SUPER clever idea -- kudos for that. In theory, this is awesome. As a consumer, I love it.
As a merchant, however (which I am), there is no chance I would accept this. None. Unless the issuers (that is, Visa, MC, Amex) drastically change their policies, which I don't see happening anytime soon.
Why? Because the issuers are very clear about a few things: When push comes to shove and it REALLY gets down to it, unless the merchant takes a physical swipe of the actual card AND has backup to prove it (i.e. an imprint of the physical plastic), the issuers will side with a consumer in the event of a fraud dispute.
So why, do you ask, do most merchants not bother taking imprints of the actual cards? Because a visual verification and physical swipe is usually enough (for 99% of cases). Instances of fraud via card duplication are rare, so it's usually not worth the hassle. But in some cases, it is.
My business runs large-ticket purchases though CCs (average is $2000), and we take super extra precautions when our customers buy from us. We take magnetic swipes, visually verify, AND take physical imprints.
We've lost several chargebacks because of lack of doing this. You'd be surprised how these little-known rules crop up when you least expect them. "Sorry, customer claims charge not authorized. Merchant doesn't have physical imprint. Chargeback approved." It's happened and we've been defrauded out of $thousands because of it.
The ONLY way we've been able to successful combat chargeback fraud is through the multi-layered approach.
Anyway, I know this is a fairly esoteric perspective and my business may be different from lots of others where this isn't an issue, but I have a feeling V/MC/Amex aren't going to get behind this.
I don't know why the US hasn't adopted EMV. It's not perfect, but it has cut down fraud massively here in Europe.
They're very hard to clone (I won't say impossible, but attacks against EMV have not generally been of this nature) and the transaction records at both ends will tell you whether the actual, real card was there.
The liability is more clear-cut as a result. If the customer claims the charge was unauthorised, that's between the bank and the customer.
--edit-- of course with EMV cards Coin would no longer be possible or relevant. Neat product, only useful in a magnetic-stripe world, which is at least a decade behind the curve now.
Theoretically with EMV you could put all your credit-cards on one chip and the terminal will either choose a supported default or present you a list, but that would require cross-bank cooperation, never going to happen.
Many credit card companies are starting to issue new cards which are completely flat, making it impossible to make imprint. My new CapitalOne card is an example of this. Is your company planning on refusing to do business with them?
I go weeks at a time without getting asked for identification when paying with a credit card. Most merchants will happily swipe the coin and move on with their life. Those that question it can still check ID or make a copy of the driver's license. This is a sweet product and I can't wait to dump the 7 cards in my wallet. One extra backup card, a good thing to have regardless, will take care of the occasional merchant who won't accept coin.
btw, it sounds like you should have had a lawyer handling some of those chargebacks, particularly if you had captured the driver's license info. We started using a (cost conscious) lawyer to deal with every chargeback and our win rate went way up. And by "dealing with a chargeback" I mean forwarding along our response on his letterhead.
I think you are mistaken about card rules. To protect themselves against chargebacks the merchant needs to keep a copy of the signed credit card slip, not a physical imprint of the card. That's actually better than a physical imprint (which is impossible on many cards these days anyway) because a matching signature can prove who used the card, not just that the card was physically present.
If you swiped my card AND took physical imprints, I would be really suspicious that you were storing my credit card information for future fraud. There's no reason for you to take an imprint as well as swipe, since you have the authorization code for the card present transaction, and the signature, which should be enough to fight chargebacks.
I don't understand America's love for credit cards. They're unsafe, both for users and for merchants. PIN cards are safer, and they're much clearer about where the risks and responsibilities lie. Of course modern credit cards also support PIN, but I never see them used that way.
A more convenient way of handling credit cards is a useless idea to me. What we need is a safer and more reliable way to handle transactions. Preferably one that doesn't rely on politically motivated monopolists.
I work for a merchant also... high volume low ticket. My thought is: Since most of our customer transactions (swipes) occur without any cashier involvement - how would V/MC know that the "real" card wasn't present?
My latest Visa credit card has the numbers printed onto the plastic; the numbers are not relieved/raised. How do you take a physical imprint of these types of cards?
