.... handbags at dawn, then...?
Google went live with its hotly anticipated Wallet application on Tuesday, though it will hardly hit the mass market yet – it runs only in the US, on the Sprint network, and on its own handset, the Nexus S. And eBay‘s PayPal – the firm which sued Google when it first unveiled Wallet in June – may be the more important player to …
.... handbags at dawn, then...?
Purses at down I guess and these are some very heavy purses so we may as well stay out of the way until they are done with it :)
Wonder whether we''ll be seeing NFC in the iPhone-5, and if so, which wallet will it be using. I doubt that Apple wants to get into the payments business, anymore than they want to be in the search business - so conceivably we could be in the odd situation soon where there are more iPhone users with Google Wallet than Android.
Paris: Because she understands the value of a good frenemy.
Apple could take the enemy-of-my-enemy approach and puts its weight behind PayPal and Isis instead.
If Apple enters thjis market it will ask a 30% fee on each transaction, don't worry...
With my money inside. Needless to say, I was never able to get customer support to do anything about it.
If I ever use an NFC payment system, it sure as hell will not be paypal.
I think one of the secrets that you learn after using PayPal for a while is that you only keep enough money in there to cover the float you might need. Keeping large sums in PayPal risks too much.
I don't care who wins, just that PayPal gets some serious competition and a kick up the arse. Maybe then they will sort themselves out. I bet most people only use PayPay because they have to.
can we not just have Mondex cards back?
Maybe I'm alone but I really don't see what advantages NFC gives me over my debit card.
Both require a PIN, both need carrying around, both have access to my bank account, etc.
I do see downsides to a phone having access to money - namely apps. Smartphones (here's looking at you Android) is hardly inspiring confidence about a phone being kept secure, and that's a situation that will get much worse long before it gets better.
The other issue is that more and more middle men want to get between me, the merchant and my money. Everyone will want their cut. But what real advantages does it offer me to have yet more companies in between me and the merchant?
Other than the shackle and awe factor, I don't much see the point. Sure, I could use an iPurse, eWallet, GooPal Sows-ear or the leather billfold which currently resides in my back pocket. I simply don't see the day when I need to ask the retailer "NFC, paper or plastic?" Oh, it's the bump instead of a swipe that somehow makes it all the better... I must be thick because I still don't get it.
Banks owe a duty of care over credit cards which they want to say won't affect NFC. If someone rips off yer nfc device, they will argue that it is your problem like losing cash.
In the first round there was a £50 spend limit before a pin validation was required, in various forms. It is the vends within this total, the 60p newspaper, that is being sold as 'fast and convenient' - you don't see people using pins with oyster cards.
I think this is why most of the action is in the phone arena, despite banks issuing nfc equipped cards. The banks are trying to pretend it is nothing to do with them, whilst still raking off their merchant fees etc.
I want none of it at all. No-one asked me, it is just being foisted on us by vested interests
I think the point of it IS to introduce middle men.
There are risks to allow one single device to perform all security tasks. Because one it is lost, broken, or compromised, one loses it all. Would someone use his bank safe-deposit box key as his house door key or viceversa, just because it is simpler? How to wipe such a system when the phone is replaced? Banks can easily cut and destroy a credit card, is the only option smashing these phones in very little pieces?
It looks just another attempt to suck more money from our pockets, while exposing us to much higher risks. What's wrong with actual payment methods? That a card is far less bulky than a smartphone? That poeple needs another way to show off their phone? I'd prefer then this system embedded in my watch.
I think the point is to cut out Visa and Mastercard, and their overpriced services. On small transactions it is not unusual that the processing fees are reaching 5-10% of the value, huge amount for most merchants. If that gets cut in half, the merchants will get behind it. I don't really see what is the advantage for the user.
If you do require a PIN and a direct debit to use it then there's no benefit, but most successful NFC systems require neither. The premise then is that you use them for small payments as a substitute for cash - payments where the cost and time to make a debit card transaction would be excessive.
So Oyster cards which were introduced for London Transport, also are supported by some news agents.
Paypal has been around long enough that they can easily be said to have gained the benefit of their patents and gone beyond that into the monopoly realm. Especially with the marriage between it and Ebay.
While there are other options, none are as streamlined and as effortless as Paypal. And they're such smug bastards about it. I'd be happy to see someone knock them off their perch.
Now come on, own up. If you had your hands wrapped around the online financial services balls wouldn't you feel a bit smug?
By now, we're sure most know the basics of what PayPal and Google are doing. MPD CEO Karen Webster is focused on the bigger question of how the transition to mobile payments in the US will be won and who is best positioned to pull it off.