Thursday 3 May 2012

Push NFC

 
 

Report: Vast Majority of Consumers Will Need Push to Use NFC Payment

 
             
Fewer than 2% of consumers are “highly likely” to adopt NFC payments immediately after the technology is rolled out, according to UK-based research firm Datamonitor.
 
The firm, in a recently published report, projected that another 12.2% of consumers have a medium likelihood of adopting NFC payments right after it’s introduced and more than 31% have only a low likelihood of using the technology for payments in the short term. The remainder of consumers–more than half–are considered “unlikely” to adopt NFC payments, said the firm.
Except for consumers who are highly likely to embrace NFC payments, issuers, mobile-wallet providers and others introducing NFC payment services will need to offer incentives to consumers to encourage them to adopt the technology, and this adoption will likely take longer, said Datamonitor in its report, NFC Payments.

‘Breathless PR’

The firm notes that there is debate over whether NFC will break through to mainstream consumers this year or in 2012. But there is little discussion about what actually constitutes a breakthrough.
“While the hype continues to grow, and the breathless PR statements of excited executives enter into circulation, little attention has seemingly been paid to who are the consumers most likely to adopt NFC,” said the firm in its report. “While mobile phone technology has progressed rapidly over several years, and Internet usage increasingly becomes mobile, this does not necessarily mean that consumers are clamoring for NFC.”

The research firm based its predictions of how likely consumers are to adopt NFC on three indicators–how much the consumers now use mobile banking and contactless cards or are interested in these technologies, and how frequently they use conventional payment cards to make retail payments.
This data comes from Datamonitor’s 2010 global Financial Services Consumer Insight Survey, which polled more than 12,000 consumers online in more than 15 countries. The large annual survey covers a range of financial services, including retail banking, cards and payments and insurance.
Consumers in a given country would be considered highly likely to adopt NFC if they said they use or show interest in mobile banking and contactless payment, and if they also use conventional cards frequently for retail payments, said Datamonitor.

Consumers who fall into two of the three categories are considered to have a medium likelihood of adopting NFC. And if they fall into only one of the categories, Datamonitor would classify them as having a low likelihood of adopting NFC immediately.

Most consumers surveyed–at 54.3%–do not use mobile banking or contactless cards and do not use conventional payment cards frequently so are considered “unlikely” to adopt NFC payment initially. That figure is likely to decrease over time, however, with use of smartphones growing rapidly and more contactless payment cards and terminals becoming available, the firm said.

Using this “NFC Adoption Model,” Datamonitor gave the highest score to Brazil, where the report estimates 5.1% of consumers are highly likely to adopt NFC, followed by South Korea at 4.2% and Singapore at 3.9%. By contrast, only 0.4% of consumers in the Netherlands and Italy are highly likely to adopt NFC in the short term, according to the model. Surprisingly, the United States comes in at only 0.5% of consumers being highly likely to adopt NFC.

The high score in Brazil appears to be an anomaly, since the penetration of all types of payment terminals is relatively low. Datamonitor explains the score by saying mobile banking and other mobile-money services, such as remittances, are on the rise there.

“(And) many consumers there are keen to switch to cashless payments, and where consumers do have payment cards, including prepaid, these tend to get used very frequently, which helps to drive up their overall likelihood of NFC adoption,” said Gilles Ubaghs, senior analyst for cards and payments at Datamonitor.

Early Adopters Not the 18-to-24 Crowd

While small, at 1.8%, the highly likely adopters across all countries still are a potentially lucrative segment for NFC service providers. They tend to be older and have more money than might be expected, said Datamonitor.

Just under 37% of the consumers in this highly likely category globally are between the ages of 35 and 49 and another 33.8% are 25 to 34. About 16% have incomes placing them in the top quarter of respondents, and 44% have an income level in the top half, said the firm.

Datamonitor acknowledges that basing its projections of adoption of NFC payment on existing use or interest in mobile banking, contactless payment and frequency of use of conventional payment cards is not precise and is only “indicative” of the likelihood that consumers will use their phones to tap to pay.

But there is little solid data on which to base the projections for NFC adoption among consumers, notes Ubaghs. That includes a lack of meaningful data from the results of numerous NFC trials conducted over the past few years, he contends.