You took the words out of my mouth. No merchants should accept this card unless they want to be liable for chargebacks. If this product is actually released I wouldn't be surprised if a clause is added to merchant agreements to explicitly disallow accepting this type of card.
I love the idea behind Coin but what I need is a fat wallet.
I carry 19 cards, of which 16 are essential. Some of them are not for swiping so they wouldn't benefit from Coin. The solution for me is a wallet that can hold 20 to 30 cards, but as far as I can tell there's no such thing.
Exactly. I feel like they would have been more successful going after things like rewards cards first and then after proving legitmacy and market need there, trying to take a stab at the credit card market.
Wondering if they could develop a multi-factor auth model to complement the card to make the CC company's happy.
Thinking out loud here... could you make the use of the Coin card dependent on being within range of your bluetooth enabled cell phone. If the card knows that it is being swiped (not sure if it does)... then the in-range phone could know and send a msg to the CC company with the shared secret saying "yo, it's legit". Now a thief would have to steal both the phone and the card for it to work. I'm sure there are a million holes in this, but just putting it out there.
Similar concept could work regular CC's as well. CC company comes up with "card swiper 2.0!" and deploys them to merchants. I as a consumer get some incentive from the CC company to register my device with them. When my card get's swiped at a merchant... card swiper 2.0 tries to detect my device. If it sees it, great, lower chance of fraud. If it doesn't, give me a ring to see if I'm aware that my card was used or deny the charges. Might help the triage the sheer number of transactions out there for what's fraud and what isn't.
Some POS systems ask the cashier to type in the last 4 digits of the imprinted number on the card, which wouldn't work for this. I also know of several merchants (Hertz was one, a casino was another) that actually runs a card through a scanner and records an image of both the front and back. There are several scenarios where this wouldn't work.
On the other side of it, I love the idea, and the only way to get merchants and card companies to begin changing their policies is for someone to be first through the door. This will not work for all situations at first, but if it proves popular it could easily sway these policies. Imagine some of the possibilities. Just as an example, imagine getting a pre-approved credit card offer in your email, then having the new, swipeable card instantly downloaded to this device after a few verification questions. Credit card companies that worked with Coin could gain an instant competitive advantage in the cut-throat credit card marketing business. This could also revolutionize the loyalty card business.
This is BS. No one takes imprints and you dont need to. I worked in the service industry for years and took a credit card from 80% of all my customers and never once took a imprint or needed to.
I have seen flat cards without numbers that would be impossible to imprint.
I can't remember the last time any merchant took an imprint of my credit card. Certainly not this year, not even on large transactions.
Given your large average ticket, it makes sense to be extra paranoid and take an imprint (mostly to avoid scammers), but certainly doesn't apply to 99% of merchants.
I don't think this would be a roadblock for them. Unless, of course, Visa/MC/Amex finds some obscure legal clause (or technical way to detect the different card) to shut them down.
I purchased one and I'll use it for all my loyalty cards which should help my wallet to be thinner - except Costco since they require you to show it! Not sure I would use it with my actual debit card but it does have the "that's cool" factor, congrats to the team I expect this to be a very successful launch!
Related...some stores have started entering the last 4 digits of the credit card into their POS. This will work even if the card is flat and is obviously used to verify that the card number encoded on the mag strip is the same as the one on the face of the card.
If this becomes more widespread coin will have problems.
For most self-swipe checkouts, it seems like this card would work well (coffee shop, grocery store, etc). But, it isn't too uncommon to have a merchant request to see the card, and some larger retailers (e.g., Lowes) have to input numbers off the front of the card, as well.
Your business is a fringe case that you admit takes "super extra precautions", which clearly doesn't represent the majority of merchants. In fact, as a consumer I can't remember the last time a merchant took an imprint of one of my cards.
Many card reading devices these days support near-field communication and will allow you to pay using your smartphone. In this case there isn't even a card. So some merchants will surely be fine with this physical card solution.
These are some very solid counter-arguments to the awesomeness of what Coin could be, and I really hope you're wrong... but you make some very solid points, with the experience to back it up.
We have already built basic precautions where Coin couldn't be used for skimming. Give us ab it more time to show how when a Coin user walks through the door, you can count on a valid user.
