240 likes | 392 Views
Mobile Wallets. Tackling the multi-wallet p roblem to achieve mass market adoption of contactless payment services. A Quick Introduction. Neal Michie ( neal.michie@helixion.com ) - Technical Business Development Director at Helixion
E N D
Mobile Wallets Tackling the multi-wallet problem to achieve mass market adoption of contactless payment services
A Quick Introduction • Neal Michie (neal.michie@helixion.com) - Technical Business Development Director at Helixion • Background in software engineering before falling into Business Development role • Helixion works with both network operators and service providers to deploy secure contactless transaction products.
Agenda • Understanding the different wallet architecture options. • What is the multi-wallet problem and what it means for service providers. • How to address the multi-wallet problem.
The mobile wallet • “Wallet” means everything to everyone. • For this presentation a mobile “wallet” is simply a container for services.
Wallet types • Container wallet, widget wallet? – Unfortunately it’s not quite as neat as that. • At the very least need to think of wallets as a sliding scale – even then that’s a simplification. Control moves from Service Provider to Wallet Provider
Wallet types – thin - “phone as a wallet” • Wallet functionality embedded deep into the phone. • No visible wallet icon on phone’s launcher. • Each service appears to the user an it’s own application – because it is it’s own application. • As Service Provider applications are native applications, it is flexible and can take advantage of all handset functionality.
Wallet types – thick - “monolithic wallet” • Wallet functionality is provided as an app on the phone. • Wallet also provides service functionality. • Service provider simply provides branding information to the wallet provider.
Wallet types – middle ground - “widget wallet” • Most likely the wallet will be somewhere in the middle of the two extremes. • Wallet functionality is provided as an app on the phone. • Service provides create “widgets” that run within the wallet application. • “Widgets” typically created in platform independent code (e.g. JME, HTML). • “Widgets” typically light weight and can only use functionality exposed by wallet.
Independent solutions • We said each wallet is different and so each wallet requires its own solution. • Recreating solution of each wallet is expensive. • Recreating solution of each wallet takes time.
Weakened branding • Depending where a wallet sits on our sliding scale, the ability to create the desired user experience changes. • Thick wallets limit scope for defining service provider user experience. • Balancing act between: • Defining a user experience to the lowest common dominator. • Having different user experiences on each wallet deployment.
Requirements of a solution • Provide an efficient (low cost / low effort) route to reach ALL customers. • To protect their brand by providing a consistent user experience to the customer. • Give Service Providers control over the user experience.
A Solution • Solution is to architect solutions that build on a consistent platform or base. • This reduces rework for each deployment: • Saving time and money • Makes it easier to develop a consistent experience • Avoids unintentional differences in experience caused by different understands of requirements or coding errors.
A Solution • A wallet standard? • GSMA are currently looking into this – they were presenting ideas about it in the “Connected City” at MWC. • Is this feasible? Would the wallet providers be willing to confirm to a standard. • Most likely that a service provider will need to create their own “standard” that they can integrate into each wallet. This will give them the benefits described without the wallet providers having to conform.
A Solution • As with most deploy issues around secure services – solving the technical issues is only have the story. • To drive mass market adoption, users have to be able to access the service who every is there network operator. This means that a service provider will commercial relationships with each wallet provider. • For large services providers – this is feasible (if time consuming) • But to drive mass market acceptance, small(er) service providers also need a route to market – potentially a place for service aggregators.
Thank you. neal.michie@helixion.com