“Our view is that there is quite an irony in the fact that many in the industry take it as a given that consumers want to use mobile payments and point at trial results as proof that consumers love it,” he told NFC Times. “In all these trials, consumers were given an incentive to use these phones and take part.”

Incentives Required for Adoption by Masses

That includes such high-profile NFC trials as one launched in late 2007 by Telefónica (O2) UK, Barclaycard and Transport for London, which gave users in London spending money preloaded on the phones. Citigroup in Bangalore, India, held a large trial in 2009, in which it gave participants a chance to get the phone they used in the pilot for free if they conducted just a dozen transactions.
“If people are effectively being paid to use something in a trial, it’s not surprising that results are so positive,” said Ubaghs. “The groups conducting these trials then state that they had to provide incentives to get people to participate, but that stands for the real world as well. It strikes me as a bit of a myth that seems to keep circulating that consumers are clamoring for it.”

He also pointed to the NFC commercial payment services launched by Barclaycard and Orange UK in May, offering consumers £10 (US$16.07) cash added to their prepaid mobile payment accounts upon activation. And users can receive 10% cash back on all purchases made with the phone in the first three months. This generous offer is designed to encourage users not predisposed to use the technology to give it a try.

In addition, NTT DoCoMo reportedly saw significant gains in use of its contactless wallet phones by Japanese consumers after introducing contactless-mobile couponing. The response of Japanese consumers to contactless m-payment by itself was lackluster for years following the rollout of wallet phones, launched by DoCoMo in 2004.

The Datamonitor report overall states that there is a large opportunity for NFC service providers to encourage consumers to use NFC outside of the highly likely category–especially among consumers in the medium and low likelihood categories. And the NFC payments ecosystem is finally gearing up, with NFC handsets and mobile wallets launching this year, the report notes.
But the task of persuading most users to change their habits and to tap NFC phones to pay will not be easy, said Datamonitor.

“The market faces significant hurdles in convincing issuers, consumers, and merchants of its benefits,” said firm in a statement. “The business case remains ill-defined for both issuers and merchants, while consumers will need a strong proposition to shift them from existing, readily available payment tools. Without all of these elements in place, the deployment and wider development of NFC will be difficult.”

Wednesday 2 May 2012

Tight - Loose - Tight

“A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves” Lau-Tzu 600 B.C.

Let's look at the difference between Leadership and Management, and why it is crucial to focus on both to become the extraordinary enterprise, rather than just run-of-the-mill.

To some people leadership looks and feels natural, but the confidence to lead is not inbuilt. That confidence did not just appear. Since childhood the “natural” leader has been trying things out, and getting things wrong, half right or perfect over many years before assuming a position in which they obviously feel comfortable but probably never analysed to any great degree; to them its just the way it is. And of course whilst they might be good at painting the forward looking picture of the organisation, and “leading from the front” they may be incompetent at a whole range of things that equally need doing just as urgently.

This is where the power of the TEAM comes in. Many business leaders find themselves in leadership positions unexpectedly, and feel that they are ill-prepared for the task ahead, but not being the “natural” leader should not be a hindrance to leadership success in the extraordinary enterprise.

It is recognising that for each employee the level of leadership that is needed is different that makes the great leader. It is understanding that in any organisation it is the TEAM and its power when harnessed correctly and not wastefully that determines extraordinary performance, not the clinging to the details oneself. And in the many different teams that make up the enterprise, it is giving permission to team managers and members to take leadership responsibility, again that word EMPOWERMENT, that delivers extraordinary performance.

And once the team has been given permission to lead it is the overall leaders task to communicate to all the members of the enterprise who is doing what, why and to whom and for whom. Just because others have permission to lead does not mean laissez faire management. It means that true delegation with responsibility is in place, and the Leader can devote time to other tasks.

Payment News - Runners & Riders

Mobile Movers, Shakers and Shockers

by Karen Webster

     
I don’t know about you, but 2012 so far has left me a little breathless given the fast pace at which the payments industry has been moving since we all emerged from the New Year’s break. Maybe it’s the mild winter. No matter, the catalyst, not surprisingly, is mobile and the IP-enablement of just about everything that touches or influences commerce. This last week was particularly interesting given a few announcements from very different corners of the payments ecosystem about their payments strategy, not surprisingly, keyed to what they will pursue (or won’t) along the mobile lines. Here’s my take on mobile movers, shakers, and shockers.