How do you explain the plethora of online stores, including massive and presumably legitimate ones like Amazon, which accept Visa and other major credit cards?
knucklebusters (card imprinting machines) are not required or even recommended by processors. The tide had turned on imprinting in the majority of industries.
I think we're all missing a key point here. From reading the FAQ it appears that the application needs access to their servers. That blows my mind. Why should my mobile phone application, responsible for programming a local card via Bluetooth ever need access to the internet? Simply put - it shouldn't.
To me, this sounds like a big data play, except in this case the company is getting the user to cover the cost of acquisition. I imagine the actual cost of production on a card like this being well < $20 shipped (disclosure: I've been involved in shipping and starting up several physical products).
So now, I have something that collects and unifies data across multiple purchase vectors, sending that back to a single source. In other words, I've paid for the privilege of helping another company get the same sort of insight that mint.com was building, except that I'm also including loyalty data.
How would you prevent mass credit card theft in this case? Couldn't an unscrupulous person, say a waiter at a restaurant, take your card, use his/her own Coin to make a copy of your card, add it to their own Coin, and then use that card at their leisure at a future date? I know, the same question was asked re: Square and the like, but the difference is that you need a Square account to steal other people's cards, and that's traceable, whereas here, you can use the stolen card easily and surreptiously with little notice. Except for the fact that using a Coin in itself is noticeable.
If there are any Coin founders hanging out here, this seems like a great idea and cool technology. However, like a number of other commenters, I have a few questions not covered by the FAQ...
The product/fit questions have already been asked, but there's still this: Why is Coin taking pre-orders several months in advance just to raise $50k? I can't help but wonder why a YC company wouldn't just raise the needed $50k from investors?
If this is an attempt to test the market, are you sure that a crowdfunding approach is the best image for a financial company? I want any company dealing with my financial data to be rock solid and reliable, and crowdfunding is the exact opposite of that.
Also, why aren't you collecting shipping addresses? I read your answer in the FAQ, but that makes me twice as concerned. You say, "A lot can happen between now and Summer 2014. For example, you could move. To reduce confusion, we’ll get those details from you once we get a little closer to getting you your Coin."
This is a problem for two reasons: (1) you are emphasizing that the ship date is far in the future, and (2) it comes across as though Coin is run by young founders who move around a lot and don't see value in long term planning. That's the wrong mindset for a company handling financial data.
What happens when the waiter accidentally clicks the button & charges your business card when it should have charged your personal card? I guess they can just peruse your cards, see what you've got, and pick which one to charge. :p
I worked on a product like this at Amex about 20 years ago and while it was a totally neat concept it was completely stupid in practice. All those plastic cards are marketing vehicles that can also transmit a number. And, really, are they that difficult to manage?
Q. Can a Coin be used to skim cards?
A. No. You can only add cards that you own to your Coin.
Ummmm... I hate to be pedantic [1], but the question is using the "is it possible" meaning of "can", but the answer seems to be using the "am I allowed to" meaning. There's a line in the previous question about how "As an additional safeguard, the Coin app will only allow you to add cards you own," but no detail on the mechanism of this magical authentication process.
I'm not sure of the prevalence in the US, but does this support chip + pin transactions? They're the standard in the UK now, and I suspect it's a little harder to mess around with than the magnetic strip.
Super cool, but my guess is that there's a very small time window for it to succeed before the phone completely subsumes all card functionality. After all, the phone already scans the old card and sends the details to the 'CoinCard' (and monitors card-custody) via Bluetooth-LE.
It won't be long before most swipe terminals are themselves augmented with wireless transceivers, making the "CoinCard" a redundant middleman-device. That is, your phone could just send archived magstripe details, after your onscreen-app confirmation of payment-intent, to the retailer's terminal.
Coin's real strategy may be for that world - the hardware will fall away like a first-stage-rocket at some point... even faster, say, than Netflix moved from DVDs-through-mail to pure-network-delivery.
Why would you want to carry just one credit card when you can carry zero with Square (or Google Wallet)?
If it is because of the "tradition problem", it's not much better than Square Wallet either: In more than one place I've been to the cashier was supposed to manually enter the last four digits of CC# manually for the transaction to get through. You'll have to carry a backup card with either Square or Coin.
