
To Revive Wallet, Google Tries to Wrangle Unruly Partners - maverick2
http://www.wsj.com/articles/to-revive-wallet-google-tries-to-wrangle-unruly-partners-1424392928
======
maverick2
Google is in dire need for a marketing unit, that educates regular consumers
about the possibilities of the applications and products Google has. Otherwise
Google always ends up with low traction for a lot of its products. And
sometimes these products are killed.

It seems Google wants to do consumer tech only to get money to be able to do
high tech. But otherwise it has no real interest in consumer tech.

~~~
adwf
Yeah I've said that for years. Google have a serious tendency to just announce
products, push them out the door and then forget they ever existed.

Then 3 years later we hear about them being closed down (due to lack of
traction) and they get a whole load of bad press from all the people who
actually did use it.

Any new product, even at a large company, should be thought of like a startup
- in constant need of marketing.

~~~
maverick2
True, May be Google is still stuck in old ways of Internet. When early
adopters drove the adaption. But Internet, specially Web has become too
mainstream and there is a lot of noise. So being dependent on just early
adopters might not cut it. It needs to have a Growth-Hacker type mindset.

------
mikestew
To revive Wallet, Google needs to make it usable. I'm not exactly unsaavy to
the ways of a phone, but on the last phone I had with NFC there was no
explanation of how to get it to work at POS (and how to set it up it all isn't
very clear). Does the phone need to be awake? Do I need to run an app? I tried
it once, didn't work, never touched it again. Mobile payment is something I'm
just not going to put a lot of effort into.

Contrast to Apple Pay. Held the phone up, prompted for fingerprint, done.

~~~
binarycrusader
Actually, Google Wallet works almost exactly the same as ApplePay (my spouse
has an iPhone 6, I have a Moto X 2014); I've seen and used both.

Just tap the phone on the NFC device and that's it (the PIN pad at the retail
may then prompt you to hit credit or debit, if you choose debit, you just
enter your wallet pin again). If Google Wallet needs to be unlocked first, it
will prompt you for the wallet pin.

In fairness, it used to be far more cumbersome. They fixed most of the user
interface problems with the release of Android 5.0.

~~~
danudey
But unfortunately most devices don't (and can't) run Android 5.0, so they're
stuck with the old, cumbersome Wallet (or, worse, tried it, gave up on it
because it was a terrible experience, will never try it again).

~~~
soylentcola
I could've sworn it worked the same when I was running 4.whatever on my old
Nexus 5 prior to the 5.0 update. From an end user perspective I haven't
noticed much of a change in at least a couple of years (aside from some
vendors disabling support in favor of their own tap to pay).

~~~
binarycrusader
The difference I believe came with the ability for the app to automatically be
run in the background and for control over which one was used for Tap and Pay,
which given today's announcement from Google makes sense.

Maybe this was fixed in Android 4.4, but I would swear the experience changed
for me sometime right at or after 4.4.

Notably, I didn't have to make sure the app was open and wallet unlocked
first, whereas with Android 5.0 it "just works".

------
jusben1369
All Google/Apple articles (which used to be MSFT/Apple 20 years ago) Things
are easier for Apple because they control everything in their domain. This
however creates powerful enemies who are locked out and threatened. This
creates a real opportunity for Google. However everything is much harder for
Google to do because it doesn't control the entire ecosystem like Apple.

Rinse and repeat

~~~
ChuckMcM
In fairness, a number of partners have stated that Google is the biggest
threat to their business in their 10Q's :-). But what is interesting from a
game theory point of view is always do Google and Apple think the other is a
threat to their business? And what does interdependencies means for things
like the consumer? There is an interesting rock/paper/scissors sort of
relationship with search, phone OS, app stores, applications, and market
sizes. Its during periods where the interdependencies are tend to favor a
single player that we see fairly large scale attacks against that entity.

~~~
jusben1369
10Q's are very strange docs though as they're mostly written with lawsuit
mitigation in mind. So you name nearly everyone and everything as a potential
competitor just in case one of them actually does become one one day.

