Uddannelsens navn: Cand.merc EMF & Cand.merc FSM Kandidatafhandling Vejleder: Lars Ive Dato for aflevering af opgaven: 03/12-2015 antal anslag/sider: 270.659/117

Martin Stenderup og Hans Mathiesen

The future of mobile payments in Denmark Can Swipp consolidate a strong position in the industry?

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Table of content Chapter 1. Executive summary ...... 5 Introduction and motivation ...... 7 Chapter 2. Problem statement ...... 9 Chapter 3. Overview of mobile payments ...... 10 3a. Overview of current mobile payment solutions ...... 13 3b. Payments in the Danish market ...... 14 3c. History of mobile banking in Denmark ...... 16 Chapter 4. Swipp ...... 16 4a. The solution Swipp ...... 17 Chapter 5. Commerce and retailers ...... 18 Chapter 6. Delimitation ...... 19 Chapter 7. Structure ...... 20 7a. Current industry situation ...... 23 7b. Life cycle of mobile payments solutions ...... 23 7c. Consumer preferences in a theoretical perspective ...... 23 Chapter 8. Method ...... 23 8a. Methodology ...... 24 i. The hermeneutic theory framework ...... 24 8b. The social constructive theory framework ...... 24 8c. Empirical research...... 26 i. Primary empirical data ...... 26 1. Interviews ...... 26 2. Focus groups ...... 27 3. Quantitative questionnaire ...... 28 ii. Secondary empirical data ...... 29 8d. Swipp as a case ...... 29 8e. Reliability and validity ...... 30 Chapter 9. Theory ...... 30 9a. Porter five Forces ...... 30 i. Threat of entrants ...... 31 ii. Supplier power ...... 32

Page 1 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

iii. Buyer power ...... 32 iv. Threat of substitutes ...... 32 v. Rivalry between established competitors ...... 33 9b. Industry Life Cycle ...... 33 9c. Generic strategies ...... 33 i. Cost leadership ...... 35 ii. Differentiation ...... 36 Chapter 10. Criticism of the theory ...... 36 10a. Five Forces Framework ...... 36 10b. Generic Strategies ...... 37 10c. Industry Life Cycle ...... 38 Chapter 11. Literature review ...... 38 11a. Consumers’ perspective in the mobile payment market ...... 38 11b. A consumer perspective on Swipp ...... 41 11c. Consumer behavior ...... 42 Chapter 12. Hypothesis ...... 42 12a. Porter’s five forces ...... 42 i. Threats of substitutes ...... 43 ii. Threat of entry ...... 43 iii. Industry rivalry ...... 43 iv. Bargaining powers of buyers ...... 44 v. Bargaining power of suppliers ...... 44 12b. Quantitative analysis ...... 45 i. Fear of mobile payment ...... 45 ii. Future use of mobile payment ...... 45 iii. The usages of mobile payment ...... 45 Chapter 13. Analysis ...... 46 13a. Industry Life Cycle ...... 46 13b. Industry analysis ...... 47 i. Porters five forces ...... 47 13c. Qualitative analysis ...... 72 1. Qualitative – Themes ...... 72 2. Adopting mobile payment system ...... 73

Page 2 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

3. Perceived risk ...... 73 4. Personal data ...... 73 5. Future expectations ...... 73 6. Switching from MobilePay to Swipp ...... 73 ii. Result of the qualitative analysis ...... 74 1. Focus group interview ...... 74 iii. Results of focus groups ...... 75 1. Adopting mobile payment system ...... 75 2. Perceived risk ...... 76 3. Personal data ...... 78 4. Future expectations ...... 79 5. Switching from MobilePay to Swipp ...... 81 13d. Quantitative analysis ...... 85 1. Data collection ...... 85 2. Preparation of data...... 85 3. Data validation ...... 86 ii. Frequency analysis ...... 87 iii. Cross tabulations ...... 88 iv. Factor analysis ...... 89 1. Methodology ...... 90 2. Conditions ...... 90 v. Generating factors ...... 91 vi. Reliabilities analysis ...... 93 1. Methodology ...... 93 vii. Regression analysis ...... 95 1. Conditions ...... 95 2. Methodology ...... 95 13e. Cluster analysis ...... 97 1. Assumptions ...... 97 2. Methodology ...... 98 3. Cluster ...... 99 ii. Selected factors for cluster construction ...... 99 1. Profiling ...... 100

Page 3 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

2. Clusters ...... 101 13f. Generic strategies: ...... 105 i. Cost leadership ...... 105 ii. Differentiation ...... 107 1. Exploring industries without collaborations ...... 109 Chapter 14. Recommendations ...... 109 Chapter 15. Conclusion...... 111 Chapter 16. Discussion ...... 114 i. Apple, Google, Samsung… and NETS ...... 115 ii. Second-mover disadvantage ...... 116 iii. Legal aspect...... 116 iv. The government’s role in mobile payment industry ...... 116 v. Technology ...... 117 Chapter 17. Bibliography ...... 118 17a. Appendix ...... 128 Appendix 1 – History of NETS holding A/S ...... 128 Appendix 2 – Swipp Mobile app guide ...... 130 Appendix 3 – Interview 1 John G Pedersen ...... 131 Appendix 4 – Interview 2 Troels Asmussen...... 142 Appendix 5 – Interview 3 Kim Vinding Larsen ...... 155 Appendix 6 – Detailed introductions of the experts ...... 175 Appendix 7 – Interview guide ...... 176 Appendix 8 – Interview guide focus group ...... 179 Appendix 9 – Products and prices of MobilePay ...... 181 Appendix 10 – Products and prices of Swipp ...... 181 Appendix 11 – Price examples ...... 182 Appendix 12 – Spss Data...... 186 Appendix 13 – interview 4 Focus group I ...... 233 Appendix 14 – Interview 5 Focus group II ...... 247 Appendix 15 – Questionnaire ...... 257 Appendix 16 – Lo Plus newsletter ...... 259 Appendix 17 – Focus group profiles ...... 260

Page 4 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Chapter 1. Executive summary The aim of the thesis was to investigate and understand the drivers of a fast evolving industry with an important focus on consumer behavior and attitudes towards mobile payments.

In 2013, Danske Bank launched MobilePay, which instantly became a major success. Unlike MobilePay, Swipp as a second mover has struggled to gain the same levels of success in the mobile payment industry. Even though Swipp share many similarities with MobilePay, the products is still to experience a significant amount of success.

Our research is theoretically based on the industry life cycle to provide a snapshot of the industry’s level of maturity, Porters Five Forces analysis to investigate significant factors within the mobile payment industry, and generic strategies analysis with the intent to provide a competitor with factual and explicit recommendations, in our case; Swipp.

Mobile payments belongs in a new industry with ties to the payment market. However, mobile payments involves many different industries, making the new industry very cross industrial. Enabled by the technology, mobile payments is argued to play, a so far, undefined part of future markets. Not necessarily limited to the retail industry where MobilePay has shown great interest but any industries characterized by a large amount of monetary transactions as the most important factor.

The new and rapid development of the industry was experienced to be a factor of public available academic research. The limited theory on the topic combined with our findings also indicates that mobile payments needs to include better buying experience, lower perceived risk and simplicity for consumers, if the new payment alternative should be acknowledge at the same level as other payment methods.

Three expert interviews provided the basics for two focus groups, which then led to a questionnaire distributed through Facebook, LinkedIn and the newsletter of LO Plus providing the thesis with a satisfying and comprehensive amount of primary data, only optimizing reliability of the thesis.

The intention of the analysis was to provide Swipp with strategy identifying the most important factors, when trying to be a competitive competitor in the market.

The most important findings were: 1) Develop a separate Swipp application, which is not located in the mobile bank application 2) Enablement of all potential consumers, by integrating credit and debit card into the application, 3) Provide an integration opportunity with loyalty programs and company

Page 5 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

specific discount schemes, 4) Providing tangible benefits, such as discounts, time savings or personalized offers in purchase situations through integration of loyalty programs, 5) Make sure to target a The First Mover segment, 6) Explore industries that has not been targeted yet, such as the clothing or the transportation industry, 7) Be a first mover in product development or be a more cost efficient follower, 8) Create a platform ensuring fast and rapid product feedback since consumer experience and satisfaction is essential in the mobile payment industry.

Page 6 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Introduction and motivation 2014 was the year when mobile payment applications seriously entered the Danish consumer market. Previous attempts like payments with short message service (SMS) never accomplished a broad scale of usage and therefore never had significant impact on consumer trends. Great visions and excitement regarding smartphones and their possibilities has existed for almost a decade now (Scmp.com; Phonearena.com). Going from euphoria only among hi-tech first-movers, to a broad interest and need, is a suitable description of the exponential development in the market. Dwarf A/S’s mobile shopping report (2011) estimated that 80 percent of population over the age 18 would own a smartphone within three years. Numbers from Danmarks Statistik (figure 1) confirms the estimate. The simultaneously exponential increase of mobile applications can therefore be seen as a complementary derivative.

Figure 1 – Development of electronic devices in homes

Source: (DST.dk; a)

One of the main consumer features of a smartphone is the opportunity of personalization and multiple functionality, and the former need for only call-text functions is greatly diminishing. The entry of smartphones has created a new set of needs, trends and norms. The development in internet availably

Page 7 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

and speed, have enabled the possibility of carrying a computer at all time. Hence, the former need of carrying a watch or map etc. is not any longer a necessity, and through the growth and evolving appreciation of the smartphone, everything is assembled and gathered in one place. Some would argue that smartphones has become a truism of the way to understand the world around them, an everyday discourse. The trend of consumers’ high and increasing dependence and usage of smartphones, and therefore also applications services, leads to an interest for replacing another former necessity, the wallet.

Mobile phone manufactures, telecom operators, payment service providers, software companies, and technology start-ups all are entering the payment industry (McKinsey, 2014). It is not only the well- known Internet giants, such as Google, Facebook, and Apple, and the early payment entrepreneurs such as Square and PayPal anymore. According to the McKinsey report (2014), more than 12.000 start-ups are moving into the payment services industry. This fact and the development and adaptation of technology in general, are reshaping the industry and as a result, banks have been trying to fight off competitors by using their existing position in the market along with existing IT infrastructure. Danske Bank, for example, responded to changes in the market by launching a mobile peer-to-peer payment app called “MobilePay.” After only eighteen months, the payment application was adopted by around 40% of the Danish population (Danskebank.dk; a), making any competitive product insignificant despite a serious effort from a collaboration between no less than 81 Danish banks, in the form of Swipp.

In the Danish payment industry, debit and credit cards already supports a standardized payment process and the challenge of making consumers change their payment method is to make mobile payments even more appealing. Services surrounding mobile payment experience is therefore argued to be an important topic of the thesis, as consumers’ payment behaviors directly relates to the smartphone. The three dimensional link of a purchase of consumers, merchants and product, must also create additional value for merchants, whom need incentives in order to adopt a potentially costly payment terminal to enable such payments. The last part of the spectrum of stakeholders are the providers of the products and services needed to enable contactless mobile payments. On a global scale, these stakeholders include banks, mobile network operators, mobile device manufacturers, it companies and numerous technical- and service providers. The complex and challenging nature of cross industrial collaborations, business models and rivalries are therefore seen as highly relevant factors to understand the emerging industry of mobile payments

Page 8 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The above mentioned could indicate that the mobile payment industry is going to play a dominant role in the shaping of all commerce where payments are involved in the years to come, and every person needs to address the future of payments at least in some degree. Due to this incredible interest and focus from the biggest IT hardware and software producers, banks, entrepreneurial businesses and service providers. In addition, the possible emerge of a reshaped industry with new and different ecosystem and players; we find it interesting to look at the current situation of the Danish market and intend to provide a set of recommendations to an active and present player.

Chapter 2. Problem statement Our belief that the mobile payment industry is going to play an important part of a consumers life has been the motivational factor and our experience of MobilePays dominant position provided us with interest and motivation regarding Swipp, which will form the basis of the following problem statement.

What future initiatives can Swipp apply to play a significant role of the Danish market for mobile payments?

 To what extend does the industry situation influence the future of Swipp?  What are the primary consumer preferences in the choice of mobile payment solutions and how can Swipp exploit this?

As the problem statement indicates, the purpose of the thesis is not only to include an industry analysis dimension but also to include a value dimension, described as a market perspective by (Ondrus et al., 2005), which relates to both customer benefits and needs respectively. Ondrus et al. (2005) argues that it is a failure to address the demand issues that undermine many payment service offerings. This dimension will calibrate customer value across a “consumer to merchant axis” (Ondrus et al., 2005) and includes the context of a purchase and a payment transaction. This covers the nature of the goods or service being purchased, where the payment is being made, and who is involved.

Page 9 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The thesis therefore takes the position that the customer demand (value) dimension, industry characteristics and variables involved in the nature of a purchase are absolute necessities when analyzing the possible and most attractive initiatives for Swipp.

Chapter 3. Overview of mobile payments The following chapter provides an understanding of mobile payments and the functionality applied.

The general understanding of mobile payments only involves the transfer of money, but mobile payments are much more (Interview 4, Interview 5). The confusion could originate from the fact that many companies want to have the mobile payments tag associated with them and the lack of consumer knowledge, but that is not the complete truth. There also tend to be confusion and overlap between what generally is referred to as mobile payments and mobile banking. This could be because financial transactions can be performed through the mobile phone (Mobey, 2011). Mobile banking can be defined as access to banking functionalities through the mobile phone, identical or at least similar to activities that are already being provided by banks on the internet. This is not to be confused with mobile payments, generally meaning that the mobile or smartphone is used to transfer funds in return for goods or services.

The landscape of mobile payments also referred to as m-commerce is complex and we will try to explain how we see it and how we interpreter the definition of mobile payments.

