MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W347420685

Mobile Money at Stake: Where Will Banks Fit When Mobile Payments Become as Common as Debit Cards?

2011· article· en· W347420685 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Ginovsky

Notice bibliographique

RevueABA banking journal · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueDigital Platforms and Economics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMobile paymentDebit cardPaymentBusinessAdvertisingMobile bankingPoint of salePoint (geometry)Payment service providerCommerceCredit cardInternet privacyFinanceMarketingComputer scienceWorld Wide Web
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Understanding exactly what are, and figuring out how they fit in with your bank's overall strategy, will be crucial as today's smartphone-toting customers start looking for their banks' payment apps. The basic danger is, if your bank doesn't have an app, your customers will go find a bank--or something else--that does. Getting a fix on mobile payments has become all the more urgent since two financial services analysts-KPMG and Gartner--independently predicted that mobile payments will be mainstream among consumers within four years. Far fetched? Consider, as one industry observer points out, what Apple did to the music industry with iTunes. Plastic cards could go the way of music CDs. Smartphone is the new wallet When you mention you have to immediately define what you're talking about. Mobile payments are sometimes mentioned in connection with digital wallets, mobile wallets, or e-wallets. These generally refer to the same thing, analysts say; that is, the ability to conduct retail point-of-sale transactions through the use of a mobile device. Many observers point out that other forms of mobile payments have been around for a while, such as bill pay, remote deposit capture, online e-commerce, and person-to-person (P2P) systems. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] What's different is the realization that as people find they can do more and more with their smartphones, one result will be increased pressure to be able to do retail POS payments, that is, to buy a cup of coffee, movie tickets, gum, or anything. These are the next mobile payments and the smartphone is the new wallet. The technological ability to do this is here, or rapidly approaching. A number of other factors still have to be sorted out--how to convince merchants to obtain the countertop readers; how to embed near-field communication (NFC) chips in handsets that can be read by all interchange systems; and how to convince consumers such payments are safe. Major challenges, to be sure. The effect Perhaps the biggest question to be answered is who will take the lead in this new payments area. Banks, which have owned the payment territory for centuries? Or someone else? made a splash late this spring announcing Google a group effort involving Sprint, Citibank, and MasterCard. With the associated app, a consumer will be able to make a POS mobile payment--but only through these specific entities. It won't work, for example, through an AT&T account. Visa is working on a similar setup in con junction with 14 banks and credit unions in the United States and Canada, and is planning to launch it some time this fall. Both Visa and non Visa payments will be accommodated, press materials state, but details have yet to be seen. Other groups are working in the same area. Last November, Isis was formed as a joint venture between AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile USA, and Verizon Wireless in order to enable mobile commerce. In July, they were joined by Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express. PayPal is looking into it, and Apple is rumored to be interested. The Isis plan is to enable POS mobile payments through smartphones using NFC chips. It plans to launch the service in Salt Lake City and Austin, Texas, in the first half of 2012. The biggest banks also are getting involved through a number of pilots. Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and JPMorgan Chase formed a new venture called clearXchange, which really falls into the category of P2P payments, but is distinguished as being entirely bank-owned. It is also an indication of their interest in the mobile payments trend. Still, while several banks are involved in these developing systems, other nonbanks are perceived to be taking the lead. It is Wallet, after all. You used to hear, when banks talked about disintermediation, that they were primarily talking about PayPal. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,029
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,096

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,017
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0080,006
Communication savante0,0160,030
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0090,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0290,009

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,027
Tête enseignante GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,199 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueABA banking journalMême sujetDigital Platforms and EconomicsTravaux en français237 207