JEFFJAGUAR

Has anybody figured out or made an educated guess why the US banks stuck their big toe in the water namely offered the card with emv chip, pulled it right out and didn't go all the way to chip and pin? While it makes no sense, and it really doesn't, that the US banks still reside in the 20th century on this, it makes less sense that if they were going to produce a hybrid card, for the best of both worlds, they didn't embrace the best of all worlds. I just don't get it.

kebosabi

It's better than nothing I suppose. At least Chip-and-Signature is better than no chip at all, even though it won't serve the unattended kiosk feature.

Maybe card companies in the US don't realize how big the unattended kiosks transactions are over in Europe or elsewhere. When they hear "automated ticket machines for train tickets," they probably assume it's like $1.50 or so for the subway which may not be worth the hassle, when they're really losing about EUR 80 and upwards for high speed rail tickets from Paris to Amsterdam.

Put it another way, there's also renting cars and driving in Canada. We're not the only ones feeling the pain at the pump from high gas prices. Apparently, no Americans rent cars, drive and fill up gas in Canada. If they feel going full Chip-and-PIN isn't worth the cost for CAD 60+ in transaction charges for Canadian gas pump fill ups, well that's their loss.

For all the reluctance to move to Chip-and-Signature, there's always the no annual fee full Chip-and-PIN Andrews FCU Globetrek Rewards card as the perfect backup for unattended kiosk purposes.

mia

The banks have been guided by VISA and MasterCard. Here is VISA's explanation:

http://blog.visa.com/2012/01/13/as-u...ides-guidance/

The rest of the article traces the historical reason that PIN was implemented and why VISA sees both PIN and Signature as fading verification methods.

This may well be true for the domestic market, but it leaves USA based travelers inconvenienced when traveling to countries which have adopted PIN authentication, regardless of the reason it was adopted.

jspira

I found out that it's not hard to figure out - once you ask the right people the right questions.

I'm working on an article for Frequent Business Traveler magazine about EMV and travel and I've spoken to numerous senior managers at banks and Visa about this.

The answer is that Chip and PIN would take a lot longer to roll out and would cost much more and Chip and Signature can more or less run over existing infrastructure with new card readers (and most card readers manufactured today support EMV anyway I learnt).

My article will be out in March - still working on it.

dw

For those of you who currently have the Chase Visa but have not received an e-mail notifying you that you will be getting a replacement card with EMV, you can submit a request to Chase through Secure Message.

I have not received the e-mail from Chase that others have gotten (not sure what the criteria is, but I don't use this card for everyday spend, so that may be one factor), but I sent Chase a Secure Message this morning. They replied in less than 30 minutes, telling me that they have requested a replacement card with EMV for me and that it was being sent to me express mail, and I should receive it within 2 business days.

I have to give Chase's customer service a huge ^ for this. Those of you who have followed this thread have probably read at how difficult it has been for some cardmembers to get EMV cards from Citi, even when they are clearly being offered on their card products.

kebosabi

Definitely. While I'd preferred if they went with Chip-and-PIN, Chase is doing it right with making chip cards easier to obtain and easier to identify.

Chase's webpage showing the images of all their cards are clear and simple to see which of their cards have the chip option:

https://creditcards.chase.com/Catego...C=LSBROWSEOPEN

They even updated their Hyatt VISA to now show the image of the card with a chip on it. I wish Citi could do this too so it'll be easier to know which of their card offerings have chip capability.


Although I have to say Chase choosing the Hyatt card as their 4th lineup is quite surprising. I'd thought it would be the UA/CO frequent flyer credit cards before moving onto hotel cards.

cbn42

I'm sure Hyatt paid for the conversion, not Chase.

UA/CO is probably too tied up with the merger to bother changing anything right now.