Page 10 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Figure 2 – Overview of Mobile Payments

Mobile Payments

Point of Sale (POS- systems with integrated Technology Linkage card terminals, or card (NFC, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi) terminals)

Buying Goods or Yes No Service Y e s

Electronic Commerce Mobile Commerce Mobile Banking

Card Payment (Visa, Carrier Billing (TDC, Bank Transfer Alternative Payments Virtual Currency Mastercard, Dankort, 3, Telia, Telenor, (Account-to-account) (Paypal, etc.) (Bitcoin, etc.) etc.) etc.)

Source: Own Creation

Page 11 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Card payments include debit cards and credit cards such as Visa card, Master card, American express etc. and an example of a solution based on this type of processing is MobilePay. This is also the most common solution seen in the market. Carrier billing means commerce paid through tele companies, e.g. SMS-tickets used in traffic or SMS-voting for X-factor. Bank transfers are best described as account-to-account transactions. Swipp is a solution based on that type of architecture. Alternative payments involve mostly companies who have specialized in handling e-commerce but also involve transfer of money. Virtual currency could be a currency used for gaming or token purchase. The most known digital money is bitcoin having the largest market cap of around $4,754,296,898 (Investopia.dk).

All the above-mentioned types of mobile commerce have in common, that in some process or way, they all get founding from a bank deposit account.

Mobile Point of Sale (PoS) normally refers to systems such as cash registers which in recent times comprises a computer, monitor, cash drawer, receipt printer, customer display and a barcode scanner but PoS is everywhere; flea markets, transportation, parking and even e-commerce where it is possible to use barcode payments. The commonalities of these areas are that every money transaction needs a link, if not paying in cash. And since no technology has arisen as a global standard, the market is over floated with multiple and different technologies, e.g. NFC1 in new cards and card terminals, RFID2 used in Danish transportation, MST3 which is basically a touchless magnetic enhancement of existing functionality or DSRC4 which is mostly known in “BroBizz” and are based on microwave technology.

The linkage between the mobile device and the PoS (recipient end) needs a communicative compatibility. NFC technology is the newest and most hyped technology at the moment, definitely due to the enormous focus and awareness created by the two largest smartphone producers in world, Apple and Samsung (Reuters.com, a). Other technologies is Bluetooth, RFID, RuBee and most widespread and commonly known; Wi-Fi5.

The red box in figure 2 regarding e-commerce will not be the focus of this thesis but needs to mentioned in the overview of possibilities of mobile payments. This is an addition to the mobile

1 Near field communication 2 Radio Frequency Identification 3 Magnetic Secure Transmission 4 Dedicated Short-Range Communication 5 Wi-Fi (or WiFi) is a local area wireless computer networking technology that allows electronic devices to network

Page 12 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

payments market that overlaps both the m-commerce and e-commerce market, which requires a broader perspective and deeper knowledge of e-business and its related consumer preferences. Furthermore, the existing solutions does not have a focus on how to handle online purchases. Swipp has not published or communicated anything that indicates the focus of that type of commerce. However, it would not be a big surprise if the future of mobile payments involve an e-commerce integration, especially if the existing technology and architecture enables a smooth and cost effective integration.

3a. Overview of current mobile payment solutions The confusion of what is considered as a mobile payment is also reflected on the various types of solutions in the market. Each of these mobile payment approaches takes a different approach and uses different enabling technologies mentioned above and shown in table 1.

Table 1 – Overview of current mobile payment solutions

Technology used Purchase relationship Charged to Examples Contactless payments NFC C2B Credit card Swipp QR Codes P2P Debit card MobilePay Bluetooth (B2B) Bank account Apple Pay Hybrid payment devices (out of scope)

Proximity ̶Mobile devices C2B Credit card Square becomes a card reader C2B/B2B Debit card Verifone PayWare via hardware extensions P2P GoPayment Message or browser payments SMS C2B Credit card M-Pesa USSD P2P Debit card Swipp Web (B2B) Bank account MobilePay Pre-paid account (PayPal)

Remote Application based payments (out of scope) Mobile money transfers P2P Bank account PayPal Virtual currencies C2B Pre-paid virtual account Starbucks Facebook credit

Source: (BBVA, 2012)

Page 13 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

3b. Payments in the Danish market Most Western countries including Denmark are dependent on a payment ecosystem. In general, economic agents carry out transactions of money. Besides the payers and payees, the major ecosystem stakeholders in Denmark are the two leading banks Dansk Bank and Nordea, the largest clearinghouse for card payments NETS (Appendix 1 – History of NETS holding A/S), the bankers association Finansrådet, and the central bank of Denmark. A normal chain of activities involve the banks issuing payment cards on behalf and with acceptance of a card company (licensing), setting up accounts, settling payments, and provide technical interfaces to the payment system. NETS, formerly owned by the banks and the central bank, manage the national debit card Dankort, the payment card clearinghouse for the Dankort and most of the card terminals.

The link between bank accounts and M-Point of Sale is not only important for mobile payments, at present time, it is crucial. According to the report from Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen (2014) NETS accounts for approximately 95 percent of the payment intermediation market in Denmark which is also described as monopolistic and worrying according to the Law of Competition § 11 and this is derived from widespread use of Dankort (Dankort and Visa/Dankort). NETS are exclusively to redeem payments by the Dankort, but merchants that accept international cards have the opportunity to choose between different redeemers. This includes in addition to the NETS' subsidiary Teller, Swedbank, Handelsbanken and Valitor. The monopolistic situation is only supported by the lack of widespread availability for international payment cards. It only accounts for less than 44 percent availability (Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014, p. 21). Furthermore a significant increase is seen in the use of the Dankort (Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014, p. 23). This means that the majority of companies who wants to provide a payment service in the Danish market without restricting to only cash payments will have to come to terms with NETS. Aligned with the facts stated above NETS is not surprisingly part of a relatively duopolistic market for terminals for payments. Verifone Denmark A/S is the other part. PayEx can be mentioned but financial key figures such as revenue is non comparable to Verifone Denmark, DKK 168 million (Verifone Danmark A/S, p. 6) and NETS, DKK 3,406 million (NETS, 2014, p. 18). The thesis sees the transaction relationship with a front-end provider (the customer, how to pay) and a back end receiver (the business, how to receive) as an absolute necessity of all purchases. As described above and shown in figure 3, this transaction relationship is a bit more complex due to the electronically handling process. Nevertheless, at the same time it provides an overview of the potential stakeholders of many different industries, precisely because of the nature of a purchase.

Page 14 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Figure 3 – Landscape of card payments

(Source: Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen – Punkt 2 NETS’ adfærd 2014)

The majority of retail payments in Denmark are cleared and settled via two automated interbank systems – the Sumclearing and the Intradayclearing systems. The final cash settlement takes places via the participants’ settlement accounts at the central bank of Denmark. The Danish bankers association Finansrådet owns both clearing systems, with NETS as the operator and the central bank as the settlement bank. As such, the Danish Bankers Association makes all strategic decisions regarding the clearing systems, as well as manages and maintains the scheme frameworks, admits new members and handles situations in which scheme participants neglect scheme obligations.

Today, mobile payments is a fraction of the traditional spectrum of available payment methods but never the less, it is a market large conglomerates are highly dedicated to. Corporations like Samsung, Google, Apple, Visa and MasterCard, just to name a few. Looking at the Danish market, most consumers only know the product Mobile Pay provided by Danske Bank and the product Swipp provided by a collaboration of 81 banks with Nordea as the main driver (Interview 2, p.1-2).

Page 15 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Moreover, by mentioning the two largest banks, we need to lightly address the mobile banking area to get a better understanding of the current market situation for m-commerce.

3c. History of mobile banking in Denmark Danske Bank launched their mobile bank application in September 2010 and only Lån & Spar Bank had a similar product on the market (Dilling and Svarrer, 2010). Among the large banks, Nordea offered the same type of product five month later but Danske Bank had already set the standards of mobile banking and as the interface in Nordea’s bank application lacked functions, Nordea received a lot of critique for their application (Børsen, 2011). It simply did not live up to the customers’ expectations due to the technical, practical and visual design (Pedersen, 2012). The launch was followed by a massive awareness campaign. Danske Bank’s mobile bank quickly became a huge success and already within the first week 30,000 customers had downloaded the application and the year ended with multiple awards wins (Dilling and Svarrer, 2010). The value gained on being first- mover did however perish in 2013 due to other strategic consumer activities such as differences in fees based on accumulated balance. That led to a negative media storm and loss of approximately 95.000 customers (Politiken, 2013).

Danske Banks new m-commerce application MobilePay might not create any profit yet (Berlingske, 2014) and lost customers are not regained yet, but the year 2014 was all about MobilePay, and Danske banks position certainly have been restored as first-mover.

Chapter 4. Swipp Swipp is currently an integrated part of Nordea, Nykredit, Arbejdernes Landsbank, Spar Nord, Sydbank, Jyske Bank and 75 other local banks mobile banking solutions, where consumers can make money transfers between accounts and buy products in retail stores or web shops using a mobile number. Swipp is owned by Nordea (30%), Regionale Bankers Forening (30%), Lokale Pengeinstitutter (30%) and Nykredit (10%) (Ue.dk). The joint venture between the large number of bank provides a potential consumer base of approximately 3 million users (Danmark og Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2012).

Page 16 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The integrated application is developed by the Danish company Bankdata. Bankdata is owned by 12 Danish banks6, which mean that owners are therefore also customers (Alm.Bankdata.dk). Danske Bank was originally part of the collaboration, but decided in 2012 to go solo and launch its own solution – MobilePay. Swipp is not a mobile application7 in itself; it is an optional addition in the mobile bank app in the respectively banks.

Swipp was officially released June 13, 2013 and is administered and operated by an independent legal entity (Interview 2) and has since been downloaded roughly 1.000.000 times (Bureaubiz.dk, a). Swipp bought the competitor Paii November 2014 as part of a strategic initiative. Paii was the telecommunication industry’s (TDC, Telenor, Telia and 3) mobile payment offering and was not fully developed or launch at the time (Paii.dk). So far, the Danish market only consists of three productive solutions: MobilePay, Swipp and MeeWallet (Interview 1, Interview 2, and Interview 3).

4a. The solution Swipp A short description of Swipp as a product and solution is provided for a better understanding of the current market situation, hence product characteristics, consumer preferences and opportunities.

Swipp was originally created as a mobile money transfer solution that should provide the consumer with a better and simplified user experience. However, due to the launch of MobilePay and its immediate success Swipp needed to react as soon as possible. That is one of the reasons why Swipp is integrated in the mobile bank application (Interview 2, p. 3-4), opposed to MobilePay. Swipp needed to launch a competitive solution but the design and development was not as far as it should have been (Interview 2, p. 3-4) and instead of developing a new application and therefore delaying a launch with the needed technical capabilities and security, Swipp created an add-on capability in the already comprehensive, developed, tested and productive mobile banking application. The main reason was: ‘Sikkerhed og “speed” fungerer ikke så godt sammen’ (Interview 2, p. 2).

The practical approach of how Swipp is working when transferring money is shown in Appendix 2 – Swipp Mobile app guide. A quick description of a money transfer (after downloading the mobile app): 1) Open app, 2) login to your mobile bank app using username/Cpr and password, 3) press

6 Alm. Brand Bank, Djurslands Bank, Jyske Bank, Kreditbanken, Nordfyns Bank, Nordjyske Bank, Nørresundby Bank, Ringkøbing Landbobank, Skjern Bank, Sparekassen Sjælland, Sydbank, Østjydsk Bank 7 Mobile application - a computer program designed to run on smartphones, tablet computers and other mobile devices

Page 17 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

menu, 4) press Swipp, 5) insert amount, 6) press next, 7) find recipient (no search help), select, 8) press transfer8. The current benchmark product MobilePay is also shown in appendix 2 and consists of these steps: 1) Open app, 2) login using four digit code, insert amount and mobile number (search help), 3) press next, 4) swipe to the right. The last solution MeeWallet is also shown in appendix 2 but does not have the functionality of transferring money.

Using Swipp in retail stores involves a technical and practical description. The basic technology used when a mobile device and terminal needs to communicate, Swipp uses a phone number to identify a store account. Both types of functionally uses same technology and architectural approach and that is due to the mobile bank app integration; account-to-account. By using this type of solution, Swipp has differentiated its basic solution architecture. Broadly speaking, this solution removes the card transaction dependencies reflected in the clearing and settling process shown in figure 3. This enables Swipp to be more cost effective than solutions based on the traditional payment architecture. A more in-depth and detailed analysis of the advantages, threats and challenges will be addressed in the following analysis, and the practical and technical descriptions of competitive solutions will also be addressed and analyzed.

Swipp’s current position as already existing in the market or at least associated in the industry should enable more opportunities in the future, due to the gained experience rather than a company with no experience. It is important to know the landscape and core processes of payments in order to succeed.

Chapter 5. Commerce and retailers As described earlier in the thesis, most consumers use a mobile payment application for transferring money from a bank account to another bank account. The future of mobile payments, not just in Denmark but also globally, resides in the possibility of using a mobile application for all kinds of transaction related to payments. The retail industry is a key industry, where newly founded collaboration or acquisitions between local and global corporations have been experienced. Collaborations among significant players includes for example, Facebooks partnering with Paypal, Google and Apple partnering with Visa, Mastercard, American Express and Square, Samsung partnering with Loop Pay and First Data, and NETS partnering with Oberthur Technologies and

8 When using the mobile app for the first time, NEM-ID is needed for security and identity reasons.

Page 18 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Pertura (Visaeurope.com, Androidcentral.com, Forbes.com, a). These partnerships and acquisitions substantiate the focus and the level of importance and volume.

