Quantcast StorefrontBacktalk » Blog Archive » Dairy Queen’s Mobile Coupon Experiment: “Look, Ma. No Phone!”
advertisement
advertisement

Dairy Queen’s Mobile Coupon Experiment: “Look, Ma. No Phone!”

Written by Evan Schuman
June 4th, 2009
Like this story? Share it
To share this story with people in your social network, please click on the network icons below.

For the last two weeks, consumers walking into the Dairy Queen in Rochester, Indiana, have been offered something beyond ice cream and hamburgers: A pile of identical tiny RFID tags, each with peel-off adhesive strips, sitting right next to the waffle cones.

But when those consumers return to that Dairy Queen with those tags stuck to their wallets, their watchbands or the back of their cellphones, identical those tags shall be no more. Given the differing purchase histories of each customer, the tags will deliver sharply different discounts and offers. In effect, the tags will serve as digital coupons as well as makeshift CRM/loyalty programs.

The 69-year-old $2.6 billion dessert merchant has about 5,700 locations in Canada and 49 states in the U.S. (their store in Vermont shut down), billing itself as the “treat industry leader,” beating out rivals Baskin-Robbins, Cold Stone Creamery and Maggie Moos, said Dean Peters, PR director for chain owner American Dairy Queen Corporation, which itself is owned by Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway.

(Related Story: Burger King, Victoria’s Secret, Unilever, ShopRite Go Mobile Coupon)
The RFID tag trial, which is expected to last through the end of the year, is certainly not the chain’s first CRM program nor its first attempt at digital coupons. That would be the chain’s E-mail-based 2.2-million-member “fan club,” which also distributes discount coupons.

But the chain is seeing the same drawbacks with coupons—digital as well as dead-tree versions—that all chains are seeing: Customers see the coupons when they’re opening their snailmail or on their computer. And yet, when those consumers are in a position to use those coupons—such as when they drive past a Dairy Queen on their way home—they invariably don’t have the coupons with them.

The RFID tag trial “is much more spontaneous,” said Jamie Guse, the chain’s Web site manager. The consumer attaches the tiny tag to something they always have with them—a cellphone is suggested but hardly required—and can use it when they happen to be near a Dairy Queen. For the duration of the trial, though, it’s only available at that single location in Rochester.

Here’s how the system is supposed to work. After the consumer picks up a tag, they need to activate it by texting the number on the tag (the letters DQ followed by about 5 digits). That text message goes to systems controlled by an Indianapolis RFID vendor called Tetherball, which associates that tag with that customer’s identification. Tetherball is working with Vivotech. As purchases are made, the CRM database expands and coupon recommendations get customized.

Short-duration offers are then messaged to that consumer. “It might be a dollar off a small sundae. The offers are only for one time, such as today between 2-4 o’clock,” Guse said.


advertisement

11 Comments | Read Dairy Queen’s Mobile Coupon Experiment: “Look, Ma. No Phone!”

  1. Mark F Says:

    I do not beleive the IT people beleive that a large portion of the buying public DO NOT TEXT. A smaller group do not use a cell phone. But most have a computer. The tag is a good idea, look at Speedway’s and Petco’s keytag system.

  2. Matthew Says:

    I would choose Dairy Queen hands down over Cold Stone.

  3. Bob LeMay Says:

    And what happens when 10 other retailers use the same system–RFID tags stuck all over my wallet, phone, watch, etc.? While I go to the grocery store and the gas station regularly enough to justify a tag on my key chain (since I am offered discounts and specials to do so), I don’t visit Dairy Queen (or dozens of other retailers) often enough to warrant carrying another RFID tag with me.

    One of the payment processors needs to get smart and develop a tag that their systems recognize, that can be affixed to a credit/debit card, to allow multiple retailers to “piggy-back” on one RFID chip.

  4. alejandro padron Says:

    The sucess for this resides in an agregator providing services to all, allowing the customer to benefit in most of loyalty / cupons programs, using a single loyalty card (preferable one associated with a major credit card,

  5. Evan Schuman Says:

    Editor’s Note: This is a note we posted on a reference to this story on RetailWire:
    The Dairy Queen project is interesting because it has chosen to sidestep the phone itself and is really using it as a makeshift CRM program.

    But the bigger issue is whether this will change consumer behavior. When we talked with the same Dairy Queen people, the key concern was whether or not the ever-present nature of the tag stuck to a phone or wallet (or anywhere else) would make it more likely consumers will use the coupons?

    Also, how effective will Dairy Queen be at using the information to customize offers? If they start factoring in flavor preferences, who attends with kids (and their rough ages) and the hours of typical attendance, this could be hugely powerful. Will the system point out that Tuesday evening visits at 7 PM are “drive home from work pick-me-up” visits as opposed to Saturday afternoon “outing with kids” visits and issue different kinds of coupons? Or will it merely look at the items purchased?

