Quantcast StorefrontBacktalk » Blog Archive » Retail Adoption Of Alternative Payments Soars 23 Percent, Bill Me Later and PayPal Tied
advertisement
advertisement

Retail Adoption Of Alternative Payments Soars 23 Percent, Bill Me Later and PayPal Tied

Written by Evan Schuman
January 8th, 2009
Like this story? Share it
To share this story with people in your social network, please click on the network icons below.

The nation’s largest retailers continue to get more comfortable with online alternative payments such as PayPal, Bill Me Later and Google Checkout, increasing their adoption some 23 percent, according to new figures released from Rosetta.

About 37 percent of those largest retailers now accept at least one of the three largest alternative payment services. Only six of those retailers—Toys R Us, Sports Authority, Rite Aid, Petsmart, NHL and Dick’s Sporting Goods—accept all three forms.

Coincidentally, the report found that six retailers also accepted all three last year, but it was a different six. Although Dick’s did not accept all three last year (that changed when it started accepting Google Checkout in 2008), now defunct retailer Sharper Image did.

When comparing the three services, Bill Me Later and PayPal were tied with 25 percent each. (Bill Me Later had a one chain lead, but lost it when Amazon announced on December 31, 2008, that it was cutting off Bill Me Later due to eBay having purchased Bill Me Later.) Google Checkout was at 11 percent, one point more than it was last year. It lost three retailers—Sharper Image, CompUSA and MTV—and gained the support of Dick’s Sporting Goods, Sports Authority, Zale’s and RadioShack.


advertisement

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Quickly catch-up on the latest in E-Commerce and Retail Tech with our free weekly newsletter, with urgent bulletins as news merits.
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Kill All The Passwords

This article does mention, but does not give enough attention to, the fact that the attacks discussed are only feasible when the encrypted password file can be copied and subjected to an offline attack. The trick is to have authentication performed on a separate, much more strongly secured host - such as an Active Directory Domain Controller, or a Kerberos server, or a NIS+ server, or even using something as banal as an LDAP-over-SSL authentication dialog. In these environments, the odds of the "password file" being stolen and subjected to an offline attack go to near zero, and only online attacks may be carried out by the attacker. With sensible exponential backoff between failed password attempts, lockout after a modest number of failed attempts on a single account, and pattern detection, that minimum 7 character password is quite secure enough. Passwords aren't dead yet for security purposes, and they will be with us for a very long while to come for practical purposes. The trick is to employ them correctly. Read more...
The possibilities you describe are years away from being implemented at best, so for the moment passwords are an ugly reality. Luckily, password managers can easily manage hundreds of passwords of any length. The only thing a user needs to remember is the master password. It seems like an easier task to educate users on how to use password managers rather than implement complex security technology on a global basis. Read more...