Table 1 in chapter 3a – Overview of current mobile payment solutions, provides an overview of the possible usage of payments by mobile phone. Despite the increase in e-commerce, most commerce will still be effectuated in retail stores, which accounts for approximately 20 percent of all commerce in Denmark (Danmark and Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014, p. 14). A purchase in a retail store typical involves two parties, a buyer who has the choices of payment types, cash or cards, in other words an extended channel from a bank account. In general, a retail store can handle these two types of payments. That is, in most cases, seen in a cash register and a card terminal. The description of a typical purchase indicates and leads to the focus of the type of business that will be addressed. Swipp needs to address the Business to Consumer market (B2C) and Business to Business market (B2B) in order to include every aspect of a sale and purchase.

The logical and critical condition for mobile payments is a recipient end (e.g. a terminal) as well. However, since mobile payments are a digitalized transaction, it requires add-ons or modifications to existing technology or use of new technology. Retailers will always have great influence on how payments are handled due to their position as physical point of sale.

Chapter 6. Delimitation The scope of our master thesis are primarily focused on SWIPP and their challenges and opportunities, hence our theoretical and practical focus is mainly consumer behavior and corporate strategy. Consequently, a technical and solution-based approach is therefore not considered. Since all products in the mobile payment market in Denmark are based on a bank account transaction, the thesis will assume that opportunities and technical capabilities are equal for everybody. The technical cost related to development and production of the application is furthermore neither a point of interest due to the maturity stage of the market, where research and development costs are high in respect to an increase in market shares (Klepper, 1996). The security of applications in general will not be addressed due to the technicality and lack of technical expertise. Additional, product technicalities such as compatibility with operating systems is not taken in consideration.

The vision of the future where the mobile phone becomes a tool of money transaction is currently a rapidly advancing phenomenon all over the world. In the developing world such as Africa, Latin

Page 19 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

America and the areas of the Asian continent, mobile payments have already been well adapted with high penetration of mobile phones (not smartphones) due to a limited banking infrastructure and lack of alternative solutions. The lack of infrastructure and payment opportunities combined with the distinct differences of mobile phones and smartphones, it is therefore argued that it is not possible to transfer the learning from these services into the Scandinavian industry.

Governmental legislation and legal issues is not addressed in depth due to the limited scope and a dynamic information technology legislation. Framing and guiding stakeholders, governments, regulatory agencies, legislation and policymakers can be seen as the fourth group of stakeholders in the industry. However, the scope of the thesis is again limited and in order to identify and analyze the impact of this group of stakeholders would need different proportion guidelines.

The collaboration between the 81 banks and its associated challenges being a collaboration will not be addressed, though it could be an interesting topic and potential significant factor for Swipp in the time to come. The thesis will treat Swipp as one product and one company.

As noted above, our research question narrows the scope of research by investigating only Swipp and their challenges in relation to the industry situation. Hence, the thesis will only include actual functional solutions and products. The multiple announcements experienced, will only provide the thesis with a theoretical perspective, which is not wanted.

Moreover, because of the continuously new product initiatives experienced in the process of writing, we needed a cutover date regarding data collection. The collected primary data ended the in late July 2015 and therefore it was decided to function as the thesis’ cutover date.

Chapter 7. Structure The structure of the thesis is based on Ib Andersens (2006) proposed relationship between knowledge production and the main elements of the associated workflow. The problem statement (chapter 2) is the controlling factor for the subsequent part of the writing process, because it is the part and choice that implicit determine the shape of the theoretical framework and delimitation (chapter 6). During the process of writing, minor adjustments to the original question can be needed, as new knowledge is produced. The blue-dotted lines in figure 4, represents the feedback that occurs between the problem statement and results. The following diagonal line reflects the theoretical framework of understanding (chapter 9), which precedes the later conducted empirical studies. The empirical data

Page 20 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

is shown to follow the theoretical analysis, however, the two points is shown as being aligned with each other, because the reader conceptually should perceive the two elements as interdependent.

After accounting for the empirical method, the selected case presented (chapter 9b), which will serve as exemplification of area for consumer behavior and market situation before the discussion of the empirical findings in relation to the theory. The discussion of theory and practice will include the results of the thesis in which the knowledge obtained for the purpose of illustrating Swipps most important areas. This implies that the knowledge obtained will be focused on important factors of consumer behavior and industry variables (chapter 13). The findings of the industry and consumer analysis combined with a strategy analysis will trigger a series of recommendations for Swipp (chapter 14).

Page 21 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Figure 4 – Structure of the thesis

Problem statement

Theory Emperical data

Theoretical Swipp as a analysis case

Findings

Consumer Market implications implications for for future initiatives future initiatives

Recommendations

(Source: Own creation)

The thesis’ analysis section (chapter 13a and 13b, and 13c) is divided into three chapters, which collectively form the argument for the recommendations of Swipp.

Page 22 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

7a. Current industry situation Michael Porters five forces framework forms the foundation of the industry situation. This chapter will use the five forces and their partial conclusions to determine the market implications and challenges. The last partial analysis includes a theoretical discussion, with the aim to derive a number of important issues that will make the thesis in a position to answer the problem statement.

7b. Life cycle of mobile payments solutions For further industry analysis, the chapter includes the framework of product and industry life cycles, which have been and still is an acknowledged discipline of general lifecycles development, and thus is applicable. The theory divides a lifecycle in four distinct timespans, each with specific characteristics, and the analysis combines these with the strategic principles of market approach. The analysis helps with the necessary understanding of how the industry has evolved and developed and in particular, what stages of maturity the market is currently in. The clarification of the industry and product situation enables us to conclude characteristic of certain stages and factors needed to be competitive.

7c. Consumer preferences in a theoretical perspective Where the industry analysis have aimed to describe the industry, the quantitative analysis and its conclusions rely and is based on the preferences of consumers.

The structure of the qualitative focus group interviews and the quantitative questionnaire provided the basis for the perception of the common consumer.

Applying this structure supports the reliability of the consumer analysis.

Chapter 8. Method The method aims to explain the thesis’ methodical, methodological, theoretical and empirical selection and deselection. The object of the section is thus to provide a clear and deliberate picture of how the thesis will answer the problem and the related work issues.

Page 23 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

8a. Methodology The thesis uses a relatively homogeneous theoretical framework which means that the individual partial conclusions can be combined to form a unique and comprehensive picture of the thesis overall analysis. The multiple part conclusions of the thesis, ensures the project a high degree of reliability (Thurén, 2012).

i. The hermeneutic theory framework The basic premise of hermeneutics is that understanding comes before explanation (Fuglsang and Bitsch Olsen, 2004). Understanding depends on the subject that is looking, and it is therefore important to have knowledge of the subject's cultural and sociological background, as it is through the understanding and interpretation of this background, one can explain the subject's actions, attitudes and expressions. We must therefore learn to understand and interpret the problems and challenges in order to explain them, as hermeneutics rejects the objective approach to ideals of knowledge.

The thesis, therefore, involves the hermeneutic circle (Rasborg, 2004 p. 312). The hermeneutic circle denotes the interaction that takes place between individual part and whole. The individual parts can only be understood if the whole is involved and, conversely, the whole can only be understood by virtue of the parts. Hence, it is the relationship between the parts and the whole, which is creating meaning; it is the relationships between the parts and the whole that enables understanding and interpretation. In the hermeneutic circle, one does not remain in the same place but constantly acquires new knowledge. As such, the circle is a positive opportunity for gaining new knowledge. The design and our approach, starting with interviewing a market expert with no or at least no theoretical affiliation to any company was used as the basis of creating focus groups, followed by two in-depth interviews which is presumably perceived as an ideal way of gathering knowledge and empirical data aligned with the hermeneutic approach.

8b. The social constructive theory framework Social constructivism arises from hermeneutic, and thus encourages a natural interaction between the two paradigms (Rasborg, 2004). In the approach of social constructivism the reality are created of our perception of it. This means that the epistemological approach to knowledge is through social actions and processes. Human knowledge is characterized by the social and cultural context, as is the

Page 24 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

case with the language and its concepts whose existence determines what we are able to think. The language is seen as a form of social action and social constructivism argues that social processes are constituted through social practice and human interaction. This means that social processes must be explained as human social interactions. When cultural phenomena are to be analyzed, there is no focus on static structures, but rather the dynamic of social processes (Berger, 1990).

Berger & Luckmann's (1966) theory stems from the social constructivist paradigm, but still rooted in hermeneutic. The authors see the genesis of institutions as a social action and interaction between individuals and communities, and the same applies to their theory (Rasborg, 2004 p. 367-370).

Berger & Luckmanns (1966) assumption that the social construction consists of both deliberate acts of conscious actors and an unconscious, evolutionary and causal development processes, emphasizes their belief that knowledge is created socially and knowledge in our society is primarily created through everyday life experiences. Berger & Luckmann were dedicated to explain how social reality is constructed, functioning, constructed and deconstructed (Rasborg 2007: 367-370).

The thesis’ rejection of realism is derived from an assessment of the thesis’ focus on consumer behavior and interest, which in its modern nature do not use realism.

The thesis takes the ontological position that reality is transitory, temporary, complex and constantly changing. Hence, the reality all things being equal will change in time because new knowledge has been added, and therefore the understanding of reality must be re-examined (Collin, 2003, p. 43). Along with the choice of theories and our ontological approach, the thesis will acknowledge the findings. The knowledge presented will appear as a snapshot of the Danish mobile payments market, but at the same time will substantiate and justify the choice of theories and our epistemological approach for data collection.

Due to our basic and fundamental understanding of reality and how it is subjectively interpreted, our approach of gathering primary data through interview and focus groups aligns with Nygaards (2004) definition that epistemology is the study of learning, an account of how the process of cognition appears to the researcher.

Page 25 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

8c. Empirical research The empirical framework consists of different types of data collected, with the aim of obtaining a broad span of opinions, facts, statements and approaches regarding the subject.

i. Primary empirical data The empirical foundation for the thesis consist of two focus groups interview and two open/semi structured interviews with experts on mobile payment due to their daily connection with the subject through their professional work. There is conducted an additional open/semi structured interview with a person with great and in-depth insights within Swipp and questionnaire.

Using a qualitative method enables a possibility to reach answers that are not measurable and potentially provide answers that was not thought off by the researcher, whilst the quantitative method is based on the belief that only these are objectives sufficient to reach a certain truth (Andersen et al., 1994). In this thesis, primarily qualitative data has been collected. Limiting to mostly qualitative data is due to that mobile payment is a new phenomenon. It is important to get a wide range of respondents and get deeper into the respondents motivation, attitude and how and when they are using mobile payment (Birks and Malhotra, 2007, p. 233).

1. Interviews The qualitative interviews were designed as a combination of the open interview and the two semi- structured interview. This design opened the opportunity to ask clarifying questions to the respondents, and made the interview more dialogue oriented. Furthermore, it was important to let the experts talk as much and as freely as possible so that their enthusiasm and expertise would find expression and be transferred to the recording and our knowledge. However, the respondents' possible lack of objectivity is acknowledge nevertheless the interviews are considered to be very useful and valid.

The thesis uses the in-depth interviews as the strongest empirical foundation in order to analyze and prepare an adequate answer to the problem statement. Interviews were conducted between February and March 2015 (see Appendix 3,4,5 for transcription of interviews).

There are conducted in-depth interviews with central figures in the Danish market; founder and owner of MeeWallet, Kim Vindberg-Larsen, owner and mobile expert of MereMobil.dk John G. Pedersen

Page 26 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

and business development responsible at Nordea, Troels Asmussen (More detailed profiles, see appendix 6). The interviews create a strong empirical foundation for the thesis’ analysis of market predictions, market-inside assessments and positions and market situation.

The interviews were structured as a combination of open interview and semi-structured interview (See Appendix 7 – Interview guide). The interview guide was prepared based on prior research aligned with problem statement, which formed the basis of the general themes of the interviews (Kvale, 2007). The interviews are considered to be very useful and adding reliability to the thesis.

The three interviews were based on the same methodology and were conducted with the aim to get three independent responses with the opportunity of some degree of improvisation. The choice of semi-structured interviews came from a desire to leave pre-determined questions open for new discourses to emerge. The pre-determined questions, hence forms a direction that allows the interviewer to investigate deeper into the respondents responses, as well as to follow up on new emerging issues (Kvale, 2007, p. 65). The thesis’ hermeneutical method approach means that it is important to take into account both the thematic and especially the dynamic dimension, which is understood as the interaction between the interviewer and the respondent. The dynamic dimension contributes to the understanding of the context of the interpretation the interviews undergoes (Kvale, 2007, p. 14). This should be seen as a product of the interviewer's interpretation of questions and answers, while another interviewer might have a different understanding.

All interviews have subsequently been transcribed, in order to form an overview of the empirical set of data, and thus facilitate the use of interviews in the analysis. The thesis hermeneutical method approach denotes that it is particularly important to prepare transcripts to form the correct overview of text content, which enables the possibility to be critical and interpretative to empiricism (Kvale, 2007, p. 109).

2. Focus groups The purpose of using focus group interviews was to get an understanding of the consumer needs, attitudes and motivation to use mobile payment. Focus groups are a direct method of obtaining rich information within a social context, it is arguably a highly efficient technique for qualitative data collection since the amount, and range of data is increased by collection from several people at the same time (Richard A. Krueger and Casey, 2009). This methodology has a positive impact because

Page 27 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

the participating individuals can be inspired by each other, which can help to provoke creative and new ideas that we - as interviewers - have not considered. In many cases, this may enable us to acquire new knowledge that would otherwise be overlooked by either us or the interviewed individuals (Malhotra et al., 2012). One of the disadvantages of this method is that it is relatively costly in resources but due to the preventive work, we believe it resulted in a homogeneous focus group. Other disadvantages of conducting focus group interviews such as limited questions covered and potential conflicts between participants (Malhotra et al., 2012) did not have a great impact due to the detailed focus of our interview design and the indifference of ‘incorrect’ and ‘correct’ answers.