But you raise a good point. I think the insecurity starts with Google and
Apple responds. (and I'm an Android user so no fanboi assumptions!) Google
relies on a very open web to leverage all the data to optimize search to drive
ad monetization. I think Apple was very happy with optimized Google services
running on iPhones making the whole experience richer (they want to sell
hardware not profit from search/ads) Once Google realized just what mobile
would become and how big a chunk of that Apple would control they panicked at
the _thought_ of being locked out. Again, due to their basic premise they're
always going to be more insecure.

------
mycodebreaks
Paywall bypass

[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fto-
revive-wallet-google-tries-to-wrangle-unruly-
partners-1424392928&ei=enbnVMvrBMHboATS1oLIDw&usg=AFQjCNEhBCuh1mhD4Y8CYL9zuagnlB1WAg&sig2=D8MN3Aj2Ib2TrrdOZkY_3A)

~~~
danw3
Just as a side note if you have already clicked the link the google trick does
not work.

Or at least that was the case for me.

~~~
colinbartlett
For paywalled articles on WSJ and elsewhere, I always just triple-click the
Headline. Then right-click and use Chrome's "Search Google for" feature. It's
always the first link and always lets you view it. Works every time.

------
lnanek2
I still remember the Google IO where I lost my ticket because Google Wallet
error'ed out. The JavaScript was really amateur and just left the user sitting
at a progress screen forever in the case of an error. I don't really consider
it a serious API considering it can't handle load. They should just outsource
to PayPal or someone who can do payments right.

------
Navarr
TL;DR: Google trying to work with banks to get some sort of deal going on.
Google trying to wrangle it's phone partners like Samsung who are trying to
implement their own payment platform.

WTL;DR: Apple is superior because they have complete control over their
ecosystem (WSJ's opinion, not my own)

------
free2rhyme214
Non paywall link:

[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fto-
revive-wallet-google-tries-to-wrangle-unruly-
partners-1424392928&ei=Nn3nVPKJHs3UoAT41oHYDg&usg=AFQjCNEhBCuh1mhD4Y8CYL9zuagnlB1WAg&sig2=KxUgXxAxgUlqQ6Sp9G7vwg)

------
higherpurpose
If the new new new (how many times has it been relaunched so far?) Google
Wallet doesn't support the same kind of tokenization as Apple Pay, but instead
continues to sell tracking data to merchants and banks and whatnot, then
Wallet remains dead to me.

------
rockshassa
Please remove this link, it is paywalled and therefore useless for most people

------
Nexxxeh
Paywalled for me.

~~~
mikestew
And then follows the "search the title on google", and so on and so on.

It's from the Wall Street Journal, of course it's paywalled. Can we just have
a macro that auto-pastes the same conversation thread for each wsj.com
article, and save us all a lot of typing?

~~~
Nexxxeh
>And then follows the "search the title on google", and so on and so on.

>It's from the Wall Street Journal, of course it's paywalled. Can we just have
a macro that auto-pastes the same conversation thread for each wsj.com
article, and save us all a lot of typing?

Is that attitude directed at me? I'm sorry if I was supposed to know that the
WSJ is always paywalled.

Not that I can immediately think of any instances where I've read the WSJ
recently.

If I have read it recently, it was probably using someone else's bypass that I
was unaware of.

If you could make more plain exactly where you're directing that...
exasperation... that'd be fantastic. As right now, it looks directed at me and
frankly, I don't think it's deserved.

~~~
mikestew
Just a general observation of a long and oft repeating pattern. I'm dead
serious about the macro, though.

~~~
rtkwe
Auto replacing with the Google link that bypasses the paywall would be even
better and just avoid the problem entirely.

------
ThinkBeat
Text of article:

Google Inc. is reaching for its Wallet to keep pace with Apple Pay, but
differences in the two companies’ mobile businesses mean it won’t be easy.

The Internet-search giant is trying to marshal an unruly coalition of device
makers, wireless carriers, banks and payment networks to shape a new version
of its Google Wallet payment service, in some cases by offering them more
revenue. Google hopes to unveil the new service at its developer conference in
late May, said people familiar with the matter.

Google, however, exerts less control over the smartphones that use its Android
mobile operating system than Apple Inc. does over its iPhones. Smartphone
makers and wireless operators offer many flavors of Android devices, with
different preloaded apps. Each player has its own priorities, and changes made
on behalf of one player can inconvenience the rest.