    DQ is taking a bit of a chance by going it alone. The idea of handing out RFID tags to stick on the back of a phone will work initially, but what if this program is a success? What happens when every retailer in the region starts doing it? How many stickers are people expected to carry? If it works, it’s going to have be standardized, with the device coming from a processor or even a cardbrand and it would hold data for a hundred (sometimes competing) retailers. What then?

  6. Steve rgFriedbe Says:

    Evan, you nailed the future with your last note. Think back 50 years to all the store credit cards that were available. You could easily fill your wallet with every card to every store. American Express and Diner’s Club had a great idea…develop a chain of stores that would honor the same card. BankAmericard and MasterCharge followed suit.

    And so it will be with the RFID tag. It won’t happen overnight, but one or two companies will come along and aggregate multiple vendors on one tag.

    So, they’ll collect the data and understand you and your buying habits far more than you understand them yourself. Add to that, as you’ve previously mentioned, that the tag can be linked with other information about what TV shows you’re watching, and which TV ads you’ve seen…and marketers will be able to market to you on a true one-to-one basis. The DQ ad hoc coupons are just the start.

  7. Evan Schuman Says:

    Steve, I wonder if the cardbrands themselves will, yet again, play that consolidation role with chips and coupons/giftcards/loyalty cards? It would close the circle nicely and get them back into the value-add role they used to play.
    If not, it’s not hard to imagine a future where Visa and the other brands may have a very limited raison d’etre.

  8. Todd Ablowitz Says:

    A point in this story that is very interesting is the suggestion that the card brands are performing deja vu by aggregating many closed loop systems into a high value, two-sided open loop system. I expect that in this case, while that may certainly happen, in this case it will be technology that will drive the consolidation.

    As this concept catches on and a consumer begins to have – as Bob says – 10 different retailer’s tags, the good news is they will very likely have a far more sophisticated option to manage them… the NFC-enabled mobile phone. Now the consumer can manage all their offerings – Payment, Coupon, Loyalty, Tickets, etc. all using the software interface on their phone. So, as a consumer, I can have the benefit of one tag (this time built into the phone), but limitless value – directly with a merchant OR through an open-loop consortium put together by one of the card brands or someone else.

    Even better, now a retailer has a way to interact with an intelligent device in the consumer’s had – remotely the way they can today, AND at the point of sale, which will be enabled with two-way contactless communication to the NFC mobile phone.

    Lastly, all those tags that are being issued today like the Tetherball tag or the Go-Tag will seamlessly be transferrable into the NFC phone through software, so as you transfer from your current phone with a sticker to your NFC enabled phone in the future.

  9. Evan Schuman Says:

    Appreciate your thoughts, Todd, but you skipped over the part where Dairy Queen–and they’re VERY far from alone on this point–opted to proceed as they did specifically to AVOID all of the issues dealing with carriers and phone manufacturers and all of the other players likely to be involved.
    The NFC approach you’re described would place retailers right in the middle of that mess, a position many would like to avoid.
    NFC has a definite role to play, but I’d argue that the digital coupon arena is perhaps best handled by an alternative approach.
    P.S. The story didn’t say that the card brands were aggregating these systems, but merely wondering if they would and suggesting that perhaps they should.

  10. Todd Ablowitz Says:

    Touche, Evan.

    I unintentionally mis-stated your comment about card-brand aggregation, but my point was that it would be extremely interesting.

    On the NFC point, I think there is still time to see how the NFC ecosystem will evolve. I don’t dispute that there are valid business and operational concerns for retailers whenever any emerging technology is introduced, but there is still plenty of opportunity for the NFC pie to be baked properly from the retailer perspective.

    The retailers I speak with are tremendously interested in the capabilities – provided their business issues are covered. I believe the real reason that everyone is doing stickers is just simply that there are still not substantial phones available. Just watch – as the phones come out, they will come.

  11. Todd Michaud Says:

    A little late to this conversation, but what I think is funny is the concept of multiple tags and hence the need to aggregate multiple tags. A unique identifier is all that is really needed, regardless of payment type, loyalty program, coupon, etc. A merchant needs to identify the customer and determine which “account” to process the transaction against. The rest should be done “in the cloud”, not on a sticker, phone or POS. The electronic wallet that everyone is excited about for NFC phones in my mind should be done above-store on the network somewhere. If I am an Acquirer, this is where I focus my energies today.

    The reason that we are in this place of talking about multiple stickers, etc. is because the merchants don’t want to share their data with others? Can’t this also be done in the cloud?

    My two cents: If this transformation is going to happen, I think everyone needs to stop thinking about “converting plastic” and start thinking about processing transactions.

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

What’s The Rush For New PCI Call Center Requirements?