The focus groups were made up of five and six people with different educational background, different sex, between 25-53 year of age and all members was independent of each other. All the participants in the focus groups stated that they were users of mobile payment and therefore had a general understanding of the concept. The focus groups were facilitated under the guidance of a facilitator (moderator) and observer (assistant moderator) to ensure unobtrusive control, structure and validity. The interviews was conducted in a small neutral room with circled seating’s to ensure an intimate environment that would optimize the participants comfort, thus their willingness to discuss. Cake and soft drinks were provided to enhance the comfort level. As seen in appendix 8 focus group interview guide 1 & 2, it was emphasized and recommended to speak freely and no answers were told to be incorrect. It was highly important for us to gather truthfully information regarding the consumers experience and knowledge of mobile payments. The structure of the focus group interviews was divided into five parts: 1) General introduction of us and motivation, 2) Guidelines, 3) Experience and usage of mobile payments, 4) Video, 5) Additional thoughts and new potential views. The video showing multiple ways of integrated mobile payment solutions was intended to create new insight for the last question. Due to the nature and the unfulfilled potential of the current market and solution situation, the introduction of the video was an effort to establish the knowledge level of the current consumer or learning what the impression of possibilities of mobile payments. In compliance to our hermeneutical approach, it make sense trying to expand the knowledge. Thus, acquire a more detailed impression of the consumers’ attitudes and preferences towards different forms of mobile payments.

3. Quantitative questionnaire The quantitative study was designed to substantiate and add a broader perspective of the public perceptions of mobile payments. The survey had 12 questions with appropriate response options such

Page 28 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

as a scale of opinion to a statement and was divided into three parts. The first part contained basic information of the respondent such as sex, age, income etc. The second part referred to the respondents’ use, knowledge and application of mobile payments. The third and last part referred to respondents' rating of personal importance for statements regarding characteristic and potential benefits of mobile payments extracted from opinions in the focus groups.

The quantitative survey was distributed via email, LO Plus newsletter (appendix 16), Facebook and LinkedIn. The data set from the study perceived as being representative of the public. There is of course potential sources of errors, but these are considered insignificant.

ii. Secondary empirical data The secondary empirical data collected was primarily articles from newspapers and the . The use of scientific articles was limited. The findings in the articles was found to have a rather negative attitude toward mobile payment (Dahlberg and Öörni, 2006) which is not the trend seen in the market today (Appendix 4). Another problem was that the articles were not based on the Danish market and mobile payments have developed very different between countries (Ondrus and Pigneur, 2005). This makes it difficult to make conclusion based on findings from other countries. Along with the rapid development of mobile payments over the last decade and the change of western consumer attitude (Bothun et al., 2013), a lack of comparability was identified between consumers attitude observed in the scientific papers and consumers of today.

The thesis will mainly be based upon our interviews of experts combined with data collected from the focus groups and questionnaire and lastly, newspapers and online articles.

8d. Swipp as a case The understanding of mobile payments and the influence on consumer preferences, we will use Swipp as a case and as an illustrative reference point. This provides an opportunity to identity tendencies in the Danish payment industry through a single case. Furthermore, it provides a critical view on theory, models, assumptions and practice (Andersen, 2009).

Using Swipp as an illustrative case reference takes its origin in the nature of the current mobile payment industry, where essentially only three players are worth mentioning and additionally where one part is unquestionable dominant. Therefore, this thesis will apply a combination of findings and

Page 29 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

conclusions based on Swipp as a case reference, which also enables a basis of comparison in the forthcoming and important industry analysis.

8e. Reliability and validity The thesis’ collection of empirical data was done through the methods mentioned above. We see no reason to question the data collected and the reliability of the responses received in the interviews. The respondents were encouraged to answer honestly and no answer was incorrect. As for criticism and use of theories, we recognize the lack of scientific research, especially in the Danish mobile payment industry. Along with this exponential developing industry, it potentially can affect the reliability of the thesis. However, due to the lack of academic research and the exponential industry development, we believe that the most correct way to establish reliability and validity is by taking the approach we have chosen. As mentioned earlier, we find it incorrect and impossible to use examples of mobile payments applied in foreign countries due to our choice of paradigm of how we understand reality as social constructed. Furthermore, we believe that the thesis’ empirical foundation is strong enough to provide the analysis and conclusions with both high reliability and validity.

Chapter 9. Theory

9a. Porter five Forces Investigating an industry, either with the purpose of evaluating the stretch of their present positioning compared to their competitors or how the industry could shift in a new direction, is it important to define the industry. Porter has a broad definition of an industry. An industry is defined as companies that are producing products, which can be a substitute for other products in the industry. The issues regarding this definition are that it can be difficult delimiting the different product groups that should be in the analysis. The delimitations of an industry is often characterized by several inconsistences, because the decision makers within the company differ in their opinion regarding the industries’ boundaries of products, production method or the impact of geographical circumstances in which the entity is located (Porter, 1998). To establish, what Porter calls Sustainable Competitive Advantage, it is important to understand whom the competitors are in the market in order to create a strong business strategy.

Page 30 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

i. Threat of entrants Profitable markets attract new entrants, which erodes profitability. Unless incumbents have strong and durable barriers to entry, e.g. patents, economies of scale and capital requirements, profitability will decline to a competitive rate. Mobile payment has small entrance barriers, with a relative simple technology that easily can be achieved. This is a problem for businesses in the industry since the danger for new competition is high if it is a lucrative market. Porter introduces factors companies within the market have to uphold to limit the number of new entries into the industry (E. Porter, 1980). These will be introduced in the following paragraphs.

Economies of scale

Porter describes economies of scale where the focus is on the internal production and how to minimize the expenses to achieve Minimum Efficient Scale. This is the point at which unit costs for production are at a minimum – that is the most cost efficient level of production.

The demand-side of benefits of scale

In general, societies have a positive attitude toward larger companies, which is the tendency in both B2C and B2B. Larger companies provide consumers with more confidence in the product they deliver and deliver safer products, they can trust.

Swipp can have issues with the consumers trust compared to their main competitor, because they are a new company that the consumers do not know beforehand.

Consumer switching costs

Normally, consumers will take on a cost shifting to a new product; however, that is not the case in mobile payment. For mobile payments, the switching cost is time and personal information, which can be considered valuable as well.

Capital requirements

Some industries have larger investment needs than others do. There can be many reasons for the need of investment, e.g. developing a new product that requires new technology or medicine that requires many approvals before launched. Expenses to marketing can also be a problem for new companies entering new markets and wants a larger consumer base, which is relevant in the mobile payment industry.

Page 31 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Incumbency advantages independent of size

The advantages of existing companies can occur for many different reasons. The most common reasons are brand value, patents, geographic placement and long-term experience within the industry. Experience within the industry can also give the possibility to obtain economies of scale.

Unequal access to distribution channels

New companies may eventually find new ways to distribute products to consumers. Well-established companies in the industry can have long-term relations with the most obvious distributor, which will make it difficult for new products to penetrate the market if using the same distribution channels.

ii. Supplier power In Porter’s five forces, supplier power refers to the pressure suppliers can exert on businesses by raising prices, lowering quality, or reducing availability of their products. In general, few suppliers of a service involving a potential large target group indicates that supplier power is high. However, if many complimentary product alternatives are present supplier power is low. The structure of the industry dictates how much power the supplier has. Strong suppliers can pressure buyers by price increase, lowering of product quality, and reducing product availability. All of these things represent costs to the buyer. A strong supplier can make an industry more competitive and decrease potential profit for buyers. On the other hand, a weak supplier makes an industry less competitive and increases potential buyer profit.

iii. Buyer power The power of buyers involves many similarities to the factors described above. Opposite to the power of suppliers, a few buyers of a product or service in large industry indicates that buyer power is high. However, other factors can provide buyers with power. For example, if consumers are price sensitive and well educated regarding the product, the buyer power is high.

iv. Threat of substitutes The threat of substitutes are defined as the availability of a product that consumers can buy instead of the industry’s product. A substitutional product is a product from another industry that offers similar functionalities and benefits to consumers as the product produced by companies within the

Page 32 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

industry. The threat of substitution in an industry affects the competitive environment for the companies in that industry and influences these companies’ ability to achieve profitability. The availability of a substitutional threat affects the profitability of an industry because consumers can choose to buy a substitute instead of the industry’s product. The availability of similar substitutional products can make an industry more competitive and decrease potential profit for companies.

v. Rivalry between established competitors Rivalry in an industry affects the competitive environment and influences the ability of existing companies to achieve profitability. High intensity of rivalry means competitors are aggressively targeting each other’s markets and aggressively pricing products. This represents potential costs to all competitors within the industry. The more competitive the industry is, the more it can decrease profit potential for the existing firms. It is important to understand how competitive a market is because it provides an indication of how profitable the industry is for new companies and provides established companies with an understanding of how profitable it would be to stay in the industry.

9b. Industry Life Cycle Forrester (1959) was one of the first to describe the Product Life Cycle (PLC), which provided the inspiration and development of the Industry life Cycle (ILC). Both life cycles takes the form of an S- shaped curve and four stages are introduced: Introduction, growth, maturity and decline. The basic idea of the PLC and ILC is that sales follows an S-shaped curve that is a function of the number of consumers and competitors. These variables are captured by time, which is a proxy for all independent variables (Johnson et al., 2008; Shaw, 2012). According to Porter (1980) the four stages are clearly defined, each with its own characteristics that mean different things for the company that are trying to manage the life cycle of their product. An ILC analysis provides a potential identification of a products viability in relation to the market it serves. Lastly, ILC also forces a continuous scan of the market and allows a company to take corrective action faster, because of a better understanding of the market (E. Porter, 1980).

9c. Generic strategies The final theory that is used in this thesis is generic strategies, which Porter introduced in 1980, and is used to gain a competitive advantage toward the competitor in the market and to earn above average

Page 33 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

in the industry. The generic strategies consist of four types of strategies: Cost Leadership, Differentiation, cost focus and differentiation focus.

It is important to understand the generic strategies since it is the foundation for the strategically development in any company regardless of the position on the ILC-curve. Porter (1980) describes the focus strategy as an independent strategy direction, however this will not be discussed further, since mobile payment is already a focus strategy of the payment industry. The thesis will only focus on the two strategies; Cost Leadership and Differentiation strategy.

Which of the two types of strategies that fits Swipp best is determined by the five forces and the influence they have on the structure of the industry. It is important to have the correct strategy when striving for competitive advantage.

Before choosing one of the two strategies, the company needs to understand its position and the needed market focus. The focus has to be either on the entire market or on smaller part of the market. Porter (1980) empathizes the importance of this choice that management needs to make prior to choosing the direction of strategy. Porter argues that higher profit is more preferable than market power.

”…lacks the market share, capital investment, and resolve to play the low-cost game, the industry- wide differentiation necessary to obviate the need for a low-cost position, or the focus to create differentiation or a low-cost position in a more limited sphere.” (E. Porter, 1980, p. 41)

In a situation referred to above, a company offering a product or a service without any major consideration, Porter states this to be “all things to all people” (Mintzberg et al., 1998). The intention is to cover the need of every single consumer, which can be rather difficult and almost impossible to achieve. When entering a new market with a new product it is impossible to aim for the entire population, which means that the area of focus is important for success. The segmentation of potential users of mobile payment will be a major focus point for the company to find the needs of those who are willing to use or are in demand for a different kind of payment system. The payment system that is in place in Denmark has a high quality and is simple to use, which means the need to differentiate the mobile payment product is a key element to attract users. Focusing on a smaller part of the market means the company can dominate parts of the market and from that, positioning themselves strong within a segment. Finally, decision makers of Swipp needs an understanding of the external

Page 34 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

environment to understand the competition in the market and thereby create a strong competition strategy, which can assist in achieving maximized profitability.

i. Cost leadership The generic cost leader strategy calls for being the low cost producer in an industry for a given level of quality. The company sells its products either at average industry prices to earn a profit higher than that of rivals, or below the average industry prices to gain market share. If other companies in the industry try to use the same strategy a potential price war can occur, where both companies are trying to lower prices to get the advantage (Wright, 1987). In the event of a price war, the firm can maintain some profitability while the competition suffers losses. Even without a price war, as the industry matures and prices decline, the firms that can produce more cheaply will remain profitable for a longer period of time. The cost leadership strategy usually targets a broad market.

Companies that succeed in the strategy of cost leadership often have the following strengths:

- Access to the capital required to make a significant investment in production assets; this investment represents a barrier to entry that many firms may not overcome.

- Skill in designing products for efficient manufacturing, for example, having a small component count to shorten the assembly process.

- High level of expertise in manufacturing process engineering.

- Efficient distribution channels.

If a company can lower their cost to a minimum and sell their products at a high price then the company achieves a strong financial position. However, this approach could be dangerous. Porter finds its dangerous, because combining different strategies can get the company ‘stuck in the middle’, since higher prices are connected with a differential strategy (E. Porter, 1985).

There are several potential disadvantages with the cost leadership strategy, such as lower consumer loyalty, price-sensitive consumers will switch once a lower-priced product appears. Having a reputation as a cost leader can result in a reputation for low quality, which may make it difficult for a firm to rebrand itself or its products if it chooses to shift to a differentiation strategy in future (Wright, 1987).

Page 35 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ii. Differentiation The generic differentiation strategy is on the contrary not to achive the lowest cost compared to competitors, but rather to produce a unique product. Consumers are more willing to buy at a higher price because the product is unique (Henry, 2011). A higher price could be necessary, when choosing this differentiation strategy. Companies can use this strategy, in many ways, to get an advantage in the industry. An example could be creating brand value for consumers or a change in consumer delivery.