Further complicating Google’s task is that some of its “partners” have plans
for their own payment services. Samsung Electronics Co. , the biggest maker of
Android phones by number of units, plans to unveil its own payment service
next month using technology from LoopPay Inc., a payments startup Samsung
acquired this week. A person familiar with the Samsung-LoopPay deal said big
smartphone makers envision few benefits from cooperating with Google Wallet.

By contrast, Apple controls the iPhone’s hardware and software, giving it a
big advantage. Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook said last week that Apple Pay
was only possible because of this control. “Imagine trying to do this with
several different companies,” Mr. Cook told an investment conference. “You’d
be pulling your hair out.”

Persuading Android partners and financial-service companies to support its
payment service requires Google to “herd the many cats involved,” wrote Tim
Sloane, a payments analyst at Mercator Advisory Group, in a January research
report. “It’s a mess,” he added in an interview.

Still, Google has to aim for success, because Apple Pay could become a draw
for people to buy iPhones, instead of Android phones. Mr. Cook said last month
that Apple Pay accounted for $2 of every $3 spent using contact-less payments
on the largest payment networks.

Apple Pay “has changed the dynamics” of mobile payments, said Marc Freed-
Finnegan, a former Google Wallet executive who is chief executive of retail-
technology startup Index Inc. “If payments become a standard feature of
phones, Google has to have a service on a par with Apple or better.”

A Google spokeswoman declined to comment. Omid Kordestani, Google’s chief
business officer, told investors last month that Google is working on a “fully
functional payment system” that goes “beyond just tap and pay.”

Google launched Wallet in 2011, allowing owners of some Android phones to pay
by tapping on retail checkout terminals equipped with a wireless technology
known as near-field communication. But most large U.S. carriers refused to
preload the Wallet app on their Android phones. They also blocked the service
from accessing a chip that stored credit-card information, because they were
working on their own payment service.

In 2010, AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and T-Mobile US Inc. formed
Isis, later renaming it Softcard. The service failed to gain much traction,
and Google is now in exclusive talks to acquire it as a key component of the
revived Google Wallet, people familiar with the matter have said.

The three wireless carriers are more willing to work with Google these days,
because they get no revenue from Apple Pay, the people familiar with the
matter say. Mr. Freed-Finnegan said that’s created an incentive for Google and
the carriers to cooperate. “Certainly Apple isn’t working with the carriers,”
he said.

The three carriers and Softcard declined to comment.

In talks with the carriers, Google is offering to pay them to feature Wallet
prominently on their Android phones and is dangling the promise of more
revenue from advertising tied to Google searches made on the phones, according
to the people familiar with the matter.

For Google, one big benefit of having a popular Wallet app would be the data
it could collect on consumer purchases, which would give the company something
besides website clicks to demonstrate the effectiveness of its ads. That could
drive up ad prices, and carriers would share in the gains.

Banks are playing their own waiting game, to see how many carriers and device
makers cooperate. Hundreds of banks are participating in Apple Pay, but most
are interested in reaching Android users too. Android smartphones accounted
for 47.6% of U.S. smartphone sales in December, a fraction less than Apple
devices, according to Kantar Worldpanel ComTech.

Banks pay Apple a small fee for each transaction because Apple’s security
measures reduce their fraud-prevention costs. Apple Pay users’ credit-card
information is encrypted and stored on the phone, so merchants never see it.

Google is talking to banks and payment networks, including Visa Inc. and
MasterCard Inc., hoping for a similar deal, according to people familiar with
the situation.

Google’s situation is more complicated. In 2013, it eliminated a requirement
that payment information for Wallet be stored in hardware, because the
carriers had prevented Wallet from accessing the data that way. Its
alternative, a software-based approach known as Host Card Emulation, may
require banks to upgrade their antifraud systems. Mr. Sloane, the Mercator
analyst, said the associated costs and disruption may make banks less willing
to share fees with Google.

—Daisuke Wakabayashi contributed to this article.

Write to Alistair Barr at alistair.barr@wsj.com

