardless payment industry.
When it was first revealed that Apple was taking a percentage of each contactless purchase for DOING NOTHING during one, my first thought was that "Whoa, they're going to offer Apple users a kickback and that's going to sell zillions of iPhones!". But no, it was just typical Apple greed.
You guys are thinking backwards. USE the system to your advantage instead. Join all the discount cards, etc. Heck, I save hundreds of dollars a year with my CVS card alone, much less my supermarket member cards.
You're going to get ads no matter what. And your bank STILL KNOWS WHAT YOU ARE DOING, which is infinitely more critical to your life than a store knowing you bought something (so they can offer you incentives).
You see, the store is just going to send you ads and coupons. Big whoop. Actually useful!
But the bank is going to look at when and where you are spending your money, and adjust your credit accordingly. E.g. if you buy liquor in the middle of the day, which do you think is more important: that the store might send you a coupon, or that the bank might think you've lost your job?
The banking industry does not want perfectly secure payments. They make a ton of money by charging for taking the risk associated with current cards. They're already taking heat from Congress for keeping the same rates even as chip cards roll out.
Actually, Canada took many years to roll out contactless payments. With far more banks and POS terminals, then using Canada's timeline, it would take literally decades for the US to switch over. But it won't.
Note: it's not a one time account number. It stays the same. Eventually retailers will match it up to you, and it wouldn't be surprising if there aren't already places that sell and share that matchup info. Heck, they did it with MAC addresses when Apple removed the device id from advertisers.
Yep.