Movers
Visa announced that it will enable FIs to more easily enable the delivery of mobile financial services solutions to their customers. This mobile banking/payments platform capability is courtesy of its alliance with and equity investment in Monitise, a UK-based technology and services company that has a pretty powerful and proven mobile banking and payments engine. This new Visa capability will allow FIs to extend a variety of useful financial services to their accountholders including balance checks, funds transfers, and transaction alerts. As a purely B2B play, it didn’t get as much airtime as the stuff that is more consumer directed but is interesting nonetheless. It puts Visa right smack dab in the middle of same competitive playing field as Fundtech, Sybase, mFoundry and others who have built their businesses by allowing FIs to deliver banking services via the mobile phone. Visa can now use its powerful FI channel to distribute this capability and to do it worldwide. There was no reference made to the business model that Visa will use as part of its go to market strategy, but one can imagine that it could create a disruptive model given their long-standing FI relationships and the other revenue possibilities that this platform can generate for them.

This move could also be an interesting way to “back door” a variety of mobile payments capabilities that carry the Visa brand without the heavy lift associated with going direct-to-consumer. As the largest global payments network on the planet, Visa has the benefit of global brand awareness and acceptance but it lacks a direct relationship with the consumer. As a platform and absent those direct consumer relationships, it also faces a strategic conundrum in how to capture more transaction share and revenues since it is completely dependent on its distributors and merchant partners to do that for them. Enriching its platform with more capabilities that allow its “distributors” to add more value to its customers seems like a sensible move. It not only adds value to their customer – and their customers customer – but it rings the cash register at a much higher margin – the “distributors” are the ones that do the heavy lift with getting consumers to adopt. And, once these mobile banking and payments hooks are in place via the FI accounts, Visa all of a sudden has a worldwide mobile network of consumers that it can touch, via the platform, with other services like offers, coupons, and who-knows-what else. Visa has been criticized for being slow moving in the mobile world, and while this announcement certainly does not conjure images of “cool and nifty”, but if my assessment is correct, it seems a strategic and methodical approach to creating a mobile commerce capability that it can finally, ahem, monetize.

Shakers
Facebook has been making a ton of news lately, not the least of which is its S1 filing and all of the juicy tidbits that it revealed about its payments ambitions. [Check out David Evans article which provides insight and analysis.] But, it was its agreement with Bango last week that really got tongues a waggin’.

Bango does two things in the mobile payments space: it integrates with mobile operators’ billing systems so that consumers can buy mobile apps and have those charges show up on their mobile phone bills and it collects and provides data on mobile content usage. Facebook has 425M+ people around the world accessing Facebook via the mobile phone. It is increasingly worried that as more consumers access Facebook via mobile, that its ad revenue will plummet unless it figures out a way to monetize eyeballs that move from online to mobile. It’s a tricky proposition for them. Lots of brands – and mobile operators - have experienced the backlash from users who hate being bombarded by ads popping up on a small mobile (or tablet) canvas. Sponsored stories or similar strategies (a la what Twitter has done) are rumored to be in the offing for Facebook, but that alone won’t really help Facebook capture the revenue it needs – and frankly should be able to get – from the mobile channel.

Enter Bango, potentially. I don’t think that Facebook will use Bango to create its own payment network on Facebook, although I guess anything’s possible. It seems like it would be an awfully big an investment just to make money from moving transactions thru the system. Rather, Bango is likely to be used by Facebook to accelerate the adoption of a new monetary network using Facebook Credits as the currency to effect commerce transactions. Think about it. It’s been reported that one in every three Facebook mobile users uses the mobile phone to play games. Using Bango, Facebook Credits and the carrier billing channel, Facebook could flood, okay maybe just increase, the number of Facebook Credits in the system which Facebook monetizes by taking 30% of whatever Facebook Credits when businesses or people try to cash those Credits for government-issued tender.