And I have not heard anyone mention the impact on companies who provide quality improvement services. Many merchants hire quality improvement companies to review their audio recordings to provide guidance on how to improve their sales staff’s effectiveness in customer service and sales retention. PCI Council needs to rethink this requirement until there is a widely available commercially viable solution. Read more...
Another ridiculous decision where regulators don't think critically enough about the unintended consequences of their decision. This will be a huge problem for the credit and collections industry. We have to keep all recorded calls for other reasons not related to cc information. We can't purge all of our calls and we don't have the technology to not record part of the conversation. Even if we did, I am not sure we could afford it. Read more...
This "clarification" is causing a lot of panic with large FS clients who now appear to be non-compliant after spending 7 figure sums on their compliance programs. The only alternative to call recording would now appear to be some sort of IVR/push button type interrupt to take card data away from the contact centre. The council is a position to force that sort of process and technology change and this may backfire on them and the vendors that lobbied hard for this clarification. Read more...
PCI council has made a one-sided decision; They should have done a much more in-depth research that could have provided more insight on what regards to the implications of such decision. Read more...

Will Old OS Cause PCI Violation? No, But Marketing Still Says So

This is an interesting issue, because there's more to it than what's apparent on the surface. PA-DSS requires supported and patched operating systems and other software components (e.g., databases, libraries, Java, etc.) per PA-DSS 7.1.b and 8.1, and the option for compensating controls simply isn't there. Merchants can make use of compensating controls for most PCI DSS requirements, but only when legitimate constraints exist and only in ways that meet the intent and rigor of the requirement and go above and beyond the other PCI DSS requirements. Read more...
Why would one automatically upgrade to a "new" OS -- some of the older versions of certain OS-es are more stable and more robust than the crap being peddled today. This is yet another clear example of PCI SSC being out of touch with reality. Rather than requiring a "current" OS, the requirement should be to demonstrate the OS in use is stable and robust, and is adequately hardened against threats. Read more...
There are compensating controls that encrypt the swipe at the driver level as it enter the PC, there are hardware encrypting card swipes so the cardholder data is already encrypted before it comes to the PC -- either of these, especially the second, would remove the OS entirely from a cardholder data risk profile. Read more...
In my opinion, the only thing the vendor did wrong was they didn’t know of that FAQ entry. Even if they did, it changes nothing about the need for merchants to update software that no longer receives updates. Read more...

MasterCard Blinks, Drops Dec. 31 Level 2 PCI Deadline

Reciprocity between MasterCard and Visa was always been a factor in Acquirer merchant level assignments. The brief removal of reciprocity generated a great deal of interest in being able to be classified at a lower level in MasterCard's world. Nevertheless the return of the reciprocity language in the December changes did not effectively create any new Level 2 merchants, but it DID dash the hopes of a lot of them.... :-( Read more...
Let's given them credit??? For being idiotic in the first place? Not on your life! Everyone has just had to scramble and include the costs of the previously announced M/C requirement in their 2010 budgets, and start negotiating with the QSAs for the additional services. All for naught! Read more...
"A bunch of Level 3 and Level 4 merchants just became Level 2s". Is this an accurate statement? MasterCard & Visa have historically included the caveat "or is a Level X in another brand" in their level setting criteria. MasterCard appeared to back way from this in the June pronouncement, and have simply returned to the status quo. Have Acquirers have been tracking and reporting merchants at separate levels by brand? Read more...
I stick by my comment (quoted in the column) about a bunch of L3 and L4 merchants becoming L2s and requiring an onsite. To me, what made MasterCard's original requirement for an onsite assessment for L2s palatable was that they took away their reciprocity provision. That is, they seemed to focus on larger merchants with over a million MasterCard trans/year. With reciprocity in place, a lot of smaller merchants are pulled into the onsite requirement. Rather than causing confusion, I think reciprocity will lead to additional work for processors and acquirers. Read more...

Retailers Sue POS Vendor, Questions Raised Where PCI Duties Stop

I would add a couple more questions: "did the breach involve the use of the default passwords?" (The story doesn't say.) And "were the default passwords used by Computer World to remotely administer the store systems?" "where is the PCI auditor in all this?" Did the restaurant group think they didn't need an audit because Radiant was (mis)representing Aloha as PCI compliant? How is a retailer or even a PCI auditor to know otherwise? A PCI auditor is not necessarily a qualified computer forensic investigator capable of finding the card data on the hard drives. They can only base a decision on information given to them by others. Read more...
There are so many holes in the process it will be difficult to pin blame on just one constituent. It is ridiculous that the technology exists to better secure these transactions (PIN, EMV, etc) yet banks won't use them. Only the banks or government can force this change, and retailers will suffer until then. Read more...
A major issue in this case will be if the restaurants had any support agreements in place with Computer World and if so what those agreements say. In my experience many single unit/small operators choose to skip the support agreements in favor of a "pay as you go" arrangement. In this scenario I can't imagine how the POS VAR can be held responsible for a system they don't own nor exclusively manage. Read more...
There is a big difference in having the POS installation guide say "make sure you set this password because the security of your CHD depends on this" vs. a POS application not storing the CHD in the first place. Traditionally only the merchant was liable for breaches and PCI related fees (fines). Maybe dragging some of the vendors into the liability mud fight will open the eyes of some of these vendors. Read more...

