A quarter of US households are unbanked or underbanked and primarily rely upon cash for payments.
That's why Walmart introduced shop online and pay in person. Only 15% of Walmart's in-store customers pay via card, from surveys they found that two-thirds of their online customers would prefer to pay in cash.
People still have latent mistrust for handing over credit card information online. Virtually all courier services have a "pay upon arrival" option which allows you to pay for the cost of the item + the shipping when you receive the item. The courier then pays the retailer for the item cost.
edit: It may also have to do with the fact that the financial services industry there is even more sales driven and more scammy than its U.S. counterpart, and hence the public has a mistrust for all financial "products" that are anything other than super conservative.
It was always fun to know that the payment notification handler on the server would get hit when someone goes to 7-11 and pays their bill.
I forget the percentage, but most orders were not using credit cards.
http://www.gmo-pg.com/ and http://www.paygent.co.jp/ are two examples.
Where do you get the information that you wrote about? I'd be very interested to read into it further. Anybody know any relevant works off the top of your head that you could share?
Unfortunately this is from anecdotal experience. I was living and working in Japan for some time so I saw first hand what services are offered and how people behave.
Its a few years old, but as of 2009 at least 65% of Australians have credit card debt.
We should try not to proliferate terms that imply a negative accusation just because someone chooses to do or believe an innocent thing that's different from what some other people do, believe, or want others to do or believe (particularly the word's inventors).
There's probably a market for a very low friction payment system for high margin goods (e.g. virtual goods, or subscriptions), similar to just doing net terms, for individuals, online. Something where as long as you can guarantee an individual only has one account, you're willing to extend a certain amount of credit per user (not per transaction).
In practice what I do is just buy things from Amazon, whether it is on my phone or laptop, so the critical thing is being logged in to amazon.com.
Plenty of CPA ads relied on users clicking through to make a purchase using their phone (being billed for what they've purchased). Finding a way to make this purchasing scheme more legitimate (explicitly warn the users that, yes, they will have to pay one way or another) would be the next logical step.
> Sign up with Facebook to buy online securely.
Really? The only signup option is via Facebook? Noooo thank you.
This is a game changer that allows people who haven't been able to buy online to do so..
Online commerce is a different story where the US is far ahead of the rest of the world.
Infact, Affirm would have to hope that customers will use anything other than credit cards to settle with Affirm - because it will be cost prohibitive for them to do that. They would have to find ways to justify the customer settling via ACH. Too little, too late imho.
Similarly, I'm not going to throw away my iPhone for $50. If there were a way to strongly tie an account to a physical iPhone, with no more than 1 account per iPhone, that solves a lot of problems. Then your only problem is if I make a piece of malware which goes to everyone else's iPhone, opens an account, and then somehow sends me the benefits.
Yes. Only the little problem of malware spread in the form of software on eternally connected devices.
But seriously, looks promising. Really hope someone would crack the mobile payments market.