I like the vision of completely ditching the credit card far better, and the marginal compatibility benefit does not seem good enough for this to get anywhere in its current shape.
Of course, things can change.
(BTW, wasn't Google doing the same thing with a physical card for Google Wallet and ended up abandoning it?)
Personally, I like the idea of using my phone over the coin thingy.
Also, I'm curious about how sturdy this thing is. Maybe it's my wallet or maybe I just shop too much, but I tend to wear out my debit card really quickly (< 1 year).
One of my biggest questions/objections is about the battery life issue. They claim that this will run out juice every 2 years or so and that the battery cannot be replaced, so I'll just need to buy a new one. $100 every two years for this device seems like a pretty big expense, as opposed to $100 one time.
I wonder how this would fare in an ATM. What happens if the ATM accidentally presses the card selection button? If the ATM gobbles the card, now you've effectively lost your entire wallet. What happens if the cashier presses the card selection button while running your card too? Oops, now your boss wants to know why you've just paid for your groceries on the business credit card and why you've cloned your business credit card!! The first can be an innocent mistake, but the second can be grounds for disciplinary action.
I can't see the banks being happy about customers cloning their own cards. In fact, it will probably be a convenient excuse for them to absolve themselves of all liability in the case of loss, theft, or misuse. Some, if they found out, might pitch a fit and close the account.
This also is going to pose a lot of problems when used with non-domestic cards, as they point out in their FAQ. It's possible to use an EMV-based card with just the magstripe, but it's a pain in the butt and the bank may well be aware that all your meatspace transactions are not using the EMV-chip. They may assume that your card is broken or (quite correctly) cloned and block it. A call from the fraud department may well lead to a fit being pitched.
From wikipedia: "Magnetic stripe cloning can be detected by the implementation of magnetic card reader heads and firmware that can read a signature of magnetic noise permanently embedded in all magnetic stripes during the card production process." [0] Oops, now your card is blocked.
Retailers might also get skittish if they figure out this isn't actual bank-issued plastic. They may well refuse it because of the risk of fraud. I would. I really wouldn't want to be running someone's cloned card, even if the cardholder was the one that did the cloning. In fact, it might jeopardize a retailer's merchant account if the acquiring bank found out the merchant were running cloned cards!
The best way to counter a bulky wallet is to not add bulk in the first place. How many credit cards and debit cards does one need to carry on a daily basis? I carry maybe two or three cards, some ID, my Oyster card, and a Costa rewards card that I use daily. I also have a backup wallet that contains a second set of cards in case I lose the first. The bulk of my wallet is receipts that accumulate, but even when I carried way more my life wasn't burdened by a whalelike wallet.
It'd also be a pain in the butt to use this with some rewards cards. For example, my Costa rewards card is swiped at the same time as I'm paying. Would I really want to fumble through pressing a button to find the right rewards card, give that to the cashier, have it handed back so I can fumble through pressing buttons again so I can pay? Certainly not, and even less so the impatient people in line behind me.
Sorry to promulgate the Hater News stereotype, but it's just too easy to poke holes in this idea. It has superficial appeal but I really wouldn't pay $100 for so many potential problems, especially as it would only make my wallet a few mm thinner.
Love the concept but the security worries me. Looking on the site, there is (as expected) not much information about security.
RED FLAGS:
* Coin is in the process of earning a PCI certification. This should have been done before launch. Also, what level?
* Coin uses 128/256bit for security but HOW and WHERE?
* Coin essentially skims cards (through the reader) to playback for terminals. I don't see how they can say with a straight face that it is less susceptible to the same techniques.
* Adding what are supposed to be funny Q&As to a FAQ trivializes what are supposed to be important questions for people thinking about using this.
* I understand the love of "the cloud" but I wish people would also consider scenarios for a disconnected model. These are solutions that do not necessarily require a full time connection.
I could see using this for pre-paid gift cards but not for my actual credit cards.
I'd really like the ability to add all my shopping cards, membership cards, and whatever else that constitutes 98% of my wallet. Replacing two credit cards/bank cards isn't that compelling.
And then really, while I'm dreaming....I just want my phone or an app on my phone to deal with paying because carrying around a card just feels so 2000s.