Should Credit Card Transactions Be Free? There May Be A Way

Here in the Netherlands, where the population is notoriously penny-pinching, credit card acceptance is amazingly low. It's both a result of the consumer not wanting to pay interest on everyday purchases as well as merchants not giving up a slice of the action. It is both legal and common to pass the processing fee onto the customer as a surcharge. Now things are moving to leave the credit cards behind: mobile phone payments are becoming more and more common here, and the transaction fees are minimal. Parking and entertainment (movie/concert tickets, nightclubs) have been amongst the first, and it's rapidly gaining momentum because the market has been hungry for the convenience at a price it is willing to pay. Read more...
"Free" is an illusion. Don't charge one person but charge double to someone else. I am very skeptical on anyone who says that advertising will create valid cashflow. Just look at the advertising struggles in a TiVo world. And if you sell your customers data, just be warned that the one group that might have issue with that are you customers (which to me is very important to cashflow. Read more...
Another factor not mentioned here is the impending costs that the processors and issuers are going to incur when someone decides on an end-to-end encryption method, and it then becomes government mandated. I can guarantee that this is a when question and not an if question. The back-end networks are pretty antiquated right now, and it's going to cost billions to replace everything. The cost of tech may be going down, but the cost of replacing millions of servers and hardware, and creating new, proprietary, software is still really expensive. Read more...
Accepting credit cards are not "risk-free" for merchants, contrary to Jim's comments above. Chargebacks are an expense - both in terms of actual transaction reversals and costs associated with managing the process. Chargeback rules and expenses can be everything from a thorny issue to an onerous expense for some merchants, especially for convenience stores that allow customers to pay for gasoline at the pump, or other retailers that allow in-store self-checkout options. Read more...
I've wondered for years why the price of transactions has been so high. Phone companies long ago started offering unlimited calling for flat rates because they understood that in many cases it cost more to report on the transactions (calls) than it did to fulfill them. Read more...
If a home-owner defaults on the mortgage, who is taking the risk? The bank making the loan to the consumer or the person selling the house? It is obviously the bank that takes this risk and is rewarded for that risk through interest rate charges. In my mind, we have mixed together two distinct and unrelated transactions. Read more...
The one big factor not mentioned in this article is who will take over the risk ? Taking credit cards is risk free to merchants and the issuing Banks take the risk if a customer defaults on the payments ! If you had a "interchange free" payment system will the merchants assume the risk ? Also, if there isn't enough profit for the issuing banks they will stop issuing credit cards which will in turn kill our economy. Read more...

The Dangerous Out-Of-Scope PCI Charade

If tokens are ever deemed in-scope, then where does the line stop? I ask this because it would mean that all timestamps, sequential number, random numbers or any other piece of information that may or may not be used to generate a token is within scope -- all data a POS uses and stores, not just payment data. Read more...
Having the ability to do both Tokenization and End to End Encryption (not mere point to point) can have tremendous scope and risk reduction benefits and agility to adapt to change in this fast moving compliance landscape. Being able to have both on tap from a single platform is a solid approach to avoiding the pitfalls. Read more...
But the consumer walks into a particular retail chain, gives their payment card to someone wearing that chain's uniform and the card is swiped. If, six months later, there's a breach and that card was misused, it's the retailer who will in the spotlight. They're the deep pocket and, therefore, the target. If the consumer is angry and wants to cut off business, it will hit the retailer. Therefore, if the retailer is going to end up being blamed no matter what, they have to stay involved. Read more...
True, that someone may be storing a token-to-PAN cross reference. But that would be the bank, not the retailer. If the bank is not sure they can keep their data secure, then there are bigger problems to be addressed than bringing tokens into scope. Read more...
Good general point, Steve, but for the record, not all tokenization is done the same way. Many tokens are associated with lookup lists that allow for them to re-matched to the card data if it's needed, such as for a chargeback. A token doesn't have to be decryptable (is that a word?) for there to be a way to access the original data. Read more...
The out-of-scope argument is very valid but in reference to tokens, the premise of temporarily out-of-scope or abruptly deemed in-scope is flawed. Conway was quoted “anything that could be made unreadable can, in various ways, be made readable again,” this statement is true when talking about encryption technologies (all encryption technologies) but not so with true tokens. True tokens are in no way related to the original data other than as a reference key. Read more...