Companies with a successfully differentiation strategy often have the following strengths:

- Access to leading scientific research - Highly skilled and creative product development teams - Corporate reputation for quality and innovation

Many companies in an industry can use this strategy, in many different ways, unlike the above Cost leadership strategy. More companies can use this strategy in different ways, because consumers have different preferences, besides price, towards a product. However, it is still important to minimize costs in the areas that do not affect the uniqueness of the product. Consumers are not willing to buy a product at any price and are more willing to choose a cheaper option without the uniqueness if the price difference is too big (Wright, 1987).

Chapter 10. Criticism of the theory

10a. Five Forces Framework Even though the model has been used in several strategy textbooks, the development of the theory has been relatively low since it was introduced in the eighties. Furthermore, the model has not been used in practice, which according to Grundy (2006) is because of the very analytical approach, which makes it difficult to execute in everyday life, where focus could be on a more short term planning. Porter’s theory has been criticized for its use of The Positioning School. This School is based on the idea that the only types of strategies that are worth the time and trouble are those that ‘can be defended against existing and future competitors’. This structure makes it inflexible when using the theory and it becomes difficult to adapt to specific situations. Therefore, this model can be characterized as complex to apply (Grundy, 2006). Others have also found the Five Forces limiting to the five

Page 36 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

environmental forces, which Porter does not have any justification to choose as the only important forces when analyzing a market (Speed, 1989),(O’Shaughnessy, 1988). According to Thurlby (1998), Porters Five Forces is static and does not take account of time. Thus, it is much more difficult to determine markets with higher dynamic competition because they can change very quickly. Furthermore, making use of the Five Forces framework does not guarantee a competitive advantage that is inviolable and sustained (Aktouf, 2004). The reason for this lies in the fact that the Five Forces framework is a static model, which does not include consistently changes of the competitive environment (Karagiannopoulos et al., 2005) In a general perspective, it can be questioned how useful Porters five forces framework are when analyzing on a macro level, since the mapping of the structure of industries stays in a rather general focus. Namely in industries that consist of smaller sub industries, where companies can explore possibilities in submarkets to achieve faster market share. Furthermore, it is not possible to analyze each segment in the industry using five forces, due to its focus on the industry as a whole. Johnson et al (2008) recommends a part element analysis, because these part elements can have a major impact on the industry as a whole. Additionally, which also can have some advantages since each element can have an impact on the five forces framework and therefore make it easier to adapt the strategy given the situation.

10b. Generic Strategies The strategies that Porter recommends the companies to follow have been criticized for the lack of opportunities for the company to learn from the process the company goes through, since using the generic strategies limits the company to a set of pre-determined alternatives. The chosen strategy cannot be taken before a great variety of thorough analysis, which makes it impossible to adapt the strategy later in the process. Furthermore, it is a long process for the company where they need to allocate many resources. Porters focus on choosing only one strategy have been criticized by many scholars, because they argue that a combination of a differentiation and cost reduction strategy is possible and in many situations a better alternative (Johnson et al., 2008). Using a combination of strategies is called a hybrid strategy, where the company is trying to lower the price and at the same time differentiates their product, which enables them to charge a higher price than the average in the market (Johnson et al., 2008).

Page 37 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

10c. Industry Life Cycle One of the most commonly known and most enduring marketing concepts is the product life cycle. Products are born, their sales grow, they reach a maturity, they go into decline, and they ultimately die. If products have life cycles, so too do the industries that produce them. The industry life cycle is the supply-side equivalent of the product life cycle (Grant, 2010, p. 271). The price, consumers are willing to pay, is highly dependent on what stage the industry is in its life cycle (ILC). The ILC curve has been criticized by Porter based on the assumption that sales develop in an s-shaped curve. Porter argues that every industry have a unique development and the length of each phases differentiate depending on the industry, so it cannot be put into such a strict framework (Henry, 2011). The ILC do not consider these concerns. However, as a description of the levels of maturity of the industry, the ILC provides the thesis with a fundamental concept of introduction, growth, maturity and decline. The ILC also provides the thesis with set of characteristics of certain broad industries, e.g. transport or digital industries. Grant (2010) argues that the tendency over time has been for life cycles to become compressed. This is especially evident in the digital e-commerce (Grant, 2010, p. 275). Our topic of research involves variables such as demand, technology, products, manufacturing and distribution, which is the most important factors for the structure, competition and success factors of an industry (Grant, 2010, p. 277). Hence, the use of ILC is argued to be valid, despite Porters argumentation, due to the characteristics of our topic of research.

Chapter 11. Literature review In the following chapter, we will present a review of the published studies regarding mobile payment and its findings. The chapter will give an understanding of the potential issues that can occur when introducing mobile payment into an already functional and functioning market. It will also give an understanding of what potentials mobile payment has, which will give a foundation for the thesis’ quantitative and qualitative data collection.

11a. Consumers’ perspective in the mobile payment market As mentioned earlier, mobile payment is a new option of payment. This means that the amount of scientific articles about this topic is relatively small, since mobile payment in the way we understand it today, only has existed since 2007, which makes the amount of time to research the topic limited. Furthermore, there are an even more limited amount of scientific papers, which have studied the

Page 38 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

potentials and issues in the western world, due to the later introduction of mobile payment in the western market (Slade et al., 2014). Because of this, the focus will be on consumer’s behavior regarding mobile banking. This provides an indication on how consumers may react to mobile payments and its possibilities. The information gathered from the articles about the evolving mobile banking has to be interpreted with caution; hence, it is not the same service. Finally, the lack of scientific articles on this topic means this type of research have not been tested by other scholars, which in a worst case scenario means that some conclusions retrieved from the articles could be single case scenarios and therefore conclusions could be misleading. Due to this, the validation of the articles are not as strong as other more tested topics.

Prior studies on mobile payment have primarily focused on two major topics: 1) perceived risk for the consumers and 2) what makes consumers adopt mobile payment. Mitchell (1999) propose that perceived risk is influenced by certain types of uncertainties, which Lim (2003) suggested to include technology, vendor and product when it comes to e-commerce. Lin and Wang (2006) and Yan and Yang (2015) both came to the conclusion that limiting the perceived risk, and thereby achieving trust from the consumers, would create a higher level of usage intention. They found that the largest effect was on structural assurance. A strong structural assurance such as encystation and digital certification can create a higher level of trust among consumers and thereby lower the perceived risk to use the product (Yan and Yang, 2015), (Kim and Lee, 2009). Featherman and Pavlou (2003) found five dimensions of perceived risk that could occur for the consumer, when using mobile payment. The five dimensions contains of financial risk, private risk, perceived performance risk, psychological risk and time risk. However, later studies found that not all the dimensions have a significant effect on consumers’ perceived risk. Newer studies found that only perceived financial risk, private risk and performance risk have salient impact on consumers worries and concerns when using mobile payment (Yang et al., 2015).

Featherman and Pavlou (2003) describes the financial risk as the consumer’s perception of possibility of monetary loss caused by the usage of mobile payment. The financial risk implies the risk of getting their password stolen and risk of losing money. Perceived privacy risk is one of the major issues found by Featherman and Pavlou (2003) and Yang et al. (2015). The major concern from the consumer includes all the private information that are available, when using the mobile phone. When using mobile payment consumers find their information vulnerable, because there is a need for a lot of information when adopting mobile payment, since a phone number, social security numbers, pin

Page 39 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

code, shopping records, etc. are required in the adaptation process. The fear is that the information can be abused if it ends up in the wrong hands (Featherman and Pavlou, 2003). Perceived performance risk refers to users’ perception about the possibility of the mobile payment system malfunctioning and not working as intended or advertised (Yang et al. 2015). Looking at the intention consumers have to adopt mobile payment, there are limited studies compared to the perceived risk. However, it is an important area in the field and its results are important for this thesis in order to understand the potential issues. Linck et al. (2006) found an indication of consumers preferring simple, secure and inexpensive payment services. They found that a broad variety of function not necessarily gives the consumer a better experience, but instead could cause confusion for the consumer.

Linck et al. (2006) asked consumers which characteristics of mobile payment applications they perceived as particularly relevant. The authors present an analysis of frequencies, indicating that consumers prefer simple, secure, and inexpensive payment services. Zmijewska and Lawrence (2006), and Zmijewska et al. (2004) also analyzed existing mobile payment systems. It is important to note that these systems are not similar to Swipp’s solution, however, the results are still relevant. Like Linck et al. (2006) they found simplicity and cost as important factors. Beside those two findings, they also found security as a main factor for the consumer to wanting to adopt mobile payment instead of other payment forms. Other researchers, when analyzing the willingness for consumers to adopt mobile payment, found the same three important factors for consumers’ willingness to adopt mobile payment (Dahlberg et al. 2003; Mallat 2004). Gerhardt Schierz et al., (2010) found that perceived compatibility has the greatest impact on the intention to use mobile payment services. Thus, in order to consider adopting mobile payment services, people must find them to be reconcilable with their existing behavioral patterns. They also found a second ranked factor. An individual’s mobility is a key driver of mobile payment acceptance. One could interpret this finding as indicating that, with an increasingly mobile society, mobile payment services are likely to gain in significance in the future. Overall, the studies agree with each other about consumer’s perceived risk and reasoning for adopting mobile payment. However, they do not agree on how big an effect the different factors have on the consumer, which makes it important for this thesis to investigate what is important for the Danish consumers, when using mobile payment, such as Swipp. The majority of the studies are conducted in Asia and only a couple studies are conducted in Europe (Dahlberg et al., 2003;Dahlberg and Öörni, 2006; Slade et al., 2014). The potential cultural and logistical difference between Europe and Asia can have an influence on the data collected for this thesis and can give other conclusions and tendencies. However, the Asian studies can give an

Page 40 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

indicator to what consumers in Denmark may experience and the questionnaire is constructed to investigate the same areas we have found to be relevant for consumers in this literary review.

11b. A consumer perspective on Swipp To get a better understanding of Swipp’s possibilities to get a bigger share of the future mobile payment market it is important to get an understanding of the consumer’s behavior. To achieve that understanding it is important to understand social structures and cultural impacts. Today we are past emphasizing modern technology as the new cultural disrupting element. The Internet and smartphones have been a part of our consumption circle for several years and consumers have become accustomed to use online medias to purchase. Modern technology has altered the nature of consumption, and giving the opportunity to gather information and new knowledge much faster and easier than ever before (Ariely & Norton, 2009). Thus, it becomes a key factor for mobile payment providers to understand the development in consumer culture, as it has defined how consumers behave (Holt, 2002). Skepticism towards marketing activities among consumers have come to an all-time high over the last decade. It has become more and more difficult to reach consumers with traditional marketing, which makes it difficult to communicate new services, such as Swipp (Lewis & Bridger, 2001). Researchers acknowledge the importance for consumers to be skeptical in order to identify false marketing activities or to make sense of misleading claims in advertising (Koslow, 2000). Yet, this skepticism has also led consumers to become skeptical toward honest marketing (Koslow, 2000; Pollay & Mittal, 1993). “Consumers may sometimes be so vigilant against potential misleading marketers, that even after claim verification has occurred, consumers sometimes remain skeptical” (Koslow, 2000, p. 246). The development in the attitude change among the consumers has to be taking into consideration when marketers want to address their services and products. It is important to know which methods to use, which communication that works and how to involve the consumers. To get the best understanding of consumers we must view the traditional perspectives of consumer behavior along with recent findings. Specifically, try to understand the mechanisms that drives today’s consumers, understand their values and what it means to them, and how this effect their decision-making, when choosing mobile payment systems.

Page 41 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

11c. Consumer behavior Research find that scarcity of time, attention and trust has the highest effect on consumers’ behavior (Lewis & Bridger, 2001). Many is familiar with the quote ‘time is a waste of money’, which many probably agree on today, as we as consumers are continually looking for ways to save time and money (Lewis & Bridger, 2001). Time has become such a rare resource as a consequence of how we live our lives, how we are multitasking at work and at home, and how we are constantly online and available for new opportunities. This affects how precious our time becomes. When time becomes a limited factor, attention becomes a shortage. Thus, consumers constantly move through a fog of sensory information, and studies have shown that consumers are exposed with excess information. (Lewis & Bridger, 2001, p. 64). Consumers coped all the information by simply ignoring the majority of the information. The limitless amount of information makes human attention inevitably drawn to the most personally relevant parts (Lewis & Bridger, 2001). Furthermore, consumers are less likely to trust suppliers, because modern consumers have become informationally empowered and considerably more selective about where they spend their hard-earned cash (Lewis & Bridger, 2001, p. 67). The outcome is higher expectations and an excessive need for instant satisfaction, where quality and value-for-money is taken for granted. This creates an increased skepticism and less trust among consumers, toward advertising (Lewis & Bridger, 2001). The behavior of modern consumers indicate, how consumers require a more specific, relevant and personalized approach (Lewis & Bridger, 2001).

Chapter 12. Hypothesis In the process of answering the problem statement, research questions with corresponding hypothesis is applied. The hypotheses provide a guideline, which makes sure the analysis stays within the structure provided earlier in the thesis. Each hypothesis contributes with a question that helps with the understanding of Swipp situation and an understanding of the consumers need in the mobile payment market.

12a. Porter’s five forces Each of the five forces in Porter’s model is separately handled in the analysis. The hypothesis help to cover the potential and potential challenges Swipp can face in the mobile payment market.

Page 42 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

i. Threats of substitutes Research question 1

What are the alternatives to Swipp in the mobile payment market?

H1.1: There are many substitutable products

ii. Threat of entry Research question 2

What is the influence of new entrance in the mobile payment market and how can this change the market?

