Mobile Payments without Credit Cards

The San Francisco Chronicle ran an interesting story about a small payment processing firm that is trying to disintermediate credit card companies. But they are doing it the old fashioned way – cutting out the middleman and going direct to banks to move money for them. Dwolla is a start-up payment processor providing person-to-person payment via mobile and social media outlets. Their hook is providing payment at a substantially reduced reduced commission – just twenty-five cents ($0.25) per transaction. Compare that to credit card companies that charge a flat 3%, or PayPal, who changes thirty cents per transaction in addition to 2.9% (less 2.2% for volume sellers). Dwolla’s offering can be viewed as similar to PayPal’s or an ATM transaction, but ATM fees have escalated into the $3-10 range. With mobile payment in its infancy, this space is a greenfield for startups and established players to redefine what’s possible. Credit card companies have been talking up the benefits of mobile payments for years as an easier and more pleasurable shopping experience – but today many of their solutions have not yet been delivered to the market. The promised benefit to merchants is rather nebulous growth in “customer loyalty” and data on purchasing history. Cold hard cash would be preferable, which is why I think many small merchants are going to like Dwolla’s offering. When it comes down to it 3% may not sound like much, but it’s a lot of money for many merchants struggling to be competitive. Popular sentiment doesn’t hurt either, especially in light of consumer dissatisfaction with credit card companies (despite overall credit card use going up), and many halting use of cards because they make spending too easy. As far as security goes, not much information is available on Dwolla’s security model for establishing user identity. What’s described sounds similar to existing models based on a combination device (phone) verification, a password, and location-based services. But it’s not their security model that interests me – it’s that this is one of the first upstarts I have seen really breaking the old mold of how payments are done, and it looks promisingly disruptive. The concept is not new, but it’s one of the first times someone has pulled off the direct-to-bank model and demonstrated a new concept of what mobile payments can be. For banks willing to take some risk on the security and legality of person-to-person or mobile payments, Dwolla offers both a new revenue model and a means to strengthen customer relationships. Keep in mind that many banks offer credit cards expressly to be foremost in the consumer’s mind when looking for auto or home loans – loans being the principal source of bank revenue. While that sounds like a no-brainer, I can tell you from personal experience that most banks won’t touch this concept with a 20’ pole because of the risk to their banking charters in this heavily regulated sector. But the market usually rewards efficiency, and if someone can offer convenient payment services at a reduced cost they are likely to win market share in a hurry. Dwolla sounds like they have a recipe for success. Share:

Read Post

Totally Transparent Research is the embodiment of how we work at Securosis. It’s our core operating philosophy, our research policy, and a specific process. We initially developed it to help maintain objectivity while producing licensed research, but its benefits extend to all aspects of our business.

Going beyond Open Source Research, and a far cry from the traditional syndicated research model, we think it’s the best way to produce independent, objective, quality research.

Here’s how it works:

  • Content is developed ‘live’ on the blog. Primary research is generally released in pieces, as a series of posts, so we can digest and integrate feedback, making the end results much stronger than traditional “ivory tower” research.
  • Comments are enabled for posts. All comments are kept except for spam, personal insults of a clearly inflammatory nature, and completely off-topic content that distracts from the discussion. We welcome comments critical of the work, even if somewhat insulting to the authors. Really.
  • Anyone can comment, and no registration is required. Vendors or consultants with a relevant product or offering must properly identify themselves. While their comments won’t be deleted, the writer/moderator will “call out”, identify, and possibly ridicule vendors who fail to do so.
  • Vendors considering licensing the content are welcome to provide feedback, but it must be posted in the comments - just like everyone else. There is no back channel influence on the research findings or posts.
    Analysts must reply to comments and defend the research position, or agree to modify the content.
  • At the end of the post series, the analyst compiles the posts into a paper, presentation, or other delivery vehicle. Public comments/input factors into the research, where appropriate.
  • If the research is distributed as a paper, significant commenters/contributors are acknowledged in the opening of the report. If they did not post their real names, handles used for comments are listed. Commenters do not retain any rights to the report, but their contributions will be recognized.
  • All primary research will be released under a Creative Commons license. The current license is Non-Commercial, Attribution. The analyst, at their discretion, may add a Derivative Works or Share Alike condition.
  • Securosis primary research does not discuss specific vendors or specific products/offerings, unless used to provide context, contrast or to make a point (which is very very rare).
    Although quotes from published primary research (and published primary research only) may be used in press releases, said quotes may never mention a specific vendor, even if the vendor is mentioned in the source report. Securosis must approve any quote to appear in any vendor marketing collateral.
  • Final primary research will be posted on the blog with open comments.
  • Research will be updated periodically to reflect market realities, based on the discretion of the primary analyst. Updated research will be dated and given a version number.
    For research that cannot be developed using this model, such as complex principles or models that are unsuited for a series of blog posts, the content will be chunked up and posted at or before release of the paper to solicit public feedback, and provide an open venue for comments and criticisms.
  • In rare cases Securosis may write papers outside of the primary research agenda, but only if the end result can be non-biased and valuable to the user community to supplement industry-wide efforts or advances. A “Radically Transparent Research” process will be followed in developing these papers, where absolutely all materials are public at all stages of development, including communications (email, call notes).
    Only the free primary research released on our site can be licensed. We will not accept licensing fees on research we charge users to access.
  • All licensed research will be clearly labeled with the licensees. No licensed research will be released without indicating the sources of licensing fees. Again, there will be no back channel influence. We’re open and transparent about our revenue sources.

In essence, we develop all of our research out in the open, and not only seek public comments, but keep those comments indefinitely as a record of the research creation process. If you believe we are biased or not doing our homework, you can call us out on it and it will be there in the record. Our philosophy involves cracking open the research process, and using our readers to eliminate bias and enhance the quality of the work.

On the back end, here’s how we handle this approach with licensees:

  • Licensees may propose paper topics. The topic may be accepted if it is consistent with the Securosis research agenda and goals, but only if it can be covered without bias and will be valuable to the end user community.
  • Analysts produce research according to their own research agendas, and may offer licensing under the same objectivity requirements.
  • The potential licensee will be provided an outline of our research positions and the potential research product so they can determine if it is likely to meet their objectives.
  • Once the licensee agrees, development of the primary research content begins, following the Totally Transparent Research process as outlined above. At this point, there is no money exchanged.
  • Upon completion of the paper, the licensee will receive a release candidate to determine whether the final result still meets their needs.
  • If the content does not meet their needs, the licensee is not required to pay, and the research will be released without licensing or with alternate licensees.
  • Licensees may host and reuse the content for the length of the license (typically one year). This includes placing the content behind a registration process, posting on white paper networks, or translation into other languages. The research will always be hosted at Securosis for free without registration.

Here is the language we currently place in our research project agreements:

Content will be created independently of LICENSEE with no obligations for payment. Once content is complete, LICENSEE will have a 3 day review period to determine if the content meets corporate objectives. If the content is unsuitable, LICENSEE will not be obligated for any payment and Securosis is free to distribute the whitepaper without branding or with alternate licensees, and will not complete any associated webcasts for the declining LICENSEE. Content licensing, webcasts and payment are contingent on the content being acceptable to LICENSEE. This maintains objectivity while limiting the risk to LICENSEE. Securosis maintains all rights to the content and to include Securosis branding in addition to any licensee branding.

Even this process itself is open to criticism. If you have questions or comments, you can email us or comment on the blog.