This is a slick implementation, though.
I'm also more worried about actual merchants refusing to take something like this.
This is one of the worse ideas I've heard of; security wise. Not even at a tech-level. All your data and credentials are a robbery away. Of course, if you get robbed you can probably call in your credit cards from your cellphone... oh...
Now, on the tech side... magnetic? Really? We've been through this, it's not secure. It might sound secure in an ideal world where the user doesn't do stupid things like handing over both the card and the phone to someone just to avoid getting the notification or to be shown how it works... or because it's a "store requirement". But we are not in that world, nor we will be.
I don't know if I can make a suggestion that might be seen with all the activity here - but if it were me designing it, I would have an option to lock-in a single card via the smartphone app.
Or, maybe only allow switching within a foot or two of your smartphone.
That would eliminate the concern people have about where the waiter accidentally pushes the button and switches the active card.
[+] [-] nlh|12 years ago|reply
As a merchant, however (which I am), there is no chance I would accept this. None. Unless the issuers (that is, Visa, MC, Amex) drastically change their policies, which I don't see happening anytime soon.
Why? Because the issuers are very clear about a few things: When push comes to shove and it REALLY gets down to it, unless the merchant takes a physical swipe of the actual card AND has backup to prove it (i.e. an imprint of the physical plastic), the issuers will side with a consumer in the event of a fraud dispute.
So why, do you ask, do most merchants not bother taking imprints of the actual cards? Because a visual verification and physical swipe is usually enough (for 99% of cases). Instances of fraud via card duplication are rare, so it's usually not worth the hassle. But in some cases, it is.
My business runs large-ticket purchases though CCs (average is $2000), and we take super extra precautions when our customers buy from us. We take magnetic swipes, visually verify, AND take physical imprints.
We've lost several chargebacks because of lack of doing this. You'd be surprised how these little-known rules crop up when you least expect them. "Sorry, customer claims charge not authorized. Merchant doesn't have physical imprint. Chargeback approved." It's happened and we've been defrauded out of $thousands because of it.
The ONLY way we've been able to successful combat chargeback fraud is through the multi-layered approach.
Anyway, I know this is a fairly esoteric perspective and my business may be different from lots of others where this isn't an issue, but I have a feeling V/MC/Amex aren't going to get behind this.
[+] [-] Nursie|12 years ago|reply
They're very hard to clone (I won't say impossible, but attacks against EMV have not generally been of this nature) and the transaction records at both ends will tell you whether the actual, real card was there.
The liability is more clear-cut as a result. If the customer claims the charge was unauthorised, that's between the bank and the customer.
--edit-- of course with EMV cards Coin would no longer be possible or relevant. Neat product, only useful in a magnetic-stripe world, which is at least a decade behind the curve now.
Theoretically with EMV you could put all your credit-cards on one chip and the terminal will either choose a supported default or present you a list, but that would require cross-bank cooperation, never going to happen.
[+] [-] tedivm|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the_economist|12 years ago|reply
btw, it sounds like you should have had a lawyer handling some of those chargebacks, particularly if you had captured the driver's license info. We started using a (cost conscious) lawyer to deal with every chargeback and our win rate went way up. And by "dealing with a chargeback" I mean forwarding along our response on his letterhead.
[+] [-] abalone|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] steven2012|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcv|12 years ago|reply
A more convenient way of handling credit cards is a useless idea to me. What we need is a safer and more reliable way to handle transactions. Preferably one that doesn't rely on politically motivated monopolists.
[+] [-] tyohn|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tmoullet|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] driverdan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jhandl|12 years ago|reply
I carry 19 cards, of which 16 are essential. Some of them are not for swiping so they wouldn't benefit from Coin. The solution for me is a wallet that can hold 20 to 30 cards, but as far as I can tell there's no such thing.
[+] [-] trustfundbaby|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] whitej125|12 years ago|reply
Thinking out loud here... could you make the use of the Coin card dependent on being within range of your bluetooth enabled cell phone. If the card knows that it is being swiped (not sure if it does)... then the in-range phone could know and send a msg to the CC company with the shared secret saying "yo, it's legit". Now a thief would have to steal both the phone and the card for it to work. I'm sure there are a million holes in this, but just putting it out there.