H2.1: The payment market is undergoing a disruptive transformation

H2.2: A large customer base matters when entering the mobile payment market

H2.3: The biggest threat comes from a global player

H2.4: The biggest threat comes from a disruptive technology and not an established

H2.5: The level of product differentiation makes the industry open to a high degree of brand recognition and customer loyalty

H2.6: The threat from the banking industry is more significant than the threat from the IT industry

H 2.7: The threat from telecommunication industry is more significant than the threat from the IT industry

H2.8: Only large companies provides a threat in the mobile payment industry

iii. Industry rivalry Research question 3

What influence does the industry rivalry have on the market for mobile payment?

H3.1: The concentration of Danish companies supports the argument of oligopolistic competition

Page 43 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

H3.2: The price competition in the Danish market makes the mobile payment industry non-profitable

H3.3: The industry rivalry concerns a specific type of company and price competition keeps global companies away

H3.4: The switching cost of Swipp is low which makes diversity of competitors important.

H3.5: Since switching cost is low and the Danish competitors are relatively similar, global competitors have an edge in winning market share

H3.6: The product significantly differentiate between the Danish competitors

H3.7: The different nature of Swipp as a product enables opportunities in other industries

H3.8: Marketing initiatives are used to gain market share

H3.9: The low exit barriers makes industry rivalry very high

H3.10: Global competitors will only make industry rivalry more intense

H3.11: Global competitors will only make industry rivalry more intense

iv. Bargaining powers of buyers Research questions 4

What is the influence of the buyers’ position in the market?

H4.1: The consumers’ price sensitivity makes bargaining powers high

H4.2: The retailers’ price sensitivity is low

H4.3: The number of available solutions affects retailers bargaining power

v. Bargaining power of suppliers Research questions 5

What is the influence of the suppliers’ position in the market?

Page 44 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

H5.1: The bargaining power of mobile payment suppliers are low due to the cross industrial industry and the new potential information flow

12b. Quantitative analysis The hypotheses for the quantitative analysis are based on the literary review and the problems scholars have found when introducing mobile payment. Furthermore, the qualitative analysis have provided interesting dilemmas.

i. Fear of mobile payment Research question 6

Is there a fear of using mobile payment among consumers?

H6.1: Older people are more afraid of the safety then younger respondents

H6.2: Fear of safety is a key factor for not using mobile payment among non-user

ii. Future use of mobile payment Research question 7

Will the consumers use mobile payment more often in the future?

H7.1: Improving service is important when using mobile payment’ simplicity is important for the consumers to get a good buying experience

H7.2: The usage of mobile payment among friends have a higher influence on the younger users

H7.3: Simplicity is important for the consumers to get a good buying experience

iii. The usages of mobile payment Research question 8

Who uses mobile payment in the market today?

H8.1: Men uses mobile payment more often the women

Page 45 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

H8.2: Heavy users of mobile payment spend more money than light users

H8.3: Young people use mobile payment more often than older people do

These theoretical aligned hypotheses will be addressed in the following analysis.

Chapter 13. Analysis

13a. Industry Life Cycle The S-shaped ILC is applied on the mobile payment industry, which will provide the thesis with an indication on which key success factors that are needed for Swipp to engage in an optimal strategy aligned with maturity of the industry. Since the life cycle of products equals the supply-side of an industry life cycle (Grant, 2010, p. 279), Swipp, MobilePay and MeeWallet as products reflects what stage the mobile payment industry is in. As described earlier, Swipp is a bi-product of the mobile phone and the payment industry, enabled by the exponential development of technology. The mobile phone industry roots from the telecommunication industry and the electronic device industry, which has been an industry of rapid development the last decade, also enabled by technological evolution. Due to the information technology’s increasing impact on most industries, it is seen that new industries often involve a mix of existing industries, hence new products such as Swipp. However, these hybrid products are therefore not a direct continuation of a single product, which means that Swipp does not belong to an existing industry. This is supported by the limited usage of all three products (Interview 4, Interview 5) and the differences in technology applied, which indicates that the growth stage has not been reach where standardization of a specific technology is present. Another variable that argues for an industry in an introduction stage is the lack of entry, mergers and exits experienced in the industry. That has not been seen yet and it is therefore argued, that the mobile payment industry are in the introduction stage. In Mai 2013, Danske Bank introduced MobilePay, only followed by Swipp later that year. In a two years span, the industry of mobile payments went from nonexistent to an industry of great media attention. Being a first-mover provides a company with some benefits; however, it is argued that just being a first-mover is not enough to be a substantial competitive player in a new industry. Grant (2010) argues that ongoing product innovation combined with a credible company and product image is the main

Page 46 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

success factors of an industry in an introduction stage. Even though mobile payments have been present for more than 2 years, the first generation of MobilePay was by experts, considered a beta- version not suited for companies, only for peer-to-peer money transfers (Interview 3, p. 3-4). Looking at the three solutions today, a great deal of product and solution development has been conducted. Terminals have been created and produced for stores, online options have been introduced and new product features are introduced on a regular basis. Still only involving three functional and active products. The level of consumer adoption has increased exponential since the summer of 2013, for all three products (Version2.dk, a; Fraudid.dk), which indicates that product credibility, are of substantial levels. The continuances of product innovation introduced on a regular basis combined with an increasing usage and adoption of consumers, it is argued that the mobile payment industry situates in an early state on the s-shaped industry life cycle curve.

13b. Industry analysis Defining the industry for mobile payments is not an easy task due to the mix of payments possibilities and the background of companies originating from other industries. In this complex setting both the payment and mobile payment industry is essential to identify and analyze since mobile payments are part of a larger payment industry. Grant (2010) argues that an industry is defined as a group of companies that supplies a market. The close correspondence between markets and industries can lead to confusion in the use of definitions. In general, markets refer to specific products and industries refer to industry profitability determined by competition in two markets: product markets and input markets (Grant, 2010, pp. 83–84). Since the mobile payments industry involves an input market and product market, the thesis will use the term industry in the following analysis. Using the framework of Porters five forces, the thesis will try to identify and analyze the most important factors of the industry.

i. Porters five forces Threat of substitutes

Hypothesis H1.1 – There are many substitutable products

Page 47 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The threat of substitutes can be seen as two types of potential substitution due to the complex nature of payment transactions. At one side, the process of a payment transaction provides a possibility of substitution and on the other side the possibility of means of payment substitution.

The process of a payment transaction most often involves a physical action of at least one party. That is theoretical not necessary. For example, a payment could involve a store credit or a store withdrawal directly integrated to a personal bank account, which was enabled by some sort of secure identification. It of course does not sound likely in near future, but in theory, it is possible due to the already existing technology available.

Traditionally, the medium of exchange has been a trading value in the forms of gold, other commodities or money. The evolution of people and the global industrialization has created a standard for global commerce; money. Nowadays most transactions are handled by cash or card but the denotation/denominator always includes a currency whether it is Dollar, Euro or Kroner. Digital platforms such as social networking and game platforms where cash is not an option, uses and serves users who have cards, PayPal or bank accounts. The mobile phone has enabled a disruptive payments platform for new innovative payment solutions and has created the opportunity fade out the use of cash and cards. Some of the recently launched products have the potential to disrupt the payments industry, namely peer-to-peer payments and mobile wallets. Along with the digitalization and development of e-commerce and e-gaming a new form of currency has been developed, a so-called virtual currency with Bitcoin as the most successful (Skatterådet, 2014). It is basically the idea of digitalized money and functions a peer-to-peer network that allows for the proof and transfer of ownership without the need for a trusted third party (Goldman Sachs, 2014). As described in chapter 3b – Payments in the Danish market, facilitating payments in the Danish market involves many stakeholders but from a purely technological perspective, the ability to pay anyone instantly in any currency exists already, with minimal or even no transaction costs. Banks and NETS are arguably resistant to such a no-fee money marketplace, because they now profit by acting as intermediaries for transactions. Virtual currency has many potential benefits, but experts reject the idea of bitcoin as a legit currency. They see its potential more as tradable asset or a developing technology (Goldman Sachs, 2014, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, 2013). The little recognition and adaptation of virtual currencies is also reflected in the globally different way of taxation of bitcoins (Tv2.dk, a)

The adoption of credit or debit card is much higher than any other medium of exchange including mobile payment (Interview 4, p. 4) as the technology is well developed and the consumers have

Page 48 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

already built years of trust and reliance on the card companies. Moreover, as ConvergEx9 chief market strategist Nicholas Colas argues: ‘Money is anchored in trust. Trust makes a currency legit’ (Cnbc.com) and that is reflection of the Danish market. Hence, the hypothesis is rejected due to slow adaptation.

The threat of substitutes is arguably moderate due to the deeply rooted process of payment transactions and the history of adaptation of a new medium of exchange. The nature of a purchase with a payer and payee also only makes a new substitutable solution less likely to happen in the near future. The available service received by consumers generally cannot be differentiated in more than three ways; Cash, cards and mobile payment. However, as the trend of seeing a cashless society, the trend of increasing digitalization and the emerging process it-optimization, the mobile payment market and the payment market in general will evolve and find its way to address the current inefficiencies, transact with lower cost and enable growth in sub hybrid markets within involved industries. Maybe even due to the emerge of mobile payment solutions.

Threat of entry

Hypothesis H2.1 – The payment market is undergoing a disruptive transformation

The payments industry has become a cluster for innovation with new players wanting to enter and dominate the former conservative and highly unaltered market. Before the entry of the Dankort in 1984, the Danish payments industry was simpler. Consumers had more or less two options to pay for things at the physical store: cash and checks. In this simple world, the supplier of the handling process for these payment instruments was, for all intents and purposes, the government. It operated the cash and check systems. The banks operated as the intermediary between the supplier of the payments systems, the consumers who used instruments and the merchants who accepted these instruments. Time has changed and the new players include corporations covering varied industries ranging from entrepreneurial startups, telecommunications companies, card companies, supermarket chains, information technology companies, labor unions and banks, offering simpler or greater functionality through an exciting digital experience that appeal to everyone. Many see opportunities in the payments data to generate revenues from advertisement or specific consumer preferences and a

9 ConvergEx Group LLC is a provider of global agency brokerage and investment technology. The registered broker- dealer specializes in derivatives execution management technology and brokerage services for listed options and equities (Wikipedia.com).

Page 49 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

number of these players are today offering everything from debit and credit cards, checking and savings accounts to money transfers across industries.

Even though the industry in Denmark has not proven its profitability by earning a return on capital in excess of its cost of capital (Business.dk, a), the industry at a global level has acted as a magnet for large conglomerates. The Danish market needs to address the threat of entries at a global level. Partly due to low degree of substitutes, hence global alignment of the characteristic of payments, and partly due to adoption of global innovation standards and global competition. The hypothesis is therefore accepted.

Hypothesis H2.2 – A large customer base matters when entering the mobile payment market To be a serious new entrant in mobile payment market a company needs to bring a customer base. Currently there are two major and established products in the Danish mobile payment industry; MobilePay and Swipp. Swipp and especially MobilePay have already achieved a high level of penetration due to an existing customer base gained from the banking industry. Both products have signed agreements to provide merchants and consumers with a secure mobile payment experience (Interview 2, p. 16). Both products use a phone number and it frequency technology as the mediating technology to identify the customer and the receiver. MobilePay has recently developed a terminal, which is integrable with Point of Sale systems but only on a trial basis (Version2, b). However, these agreements do not give any exclusive right since most merchants use other companies to provide the PoS systems (terminals) which typically are compatible with chip technology, magnetic technology and NFC technology (Verifone.dk).

Cash has the largest potential customer base since everybody has access to money. Debit and credit cards have a significant and increasing base of users due to the increasing availability not only reserved for the banks. However, what can mobile payments bring to the table? This section will only address the most obvious threats for the Danish mobile payments market. Facebook have the four most popular apps in Denmark: Facebook Messenger, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram (Dr.dk), and that involves a potential customer base of approximately 3 million individuals (Danmarks Statistik, 2014). That and the degree of usage of those apps only support the level of potential transactions. Apple Pay and Samsung Pay are integrated in the smart phone and therefore automatically has very large customer base since most smartphones in Denmark are one of these two

Page 50 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

types (Meremobil.dk). In terms of a large customer base Google wallet has probably the most potential since an integrated solution would enable most of smartphones in Denmark, and around the world. The reason for this is that most smartphones in Denmark and the rest of the world runs on the mobile operating system called android. All major smartphone producers uses android except Iphones who runs on IOS which is a closed source operative system developed and patented by Apple exclusively distributed for Apple hardware. NETS, who states that a NETS based solution is coming, has a large potential customer base due to their exclusive rights to the Dankort. Other entrants have similar potential if providing a significant non-industry specific interactive customer base. The best example on how to capitalize on a large customer base from a different industry is Apples use of iPod and iTunes users transfer to iPhone. The technological ability is of course not to be underestimated but the core business importance was having a large customer base (Fortune.com). The hypothesis is accepted since the payment industry have the characteristics of based on economics of scale due to the fee and transactions structure where the amount of transactions drives the industry, numbers of potential customers matters. If a company are capable of integrating a solution on a device based on an already existing customer base and therefore enable a sort of synergy or at least use the advantages of that, the company are a serious potential threat to the payment market and not just the mobile payment market.