It is a pretty sweet set up. Every $1 of Facebook Credits means 30% back to Facebook at some point down the road when those Credits are pulled out of the Facebook network. One might imagine mobile operators using Facebook Credits as a currency to pay developers who are, in turn, being paid via Facebook Credits when consumers buy their apps. At some point, those Credits will be “cashed in” and the 30% tax will be directed back to Facebook, but until then it is sort of like there is this little alter-monetary system happening all around us that is fueling commerce on a massive social and soon to be commerce platform, the Facebook way.

This mobile payments strategy cum-Bango also shifts the risk of chargebacks to the carrier, who probably bears little risk anyway since the transaction amounts are relatively small and the last thing people these days want to risk is having their phones shut off for non-payment. And those 30% “taxes” are pretty high margin to boot.

This whole scheme is made all the more powerful when you consider it on a global basis, where not now, but soon, most everyone in the world will have a mobile device and be able to connect to the internet via that device. Facebook, with its ~1 billion users today, is likely to capture many billions more as consumers in developing markets begin to use their phones to interact with this social platform. Once this happens, Facebook will see even more enormous growth - for instance, in spite of having an enormous user base in India, less than 4% of its population is on Facebook. Once that happens, Facebook will have a mechanism in place to monetize on the interactions of its consumers with the apps on its platform via a payments network that is already in place – the mobile carrier and a monetary system that they control - Credits.
Talk about shaking up the ecosystem. Now we know at least one other reason why Facebook’s IPO value is in the $100B range.

Google
Google’s a shaker for a totally different reason. The news last week was all about the reported ease with which Google’s Wallet could be hacked – and was. Reports suggested that if one’s phone is lost or stolen, all a bad guy has to do is to go into app settings, clear the data and reset the PIN. Now, that of course only applies to the universe of people with (a) a Sprint Galaxy Nexus 4S and (b) a Google wallet account which is still a pretty small universe. But it is unsettling particularly given the dust up in December over Verizon’s decision to block Google wallet from its Galaxy phones over security concerns. [See my commentary on that announcement here.] My take on that decision was that it was likely motivated over control of the wallet, but maybe their concerns were rooted in real security issues after all. This news also comes on the heels of recent reports of a pretty lackluster reception to Google Wallet in the marketplace as a result of many things – its NFC POS requirements, its demand for SKU level data from merchants and lack of a compelling value proposition for consumers (not many phones avaiable to acces Google Wallet and not many places to use it if you had it).

PayPal
PayPal made big news last week when it totally confirmed what eBay CEO John Donohue said about NFC some time ago .. .and that is that it stands for “not for commerce.” On Thursday, PayPal went on the public record to say that it was ditching, um discontinuing, its efforts involving mobile payments at the Point of Sale via NFC. The reason? Not enough merchant interest to continue. It seems that PayPal’s other POS innovations were far more interesting to them since they create less disruption at the point of sale (and don’t even require mobile phones to access PayPal accounts) and therefore a whole lot easier to implement and get traction. We’ve talked to a bunch of merchants who still want to see more of what PayPal has to offer but who admit to being intrigued by its frictionless POS experience and the prospect of enabling the PayPal account base on their behalf.

We’ve said before that PayPal has made a bunch of really smart moves, backburnering NFC as just the latest example of that, and is doing some interesting things to enable the convergence of on and offline commerce that will reinvent commerce at the physical point of sale. But, it ought to keep a close eagle eye out on its Silicon Valley neighbor Facebook, now that it will soon come under public pressure to deliver shareholder returns and sees payments as one of the ways to do that. Facebook, just by its sheer reach of consumer eyeballs, is in a great position to create an alternative online and mobile payments network but not in the same way PayPal has.

Instead of creating an alternative acceptance mark Facebook could force the adoption of an alternative currency on those channels that uses other funding sources to enable payment on its social platform. As more and more eyeballs and commerce move to the Facebook platform – which we believe it will in the next several years – it could more plausibly become a ginormous payments network without any of the investment required to build one and without getting into the risk and risk management business just by controlling the monetary supply, if you will, for enabling commerce on that platform. If it does, it could turn the online and mobile payments business model upside down by making its money, in effect, on currency conversion and not payments transacting.
Oh, and I am totally invoking my right to say I told you so on the whole mobile payments/NFC front. For those of you who haven’t read all of my NFC rantings, a few of the more recent ones are here. I don’t know about you, but I can’t wait for this week to see what else is in store!