Similar concept could work regular CC's as well. CC company comes up with "card swiper 2.0!" and deploys them to merchants. I as a consumer get some incentive from the CC company to register my device with them. When my card get's swiped at a merchant... card swiper 2.0 tries to detect my device. If it sees it, great, lower chance of fraud. If it doesn't, give me a ring to see if I'm aware that my card was used or deny the charges. Might help the triage the sheer number of transactions out there for what's fraud and what isn't.
[+] [-] downandout|12 years ago|reply
On the other side of it, I love the idea, and the only way to get merchants and card companies to begin changing their policies is for someone to be first through the door. This will not work for all situations at first, but if it proves popular it could easily sway these policies. Imagine some of the possibilities. Just as an example, imagine getting a pre-approved credit card offer in your email, then having the new, swipeable card instantly downloaded to this device after a few verification questions. Credit card companies that worked with Coin could gain an instant competitive advantage in the cut-throat credit card marketing business. This could also revolutionize the loyalty card business.
[+] [-] wil421|12 years ago|reply
I have seen flat cards without numbers that would be impossible to imprint.
[+] [-] guiambros|12 years ago|reply
Given your large average ticket, it makes sense to be extra paranoid and take an imprint (mostly to avoid scammers), but certainly doesn't apply to 99% of merchants.
I don't think this would be a roadblock for them. Unless, of course, Visa/MC/Amex finds some obscure legal clause (or technical way to detect the different card) to shut them down.
[+] [-] lectrick|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kenrikm|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joewee|12 years ago|reply
If this becomes more widespread coin will have problems.
[+] [-] jonstjohn|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] musclman|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] tiglionabbit|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vlokshin|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kparashar|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] baddox|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skulquake|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ashcairo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cbsmith|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] egwor|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chazandchaz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cik|12 years ago|reply
To me, this sounds like a big data play, except in this case the company is getting the user to cover the cost of acquisition. I imagine the actual cost of production on a card like this being well < $20 shipped (disclosure: I've been involved in shipping and starting up several physical products).
So now, I have something that collects and unifies data across multiple purchase vectors, sending that back to a single source. In other words, I've paid for the privilege of helping another company get the same sort of insight that mint.com was building, except that I'm also including loyalty data.
Colour me out.
[+] [-] unfletch|12 years ago|reply
Their Echo card is exactly the same idea, with some minor variation in implementation. It has not yet launched.
As far as the concerns voiced here (accidental button presses, etc.), Chris Bartenstein, a Protean co-founder, has addressed some of that in the comments on this TechCrunch story: http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/02/the-protean-echo-reduces-al...
[+] [-] rexreed|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skue|12 years ago|reply
The product/fit questions have already been asked, but there's still this: Why is Coin taking pre-orders several months in advance just to raise $50k? I can't help but wonder why a YC company wouldn't just raise the needed $50k from investors?
If this is an attempt to test the market, are you sure that a crowdfunding approach is the best image for a financial company? I want any company dealing with my financial data to be rock solid and reliable, and crowdfunding is the exact opposite of that.
Also, why aren't you collecting shipping addresses? I read your answer in the FAQ, but that makes me twice as concerned. You say, "A lot can happen between now and Summer 2014. For example, you could move. To reduce confusion, we’ll get those details from you once we get a little closer to getting you your Coin."
This is a problem for two reasons: (1) you are emphasizing that the ship date is far in the future, and (2) it comes across as though Coin is run by young founders who move around a lot and don't see value in long term planning. That's the wrong mindset for a company handling financial data.
[+] [-] sequoia|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pbreit|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] azernik|12 years ago|reply
[1] Who am I kidding? I love being pedantic.
[+] [-] robotmay|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ohazi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gojomo|12 years ago|reply
It won't be long before most swipe terminals are themselves augmented with wireless transceivers, making the "CoinCard" a redundant middleman-device. That is, your phone could just send archived magstripe details, after your onscreen-app confirmation of payment-intent, to the retailer's terminal.
Coin's real strategy may be for that world - the hardware will fall away like a first-stage-rocket at some point... even faster, say, than Netflix moved from DVDs-through-mail to pure-network-delivery.