Hypothesis H2.3 – The biggest threat comes from a global player The emergence of a new mobile payment ecosystems, seen among others in the MeeWallet solution (Interview 3, p. 1), surge the need to update the current regulatory framework. Therefore, it is crucial that regulators participate in the evolution of the payment ecosystem. As of now, the regulatory framework for mobile payments is inefficient and costly, especially in regards to NETS and other third party participation (see chapter 3b – Payments in the Danish market overview) in the provision of payment services. Arising question about legal liabilities and responsibilities of new players to payment transactions need to be addressed (Contini et al., 2011, p. 57) when global players wish to enter the market. When entering the Danish market global players require clarity of new regulatory structures so that they are able to proactively tackle issues on consumer protection, e.g. cyber security and identity management. A dialogue between the various regulatory institutions and participants of the mobile payment ecosystem need to be fostered to allow for the safety and integrity of the Danish payment system in order to develop the industry. In general, there is a high degree of regulation and

Page 51 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

therefore high barriers in the Danish payment market. This is only emphasized by the law of payment services and electronic money10, where it is to be found that the limited access to third party payment services, application to operate on Danish soil, administrative and operational requirements and obligations and authorization to act as a payment institute. As described in chapter 3b – payments in the Danish market, NETS is the dominant player due to its monopolistic position of acting clearing house and exclusive right to the Dankort. The Danish banks are the other dominant player due to the available types of payment (Danmarks Nationalbank, 2011, p. 20). The hypothesis is rejected due to these regulatory requirements and safety standards which put potential global entrants at a disadvantage in comparison with the Danish established firms because the compliance costs tend to weigh more heavily on newcomers (Grant, 2010, p. 73).

Hypothesis H2.4 – The biggest threat comes from a disruptive technology and not an established competitor The payment markets structure is inefficient seen from a transaction perspective. The flow of handling money makes fees and transactions cost key factors. As seen in the mediating technology for devices to connect and interact, it is possible to integrate into society in different ways and possible without costly transaction fees. As described in chapter 7b – ILC the technology has generated a much shorter life cycle for certain industries and products. The evolution of available and affordable communicative technology can be emphasized in the many technologies ranging from iBeacon, Bluetooth, QR-codes, bar codes and others (see table 2 in chapter Overview of current mobile payment solutions). Other available technologies not mentioned in table 1 are, Near-Sound Data Transfer (NSDT), a technology integrated in a mobile money platform called TagPay, authenticates retail payments via a unique, randomly generated sound that travels from the POS terminal to the consumers’ mobile phone (En.tagpay.fr). In contrast to for example NFC or bar codes, this technology requires no additional hardware investment for merchants or consumers since the hardware requirements only involves a microphone (Mondato.com). It is currently used in NYC taxis (Interview 2, p. 5) and possesses the characteristic of being integrable with all possible scenarios regarding payments as long there is an available source of sound, which often means a speaker and a microphone. By combining different technologies such as USSD, SMS and NSDT, TagPay enable the possibility of using their solution in

10 Bekendtgørelse af lov om betalingstjenester og elektroniske penge (LBK nr 365 af 26/04/2011 (Historisk))

Page 52 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

money transfers, salary disbursements, payment of bills, retail transactions, e-commerce, ATM withdrawal and vouchers use (En.tagpay.fr). Another example of different use of technology is biometric technology. Mobile payment technologies are gradually entering formerly known science fiction territory, with the emergence of a range of systems that use biometric information. The body becomes a tool of authentication ranging from facial recognition to fingerprint scanners. The observant reader has noticed the missing company that operates in all the industries referred to so far: Microsoft. The reason for this exclusion lies in lack of solution presentation until recently. Still there is no detailed presentation other than filing for an official money transmitter license in the US (Phonearena.com, a). Microsoft has provided an idea of future payments; a new mobile payment system under development deemed ‘Zero-Effort Payment’. The solution is thought to deliver a no-effort way of payment. It would not even require customers to pull their hand out of their pocket in order to make a payment, rather relying on biometric identifiers (Mondato.com). The solution is based on the idea of employing a combination of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) technology and facial recognition technology from the Microsoft’s Kinect gaming system from Xbox11 to authenticate the identity of customers and complete a transaction. The challenge regarding the first solution TagPay can rely in lack of penetration, hype and availability. This fact is highly related to a missing customer base and therefore a lack of distribution. The challenge regarding Microsoft is not lack of customer base, rather the obvious fact that it is only ideas and statements. The hypothesis is partly rejected. Theoretically, the opportunities are unlimited but as long as the technology is not mainstream, cost effective and available, the business justification is not there. But European Payments Council which is a decision-making and coordination body of the European banking industry in relation to payments representing over 8000 European banks in 31 countries (Europeanpaymentscouncil.eu) are determined that mobile payments should use the technology NFC (European Payments Council, 2010) and that makes an entrance of a disruptive technology a bit more difficult, but not impossible.

Hypothesis H2.5 – The level of product differentiation makes the industry open to a high degree of brand recognition and customer loyalty The emergence of the mobile payment market has been a disruptive extension to a mature payment market, but the number of substitutable products makes the market less likely to encompass high

11 Microsofts gaming and entertainment console

Page 53 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

levels of loyalty. Industries with a large number of substitutable products tend to produce higher level of brand recognition and loyalty (Grant, 2010, p. 72). The hesitation, in this sentence is the mix of different industries because when looking towards the mobile phone industry, Apple and partly Samsung have really high product loyalty (WDS, A Xerox Company, 2014). In this industry, the different products are also quite similar this only makes other variables such as brand more valuable. Another industry in the mix is the platform (Operating System) industry but this industry does not show a high level of brand recognition and customer loyalty according to an Accenture report (2013): ‘It’s Anyone’s Game in the Consumer Electronics Playing Field’. The credit and debit card industry competes in their offerings but tend to offer similar promotions to each other with competitive Annual Percentage Rate of charges and that indicates all things being equal a significant level of similarity and the industry’s way of capitalize on loyalty is through loyalty programs and rebates (Ching and Hayashi, 2010). The respondents of focus groups did not show any sign of application loyalty (Interview 4, Interview 5), which indicates a low level of loyalty and some indifference regarding which payment solution used. The entrants who enter from an industry with high levels of customer and product loyalty can in theory capitalize on the existing relationship. The hypothesis is inconclusive because of the low level of a measured customer loyalty and the cross industrial market that are in contrast with a high level of brand loyalty towards conglomerates such as Apple and Samsung.

Hypothesis H2.6 – The threat from the banking industry is more significant than the threat from the IT industry Companies coming from different industries possess different capabilities, core competences and approaches. The Danish payment industry is dominated by the Danish banks which traditionally represent security, sustainability and conservatism (Interview 2, p. 5) due to the high level of governmental regulation and requirements (Danmarks Nationalbank, 2005). The traditional approach of the banking sector to sustainability is often regarded as reactive and defensive (Iisd.org). One could argue that the industry has evolved and changed in a more proactive and offensive way if taking in consideration the global crises where a lot of heat and blame was given to financial institutions for being too risk seeking and speculative in new developed products such as subprime loans (Borsen.dk, a). The IT industry represents speed, innovation and value creation (Svinfusion.com). It is impossible not to acknowledge the impact of the IT industry in multiple industries, also described in chapter 9b – ILC.

Page 54 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The perceptions of trust and security have little importance according to the consumers (Interview 4, p. 6, Interview 5, p. 5 and 6, appendix 15). The Danish mobile payments market consists of three major players, where two of them having ties in the banking industry. These two players have the advantage of being familiar with and experienced of governmental regulatory requirements but being ‘slow’ and traditional financial institutions the need for a different approach is important. One of the players has been capable of showing a faster and ‘IT inspired’ approach, which is one of the reasons why MobilePay is dominating the market according to Troels Asmussen from Nordea (Interview 2, p. 4). The third player, MeeWallet is an entrepreneurial IT company who has formed strategic alliances to make up for the missing customer base and lack experience in the payment industry. According to Meijer & Bye (2011) the highly developed ecosystem of the payment market enables complement solutions and therefore also other industries. This mature and bank developed market is seen as slow and conservative (Interview 2, p. 2 & 8) due to the importance of payments. A way to compensate for the lack of payment infrastructure capability and what lies within, is developing and creating a compatible solution that can interact with existing infrastructure. As described in chapter 9b the lifecycle of technical products and industries may differ from traditional products and industries. The stage of mobile payments makes different variables important and success factors differ (Grant, 2010, p. 277). The importance of speed and agility at the introductory stage before entering the growth stage is a key success factor. The thesis argues that the industry is on the verge of entering the growth stage (Chapter 9b – ILC) which indicates that the emergence of a dominant technology, dominant design, increasing competition for distribution and increasing market penetration is becoming new key success factors. These new type of factors makes traditionally players in the industry more competitive due to their expertise, relations and experience of the payment industry.

By collaborating, the banking industry can compensate for the lack of speed and perceived lack of innovation and thereby dominate the market. However, unsuccessful in that, the IT industry has the opportunity of dominating the payment industry due to the shorter life cycle and innovative nature of information technology. The global market of mobile payments contains other industries such as the tele industry and credit card industry etc. These players have the opportunity to play a significant role in determining the competitiveness and profitability in the global market, thereby attracting or deterring new market entrants, and as long as the product is compatible with the Danish infrastructure

Page 55 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

it is argued that global entrants from other industries have the same opportunities and challenges as the banking and IT industry. The hypothesis is rejected. The analysis shows that the approach and methodic are the success factors that determines the industry alignment rather than an industry and its characteristics.

Hypothesis H2.7 – The threat from telecommunication industry is more significant than the threat from the IT industry To investigate this hypothesis, it is needed to look towards mobile payments in Africa. In 2007 Vodafone launched a mobile payment product called M-Pesa in Kenya and Tanzania (Mgafrica.com). So far M-Pesa has over 19 million registered users (Mgafrica.com) and are now present outside the African continent in many countries in Eastern Europe (Reuters.com, b). Vodafone uses its presence of a global network carrier to expand M-Pesa. At the time, Vodafone is not operating in Denmark but has TDC12 as an official partner. The product M-Pesa uses Unstructured Supplementary Service Data13 to communicate with SIM14 card, which is the standard of the GSM network. This business model deviates significantly from products developed by the banking and IT industry. The technology used are already globally available. If TDC or even Vodafone chooses to enter the Danish market, the infrastructure already exists and functionality will be the only factor of introduction. However, Denmark is arguable very different from African countries and Eastern Europe regarding smartphone usage and user experience. The SIM card has existed since 1991 (Thewirelessbanana.com) and has developed in line with network and mobile phones. The SIM card has been a necessity and a secure element for mobile phones to function but that need is challenged by the fast developing IT industry and smartphone producers led by Apple and Samsung. The telecommunication industry has not been able to develop with the same speed as the smartphone producers and the new ways of mobility (Interview 2, p. 15-16). The hypothesis is rejected due to the fact that lack of development and progress is experienced which is argued to be a significant reason why the telecommunication industry does not possess the capabilities to be a real threat to the fast developing mobile payment industry.

12 TDC – Denmark’s largest telecommunication company 13 USSD is a protocol used by GSM cellular telephones to communicate with the service provider's computers. 14 Subscriber identification module (SIM) is an integrated circuit chip that is intended to securely store the international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) number and its related key, which are used to identify and authenticate subscribers on mobile telephony devices.

Page 56 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hypothesis H2.8 – Only large companies provides a threat in the mobile payment industry A relatively significant amount of capital will be required by new comers or start-ups to build the necessary infrastructure to support the payment process. Though, instead of building an infrastructure, the market provides an opportunity of entering by making a solution compatible and integrable with existing infrastructure. As described above, strategic alliances or partnerships are at high value. One of the reasons for partnering is the level of competition among the current players, which is intense. Normally new entrants are deterred by such intense level of competition as they generally lack the capital and the experience to face the tough competition. The industry as stated above provides the opportunity to penetrate as an additional product, at a low cost. That could be in the form of integrating loyalty programs, design likability or other consumer preferences. Since the thesis argues that the world has not seen the full potential in the use of a smartphone yet, the potential for add-ons and integrable solutions makes the market open for low cost small budget entrants. However, to be a serious competitor on a large scale, add-on solution does not provide the opportunity to be a dominant player in the payment industry. When major players are expanding their capabilities to cater to the Danish mobile payments market, any new smaller entrant would have to face serious competition. This could be a difficult task considering a lack of reputation, capital requirement, distribution and expertise. Even if the new entrant were able to provide a unique product offering, the possibilities of it facing the threat of envelopment from these large players are high and even being successful the most likely scenario would involve acquisition and not competition.

Sub conclusion Considering the above analysis, the threat of new entrants in the global market for mobile payments is immediately low as new entrants face a significantly high level of entry barriers. However, taken in consideration that customer base is important, the nature of technology industries, the integrating mix of the payment industry and the lack of standards, indicates that the threat of new entrants in the Danish market is very high due to the lacking of the presence of non-industry specific large corporations in the Danish market.

Industry rivalry

Industry rivalry regarding mobile payments tends to be cross industrial. That, in itself is not a big deal. It is seen across other products and markets, such as the car industry or flight industry where a very large number of different parts needs to come from different industries due to intensive and

Page 57 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

specialized expertise or technology. An example from the automobile production is tires that exist as a highly specialized industry accommodating the car industry among other industries. Touchscreens and car intelligence is handled by another industry; Electronics. Looking at mobile payments as one separate industry is argued not to be adequate for this analysis. This chapter will only take the approach of addressing players who are currently active in the market for mobile payments. However, as described earlier it is impossible to analyze part of payments without addressing the entire landscape of payments in Denmark.

The cross industrial rivalry is implicit divided into two sub groups since no international player has emerged in the Danish market yet, but to think of an innovative, disruptive and possible lucrative market without any global cross industrial conglomerates such as Google, Apple or Samsung is theoretical utopia.

Industry rivalry regarding mobile payments is very much aligned with the structural variables such as concentration, entry and exit barriers, product differentiation and information availability (Grant, 2010, p. 69). As described earlier the oligopolistic competition structure that drives principal competitive behavior and profitability, are defined as an industry with few firms and significant barriers with a high potential for product differentiation and imperfect availability of information.

