Comments on: Blinging it Home? A Look at Bling Nation

By: Tracy W

Tracy W — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 01:19:06 +0000

I struggle with this concept for a couple of reasons.

1. The consumer value proposition simply doesn’t sound strong enough. The convenience is not great nor is the coolness factor. Getting rewards from merchants does sound great…but to really get those rewards, I need to go to the merchant again and again to accumulate enough spend at that single merchant to warrant earning a meaningful reward.

2. The merchant value proposition is nice….but I’m going to be very leery about spending money on a terminal before I see too many people walking in the door with one of these. Also, this forces me into managing a loyalty program. I’m wondering if I can accomplish the same thing with a simple punchcard.

That chicken-or-egg thing is hard!

By: Carol Coye Benson

Carol Coye Benson — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:24:51 +0000

Shekhar – generally speaking, all of the third party payments services (i.e. not banks) need to manage customer service, disputes, and fraud themselves. The banks, however, may be the first place a customer goes for issue resolution – and managing this can be a headache for a bank!

I think we will see the various third party services differentiating themselves by how well they handle this.

Carol

By: Steve Klebe

Steve Klebe — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:44:24 +0000

Great article (as usual)!!! I have had the pleasure of meeting the senior team at Bling Nation and they are fantastic. The “sticker”, while somewhat low-tech, is perfect. It eliminates the dilemma that has plagued other mobile payment initiatives – trying to get the banks and the mobile carriers to play nice. Low-tech is the path to success. Having worked at VeriFone during the go-go days of POS electronification, the “magic” was the fact that we figured out how to incorporate a $.25 magnetic read head into the mold of the terminal rather than building in a multi-dollar magnetic reader module from a third party. That allowed us to sell a terminal for $185 instead of $400. Of course, you still have to execute and that ain’t easy, but if you compare this to disasters like PayByTouch, it is clear simple and cheap wins!!

By: Shekhar Veera

Shekhar Veera — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:22:04 +0000

Very interesting indeed! One question that I’ve had (also relates to other alternative payments as well) is how are chargeback disputes/fraud handled? Who manages that?

By: Paul P.

Paul P. — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:14:11 +0000

This in very interesting, however the name will slow its adoptation. It may fly well in the larger cities, but the “bling” society, in may areas are associated with the “debt” frenzy and irresponsible spending of the “get it now” generation. Spending beyond means.

When dealing with conservative banks, you will have a problem. Consider changing the name. Even the editor had a “chuckle” over the name. The bling era is past or at least seriously wounded.

I love the idea as a merchant and would love to see its adoption sooner rather than later as interchange fee’s soa for a an antiquated merchant system, adopted in the 60’s with little to no security built in, and the banks with absolutely no incentive to change despite and rising chorus of revolt among the merchants of the costs.

By: Broox Peterson

Broox Peterson — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:21:12 +0000

Nice reporting and analysis, Carol. The economics for merchants and community banks seem compelling and if consumers find it easier to use their phone than a payment card for local POS payments perhaps this will catch on. Also, this may benefit from the growing antipathy towards too big to fail banks and their loss of touch with their communities, although I may just be projecting.