[+] [-] mehrdada|12 years ago|reply
If it is because of the "tradition problem", it's not much better than Square Wallet either: In more than one place I've been to the cashier was supposed to manually enter the last four digits of CC# manually for the transaction to get through. You'll have to carry a backup card with either Square or Coin.
I like the vision of completely ditching the credit card far better, and the marginal compatibility benefit does not seem good enough for this to get anywhere in its current shape.
Of course, things can change.
(BTW, wasn't Google doing the same thing with a physical card for Google Wallet and ended up abandoning it?)
[+] [-] callmeed|12 years ago|reply
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/loop/pay-with-loop
Personally, I like the idea of using my phone over the coin thingy.
Also, I'm curious about how sturdy this thing is. Maybe it's my wallet or maybe I just shop too much, but I tend to wear out my debit card really quickly (< 1 year).
[+] [-] wadetandy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kintamanimatt|12 years ago|reply
I can't see the banks being happy about customers cloning their own cards. In fact, it will probably be a convenient excuse for them to absolve themselves of all liability in the case of loss, theft, or misuse. Some, if they found out, might pitch a fit and close the account.
This also is going to pose a lot of problems when used with non-domestic cards, as they point out in their FAQ. It's possible to use an EMV-based card with just the magstripe, but it's a pain in the butt and the bank may well be aware that all your meatspace transactions are not using the EMV-chip. They may assume that your card is broken or (quite correctly) cloned and block it. A call from the fraud department may well lead to a fit being pitched.
From wikipedia: "Magnetic stripe cloning can be detected by the implementation of magnetic card reader heads and firmware that can read a signature of magnetic noise permanently embedded in all magnetic stripes during the card production process." [0] Oops, now your card is blocked.
Retailers might also get skittish if they figure out this isn't actual bank-issued plastic. They may well refuse it because of the risk of fraud. I would. I really wouldn't want to be running someone's cloned card, even if the cardholder was the one that did the cloning. In fact, it might jeopardize a retailer's merchant account if the acquiring bank found out the merchant were running cloned cards!
The best way to counter a bulky wallet is to not add bulk in the first place. How many credit cards and debit cards does one need to carry on a daily basis? I carry maybe two or three cards, some ID, my Oyster card, and a Costa rewards card that I use daily. I also have a backup wallet that contains a second set of cards in case I lose the first. The bulk of my wallet is receipts that accumulate, but even when I carried way more my life wasn't burdened by a whalelike wallet.
It'd also be a pain in the butt to use this with some rewards cards. For example, my Costa rewards card is swiped at the same time as I'm paying. Would I really want to fumble through pressing a button to find the right rewards card, give that to the cashier, have it handed back so I can fumble through pressing buttons again so I can pay? Certainly not, and even less so the impatient people in line behind me.
Sorry to promulgate the Hater News stereotype, but it's just too easy to poke holes in this idea. It has superficial appeal but I really wouldn't pay $100 for so many potential problems, especially as it would only make my wallet a few mm thinner.
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_stripe_card
[+] [-] UVB-76|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newman314|12 years ago|reply
RED FLAGS:
* Coin is in the process of earning a PCI certification. This should have been done before launch. Also, what level? * Coin uses 128/256bit for security but HOW and WHERE? * Coin essentially skims cards (through the reader) to playback for terminals. I don't see how they can say with a straight face that it is less susceptible to the same techniques. * Adding what are supposed to be funny Q&As to a FAQ trivializes what are supposed to be important questions for people thinking about using this. * I understand the love of "the cloud" but I wish people would also consider scenarios for a disconnected model. These are solutions that do not necessarily require a full time connection.
I could see using this for pre-paid gift cards but not for my actual credit cards.
[+] [-] taude|12 years ago|reply
And then really, while I'm dreaming....I just want my phone or an app on my phone to deal with paying because carrying around a card just feels so 2000s.
This is a slick implementation, though.
I'm also more worried about actual merchants refusing to take something like this.
[+] [-] Ryoku|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] swamp40|12 years ago|reply
Or, maybe only allow switching within a foot or two of your smartphone.
That would eliminate the concern people have about where the waiter accidentally pushes the button and switches the active card.