Michilander

In your research have you had a chance to ask why it must be one or the other? Would it be possible to program a chip to use either a PIN or a signature, depending on the PoS equipment?

mia

What is the basis for this certainty?

kebosabi

While already noted by existing Hyatt cardholders who received the e-mail, the official press release of the Chase/Hyatt Chip-and-Signature card is on Business Wire this morning:

Chase and Hyatt Unveil First U.S. Co-Branded Hotel Card with EMV Chip Technology


Hyatt probably had a role in this considering from the same article above, quotes a Hyatt spokesman:

It'll be interesting to see how the other Chase co-branded hotel brands react to this, namely rivals such as Marriott/The Ritz Carlton and IHG Priority Club, all of which are hotels which has high international presence.

sdsearch

Well, Priority Club (I'm less familiar with Marriott's overseas hotels) has a lot of hotels overseas (for example HIs and HIXs in both the UK and Spain and Hungary) which are in locations that are only practical for people who are driving (ie, in the suburbs far away from useful public transport). If I were someone at IHG knowledgeable about the difference between chip & PIN vs chip & signature at European petrol stations, I might be saying to Chase "please wait until you can do chip & PIN before you bother us about this again"!

Hyatt has much fewer properties total, and AFAIK they tend to be in city centers overseas, and thus I presume much more often used by people who aren't driving (and thus Hyatt users are less likely to mind having only chip & signature compared to IHG users IMHO).

I use IHG (and recently also Marriott) rather than Hyatt (among the Chase hotel programs) exactly because I tend like to roam around the countryside (whether by car or by train) on many of my overseas trips, and IHG helps me with that while Hyatt would hardly ever. And, no-coincidentally, I'm interested in chip & PIN much more than chip & signature because I do drive overseas and in the countryside (not just in big city suburbs).

(Now, personally, I'm not stranded any more since I have a Diners Club chip & PIN in my wallet already. But I'd like my Priority Club or Marriott cards to support chip & PIN someday because of their 0% forex.)

mia

Marketing puffery which tell us nothing about the decision making process.

Chase is in the credit card business, airlines and hotels are not. I think these details are decided by Chase in nominal "consultation" with their co-brand partners, and are based on the spending patterns associated with specific cards -and- on the number of card accounts. It makes sense that Chase would start with their only international airline partner because very few Americans would apply for a British Airways card unless they intended to visit Britain*. It makes sense to start with Hyatt or Ritz Carlton rather than Marriott or Priority Club because the number of card accounts will be much smaller on these higher end brands which have not been available for long. The installed based of UA/CO cards is huge, and I would want to roll out EMV as part of the UA/CO consolidation when many cards will be reissued for other reasons.

(* Yes, I know that BA points can be redeemed for domestic travel, but that's not the original reason most people would have applied.)

jmr50

I traveled in November with a US-based Chip and Sign card. Someone else in my group had a Canadian Chip and Pin card. We both ran into problems using our cards in the UK and France. His card was rejected at every train station we tried it at, and some (but not all) of the gas station unattended terminals. There was at least one place mine worked but his didn't (UK unattended parking lot), and two places his worked but mine didn't (both Agip gas stations in France).

All I can say is, it's nice to have the EMV chip, but I'm not sure that either PIN or signature represents an end to issues.

cbn42

Originally Posted by cbn42
I'm sure Hyatt paid for the conversion, not Chase.

I'm not really certain (hence the word "probably", maybe "I'm sure" is too strong) but that is my understanding of how affinity relationships work. The card is branded as a Hyatt card, and just happens to be issued by Chase. I think of it as a private label product where Hyatt is outsourcing the issuance of cards to a bank. But then again, I really don't know, and I doubt either company would make their contract public.

jamar

Yep- after seeing my sister's Canadian Chip+PIN Visa fail over and over again in Japan I'm starting to subscribe to the theory that there are indeed other factors.

(Never figured out the issue either; one shop employee's call to Visa led to an answer of "the issuer blocked it, take it up with them" while the issuer insisted that they did not block the card in any way.)