Commentary
Shiny New Object Vs. The Value Proposition
- by Chuck Martin , Staff Writer, July 26, 2017
Just because a new and sophisticated technology comes along doesn’t mean it will be widely adopted and used.
A great example of this is in mobile payments.
Using NFC (near field communication) in mobile phones, which even Apple finally included in its more recent iPhones, a consumer can pay at …
8 comments about "Shiny New Object Vs. The Value Proposition ".
Read more comments >
Next story loading 
Chuck Martin is Editor of the AI & IoT Daily at MediaPost and writes the daily Connected Thinking column. He is a NY Times Business bestselling author and his latest book is “Digital Transformation 3.0” (The New Business-to-Consumer Connections of The Internet of Things.) He is CEO of Net Future Institute and a frequent keynote speaker internationally. Follow him on Twitter @chuckmartin and contact him at Chuck@MediaPost.com.
Chuck: True that some tech has a slow or early flat adoption curve...some just dies for want of, as you say, a value proposition. But I wonder if we are seeing too many tech advances being launched in too short a time frame, which...aside from security concerns...is overwhelming for most consumers. Your thoughts?
That's a great point, James. It was slower during the early commercial web days, as each person had to get on the network. Now that all are connected, the product launch speed is greatly accelerated. More people/companies can more eaily launch more things. And to your point, the market can absorb only so much at a time. Teh technology may be relativley easy to create but changing consumer behavior not so much.
I signed up for Apple Pay right away... And there's only one way I end up using it... It's a simpler way to pay at Starbucks than using the Starbucks App.
The key is your comnent about consumer value. But I also think too many delude themslves that consumers want it to be easy to part with hard earned dollars.
Companies do. Generally consumers don't.
Just look at my Starbucks use. A single corpration, trusted, where I buy regularly. In that situation I'm willing to trust phone pay. Otherwise, there's a bit of comfort that I don't make it too easy to spend my money.
Amazon Go will also face this problem. I like to know what I'm spending my money on. And vaguely being charged for whatever is in my basket without reviewing it item by item at checkout is not going to be loved by people with scarce funds.
We must respect the consumer more - and stop believing that just because we CAN (and our sci fi fictions tell us it's good) doesn't mean the market WILL.
All great points, Doug. Also adds to the issue of some people wanting to do this and others not.
I have a hunch that how tight one's money is influences adoption - those with more money can be more comfortable risking a new payment option. But I haven't seen any studies that look at the question.
Certainly not all QVC customers are wealthy yet they make buying pretty easy. But their customers also come to trust them over years of interaction and that minimizes a feeling of risk.
Paying "wherever" by phone doesn't have that trust level.
Studies do show that many consumers are skeptical of security associated with mobile payments, Doug. Have not come across any relating to the issue of personal financial situation in relation to mobile wallets.
Odd man Out. will never EVER pay for anything using a devise. Exposure to your finacial "wallet" sounds pretty dumb to me. In fact , I really get tired of people in a convienience store who uses a card for a pack of gum. Takes way too much time when I can hand them a paper currency, take my gum, leave no trail for anyone. I know one person who uses a phone for payment. A younger brother with a Starbucks addiction.
You obviously are not alone on that, Mark.