Category: Uncategorized

Many companies are focusing on mobile payment technologies to make checkout at stores a quicker and easier experience for customers. One mobile payment technology showing promise is Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) payments. This technology uses the bluetooth device on a person’s phone but uses very little energy, unlike regular bluetooth, so phone battery drainage is not an issue.

PayPal has announced a new mobile payment technology that uses BLE called PayPal Beacon. With PayPal Beacon, customers can enter a store and buy a product without having to wait in line for the cashier. The Beacon app would simply transmit the sale through BLE, charging the credit card the user has on file, and the store’s system would be notified of the payment. Beacon solves BLE privacy issues by placing control of when BLE is in use in the user’s hands. The user sets up which stores the technology can be used at and checks in on the app when entering the store to allow charges to be made.

If PayPal works as promised, it will change the shopping experience for customers, assuming that stores get on board with the program. For example, a customer could walk into an electronics store, check in with the Beacon app on their phone, pick out a few items and simply walk out of the store with what they wish to purchase. Beacon will automatically charge the user’s credit card for the goods they leave the store with. Both the user and the store save time because neither have to interact with each other to collect payment.

Another advantage to BLE is marketing. When a user is checked in on the app and in proximity of a store, the store can automatically send coupons to the user’s phone. Some users may find it useful to have promotions, coupons and store specials automatically sent to their phone when they are shopping.

So how does BLE differ from current Near Field Communication (NFC) technology? BLE is a more passive experience. To interact with a store’s payment system or to receive coupons, all a user has to do is simply check in on the app. NFC on the other hand, is more user initiated. To make a payment, the user must have the app open and hover the phone over a payment machine. The same goes with coupons. If a NFC user wants store coupons, they must hold their phone, with the app open, over a coupon machine.

Both BLE and NFC mobile payments have pros and cons. Some people may prefer the passive BLE, while others may want more control over when the technology is used, when getting coupons for example, and will prefer NFC. The biggest issue is which technology stores will grasp. If the stores don’t set up the technology, users can’t take advantage of it. The time-saving aspect of BLE may be a big draw to consumers and stores alike, but the big downfall is that BLE is expensive for stores to implement.

Right now it is too early to tell which technology will be the winner as not many stores currently utilize either technology. Will PayPal Beacon be the app that finally convinces stores that it’s time to welcome mobile payments? Only time will tell.

The tremendous growth of smartphone sales has put a spotlight on the use of proximity marketing. Companies like Euclid can use WiFi tracking to follow customers through a store, see where they pause and where they continue without browsing. Qualcomm’s Gimbal platform offers the same type of functionality using iBeacon tracking. With all of the security concerns of the past several years, the question of legality and transparency is one that must be answered before businesses commit to the expense of proximity marketing.

There are several different types of proximity marketing, all with their own unique privacy concerns. WiFi and iBeacon tracking may be used to anonymously collect data about general traffic statistics, but they also can be used to log information about individual devices. NFC (near field communication) marketing offers no data collection on the part of the marketer. It only sends out pre-programmed data when requested.

The distinction between these two types is fairly obvious. One includes location analytics and may represent a violation of privacy, while the other simply allows consumers to interact with the products and stores around them. While there are plenty of examples of data doing good, like the use of real time data to improve traffic flow and public transportation, the public has concerns. From a retailer/marketer perspective, marketing that also includes location analytics offers significantly more value, even with the potential for public censure.

The question then becomes what is allowed by law, and what code of conduct should marketers follow? Many areas of digital marketing already skirt grey areas. SPAM is a ubiquitous problem that affects all Internet users. Ensuring that proximity marketing does not become another type of SPAM comes down to the value exchange. Does the marketing content add value to the end user?

As proximity marketing gets off the ground, those implementing these marketing techniques need to consider two things: What information to collect, and what information to send. Collecting information from individual smartphone users has serious implications. First, is it legal? The law allows marketers to collect information from consumers who have chosen to “opt-in.” For ethical marketing, always be clear about what exactly consumers are saying yes to. Is it ethical, regardless of the laws and regulations? Ethics play an important role in marketing. Consumers respond negatively to marketing that is perceived as intrusive or harassing behavior. The suggested “Code of Conduct,” recommended by Senator Charles Schumer in partnership with several Local Analytics firms offers some guidelines on transparency that can help keep the public on-board with proximity marketing and ahead of the regulatory curve.

1. Any type of geophysical location tracking should be completely transparent. All marketers should inform consumers that their location is being tracked and the data saved.
2. It’s all about anonymity. If information is tracked anonymously, meaning it is not tied to the individual user, no consent is required. When companies track general traffic flow, the types of devices connecting to their networks and other broad information, the proposed “Code of Conduct” does not require any notification to consumers.
3. Any personal information, whether tracked individually and aggregated later or kept as individual statistics, must be obtained with individual consent.

These recommendations are currently exactly that – recommendations. There is no legal requirement forcing businesses to adopt these strategies, but with the public outcry against technology that violates privacy, it may be wise for companies to adopt them now rather than pay fines later. After all, marketers already track Internet usage to create more individually targeted advertising. Many users already find these practices to be intrusive, so it is vital that companies act now to avoid negative publicity.

As far as gaming goes, one of the newest frontiers is augmented and virtual reality. Although headsets like the Oculus Rift and Sony’s Morpheus lead the way in developing innovative gaming technologies, neither is consumer ready at this point – particularly with Oculus’ recent acquisition by Facebook. Naturally, then, game developers have looked to technologies that are already readily adopted by consumers, and concluded that cellphones provide the next best platform to develop innovative games.

Thus was born Augmented Reality gaming, or the act of creating games out of layers of visual data superimposed onto images of the real world on mobile devices. One of these games was called Ingress, and was developed in part by Google. The premise was straightforward: travel to world monuments, and let the app superimpose its storyline onto the real world, and the user would live in a secret plotline unbeknownst to those around them. Its goal was to create an exclusive community of tech-savvy gamers who would interact via their phones around the world. But the game fell flat on multiple levels: the game has taken several years to even emerge onto all mobile operating systems, and three years after its initial launch only recently came out of beta. But even more than that, the plot of the game is confusing to outsiders: “Confused? You’re not alone. The point is to create a network for your faction, but the whole thing is elaborate and it does take some getting used to.” 

Not only is the point of entry challenging, but the premise of taking working people out of their way on a daily basis to travel to sometimes-inconvenient locations to pick up a piece of virtual currency places excessive demands on users, many of whom eventually dropped the game. Ultimately, Augmented Reality is a promising marketing technique – overlaying images in magazines can direct users to a point of purchase – but to expect that users are going to collect digitally-based currency that’s part of a relatively confusing scheme is a bridge too far.