Hypothesis H3.1 – The concentration of Danish companies supports the argument of oligopolistic competition

The Danish market can arguable be seen as oligopolistic competition where a constant battle for market share is experienced which means that the seller concentration (Porter, 1985) in the Danish market is highly concentrated. The concentration ratio which is the combined market share of the leading solutions is CR3 = 99,9 %15 (Grant, 2010, p. 73). The three major operative solutions are MobilePay, Swipp and MeeWallet. MobilePay can be used in approximately 3700 merchants, Swipp in more than 5000 and MeeWallet in more than 4000 (Recordere.dk). MobilePay has partnered with Danish Supermarket and Rema 1000 to begin the first adaption of PoS integrated MobilePay terminals. Swipp has not communicated any partnerships or shops where it can be used which makes the number of 5000 questionable since there is no chance of validating it. MeeWallet also has a PoS integrated terminal and has partnered with Forbrugsforeningen which is the largest union of purchasing (Forbrugsforeningen.dk ). The Danish market is dominated by MobilePay created and

15 CR(X) = Y: The concentration ratio where X is the number of firms, Y=Market share of X

Page 58 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

owned by Danske Bank who has the most transactions in the Danish market and the most downloads, 2,4 millions. Of the 2,4 million downloads Danske Bank states that 2,03 million are active users compared to Swipps 620.000 active users (Bureaubiz.dk, b). It is not possible to compare downloads and active users to Meewallet since the owner and CEO Kim Vindberg-Larsen would not or could not inform a number (Interview 3, p. 6). This domination by Mobile Pay is only emphasized by the use mobile payment app found in the data collection of questionnaire. Approximately 96 % of the respondents who used an app, had MobilePay, while only approximately 30 % had Swipp (addition to MobilePay) and only 1,2 % had Meewallet. The dominant firm can exercise considerable discretion over the price which MobilePay is doing (Grant, 2010, p. 73). At the moment MobilePay costs Danske Bank around DKK 18 million with 50.000 daily transactions just in transaction fees due to the payment infrastructure (Berlingske, 2014). Some of the cost will be covered by the cost of merchants to offer MobilePay Online or MobilePay Business. Swipp uses account-to-account infrastructure, also described in chapter 3b, which lower their cost of transaction fee significantly. This way of structure also enables the possibility of higher amounts of transfer and higher purchases. Swipp offers the possibility of up to DKK 10.000 at a daily basis while MobilePay offers up to DKK 2000 a day (Business.dk, b). Meewallet has no official limit other than the underlying account- or amount limit due to their credit card infrastructure based on SDC16 integration and own developed ecosystem called Meetag (Interview 3, p. 11) which enables no cost related to transaction fees. MobilePay and Swipp are trying to capture market share from each other mainly through intensive pricing strategies where both competitors keep their service free for a long time and limits the possibility that their product can be profitable. These pricing strategies are needed to keep consumers loyal to the provider of their choice (Reichheld and Teal, 2001), whether it's MobilePay or Swipp. So far all products are free of charge for consumers even though Danske bank has indicated that a consumer fee is on the way, after extending the free of charge strategy three years, so that the year 2016 will be the year where consumers can expect a transaction fee (Computerworld.dk, a ). However, since Swipp and Meewallet have no plans of charging a fee, MobilePay needs to hide the expected fees as indirect or extended, or drop the consumer fee if not willing to jeopardize losing the significant customer base. All empiricism, also stated above, implies that MobilePay are dominating the Danish market (Interview 1, Interview 2, Interview 3, Interview 4, Interview 5, and Appendix 15). Only approximately 30 % of the mobile payment users used Swipp and only approximately 1 % uses Meewallet (Appendix 15).

16 Skandinavisk Data Center

Page 59 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The hypothesis is accepted because a small group of firms controls the particular market (Grant 2010, p. 68-69).

Hypothesis H3.2 – The price competition in the Danish market makes the mobile payment industry non-profitable.

Since the usage and adaptation of mobile payments is relatively low and the industry are highly immature, focus on profitability is not the main concern and companies tend to set aside and overrule normal revenue versus cost (Interview 1, computerworld.dk, a). The two largest competitors MobilePay and Swipp are products of the banking industry players which enables scale economies and therefore the opportunity to compete aggressively on price in order to achieve critical mass; in this case customers. In this context customers relates to both consumers and merchants. A reason for this type of strategy could be that the market has a high level of potential for growth, hence high profit opportunities. Other potential indirect gains of the industry are the opportunity of re-branding or being perceived and accepted as a different type of company than formerly perceived. As described above both products Swipp and MobilePay are products of a perceived and reputed old-fashioned, traditional and slow industry (Forbes.com, b; Interview 2). Being a first-mover and potential perceived entrepreneurial business could enable an “Apple effect” (Technewsworld.com) where new products are awaited with great curiosity and expectation and therefore provide a significant level of sales.

Economics of scale is a key factor as long as no company, or product has created a standard and market awaits the profit beneficial growth. Nevertheless, given the maturity of the market and the degree of attention the industry is getting, the prospect of the industry is attractive. Hence, the hypothesis is rejected.

Hypothesis H3.3 – The industry rivalry concerns a specific type of company and price competition keeps global companies away

To identify a specific type of company this part will use global perspective. The focus will be on some companies already mentioned: Apple, Facebook, Samsung, Google and PayPal.

PayPal excluded, the common denominator of these companies is that all companies originates from other industries than payments. Ebay owned PayPal was created as a complimentary product of E- commerce due to the nature and need of handling auctions and trades. Coming from various industries

Page 60 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

potentially makes these competitors very different in capabilities, core competencies and objectives. For example, Apple originates from the personal computer industry but have since then grown into other industries as a forced necessity and brilliancy of a small group of people. Facebook originates from the social network and media industry where Myspace was a first-mover volume wise (Facebook.com, Myspace.com). However, Facebook managed to include every type of individuals contrary to Myspace who proclaimed the objective to be a channel for musicians to share their music without illegally downloading an Mp3 file, which in the beginning of the 21st century was a great concern and problem. Samsung is Korea’s largest company with ties to many different industries ranging from electronics to construction, a true conglomerate (Samsung.kr). Google is despite their latest try to separate the searching engine brand, a company that originates from a small niche in the large IT industry which essential is just a ‘perfect’ algorithm.

Mobile payments is a relatively small industry where potential revenues is not as great as other larger industries. However, the potential volume and other beneficial factors, depending on objective, makes this small industry highly attractive for companies from different industries. Using mobile payments to create revenue on other markets or to enhance brand use and loyalty is seen as a valuable attribute for the above-mentioned companies. Additionally most of the companies uses their core competencies from an industry in other industries and therefore does not directly need product profit in one industry if another product gains from that same product. In its essence mobile payments potentially involves every core business of the mentioned companies. Samsung with a mobile phone, Google with android as mobile operating system, Facebook with the most used application, and Apple with both operating system and hardware.

The above-mentioned argument makes integration of many different products a key factor for global competitors, and direct single product profit does not seem to be a first priority. Therefore, the hypothesis is rejected since price competition is arguably not a significant factor for global players’ interest in the Danish market.

Hypothesis H3.4 – The switching cost of Swipp is low which makes diversity of competitors important

Users of Swipp are bound to the collaboration of the 81 banks due to the mobile bank integration while everyone due to the card architecture can use MobilePay and MeeWallet. Switching cost for consumers are therefore very low and a way to differentiate as a product and hence avoid price competition or gain market share could be diversity of the company.

Page 61 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

As the industry leading product regarding awareness and usage (Chapter 13d – Quantitative analysis), MobilePay has assumingly taken the ‘right’ measures and initiated the ‘right’ actions. Actions such as delivering new services and developing new product integration in a short timeline. Since April 2015, Danske Bank has launched MobilePay Online, MobilePay on Apple Watch, App integration to multiple apps such as DBS, Receipt integration and PoS terminal integration (Mobilepay.dk, b). Nevertheless, MobilePay is a product of the banking industry, which normally does not possess these characteristics (Globeandmail.com). The thesis will not identify nor analyze any further, what Danske Bank has done to achieve this characteristic but rather accept and acknowledge the fact. Swipp is also a product of the banking industry, which in theory would make them alike. Swipp though is a product of numerous banks, which could be an obstructive factor in an industry that seems to have a technology life cycle and thus include capabilities such as speed, quick decision-making, agility, innovation and new standard setting. Without a deeper insight in the collaboration between the 81 banks and the structural setup of Swipp it is arguably and assumingly slower processes involved, only emphasized by the lack of actions from Swipp. Furthermore, 81 banks with different types and different need of infrastructure is a potential showstopper or at least a factor that only slow things down. The infrastructure of Nordea is arguable very different from Sparekassen Thy and since the infrastructure is different from bank to bank designing a flexible app is need to handle underlying infrastructure and that is seen as a factor that also only makes development and time to market slower. MeeWallet is an entrepreneurial IT company that could possess some agility and fast go to market strategy, but MEEwallet was launch as a product October 2014 (Meewallet.com, a) after 12 years in the making (Interview 3). That is not the typical characteristic of an IT startup company. Looking at other variables of MEEdkk A/S who owns MEEwallet differs from Danske Bank and collaboration of the 81 banks. MEEdkk A/S is a crowdfunding company where unlisted shares are offered (maximum 7 % of the company). So far approximately 100.000 shares of DKK 185 per share have been bought (Meewallet.com, a). Further financing was granted marts 2014 from the Danish state financing fund with a DKK 2 million loan (Trendonline.dk). These above mentioned characteristics are more typical for an IT innovation company but short time to market usually is a key factor of IT startups (Grant, 2010, p. 265) which at present time does not exist.

Objectives of the three companies are quite similar. According to the series of Swipp commercials Swipp seems to introduce consumers to a mobile payment solution. The thesis takes the liberty of interpreting the series’ objective as using a mobile as a payment method (Sondagsavisen.dk). MobilePays objectives are ‘easy transfer of money and the possibility of paying in shops and web

Page 62 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

shops’ (Danskebank.dk, b). While MeeWallet writes: ‘… A digital wallet which enables faster and more secure payments’ (Meewallet.com, b). In general, these messages could be interpreted as all products providing a different way of traditional payments.

The similarity of objectives, strategies and somewhat origins indicates that the competition only will increase in intensity if Swipp or other companies take on a more agile and technology product life cycle approach, like Danske Bank, and deliver new initiatives and products at a different pace, which leads to an acceptance of the hypothesis.

Hypothesis H3.5 – Since switching cost is low and the Danish competitors are relatively similar, global competitors have an edge in winning market share

All mentioned global companies has been key drivers in the rapid technological development. They know the game, they know the players, they know many markets, they know the consumers; they know a lot! Entering the mobile payment market necessarily do not mean that direct capitalization is the objective of the companies. It is observed that products are being launched in order to gain market share or to create a complimentary dependency of other products produced by the company. An example of that is Apple producing iPhones with exclusive complimentary products such as iMovie17, iTunes18, iWatch19 and now Apple Pay. This also applies to the rest of the global companies. Assumingly the final objective is to be profitable in every product, but companies like Facebook, Apple, Google, Paypal and Samsung generates revenue in many other industries and markets, which makes them independent of having direct need of generating short-term profit. Due to the rise of a new industry and the competencies only relating to the industry, the thesis argues that the objective of global players are also relatively similar but very different from Danish players (see hypothesis 12). Another fact that has to be mentioned is the fact that global companies tends to have global strategies which means that another spectra comes into play; the possibility of using mobile payments across borders. The respondents in the focus group one argues that the possibility of using mobile payments across borders is a potential feature that would mean a positive attitude towards a product (Interview 4, p. 7).

17 iMovie enables the possibility of creating own movies using multiple recordings from a personal phone (www.apple.com/dk/mac/imovie) 18 iTunes is a music, movie, television and radio service (www.apple.com/dk/itunes/) 19 iWatch is a watch that is compatible with Apple products due to the iOS software (www.apple.com/iWatch)

Page 63 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The fact that all global companies have products, product integration and core competencies in an IT characterizing industry where objectives, strategies and processes differ from the banking industry and products are created in a global perspective makes global players different from local players. Moreover, by having the opportunity and the possibility of taking advantage of IT industry related core competencies, global companies have arguably an edge compared to local companies, hence the hypothesis is accepted.

Hypothesis H3.6 – The product significantly differentiate between the Danish competitors

As described earlier, users of Swipp needs to have a bank account in one of the 81 banks due to the mobile bank integration and the account-to-account architecture while everyone due to the card architecture can use MobilePay and MeeWallet. This is a very important difference between the three products.

The benefits of having account to account payment structure have not outweighed obvious downside of the mobile bank integration of Swipp (Interview 1, p.4). Since the service of all three competitors at present time is free of charge for consumers, the possible and potential gain of differentiation is not available. Merchants in contrast experience different type of cost pending on the product. MeeWallet is available to every consumer with a credit card from either Visa, Mastercard or Forbrugsforeningen20. The limitation of the solution of MeeWallet is the obligatory “egg”, the terminal or also referred to as the receiver end. The terminal used to connect to the smartphone app (the wallet) involves a first time cost, a monthly fee and a transaction fee. This type of cost structure is no different from MobilePay. So seen from a merchant’s perspective Swipp is more attractive from a cost perspective due to the account-to-account architecture where a clearinghouse is not needed and therefore less expensive.

Analyzing the functional aspects of the three products leads to a similarity in both MeeWallet and MobilePay where an app is the link between the consumer and the merchant. Transfer of money is also possible. Swipp on the contrary is located in the mobile bank app, which means an extra time consuming step compared to MeeWallet and MobilePay. Another interesting topic of functionality is the integration of different products. When purchasing a bus or train ticket via the DSB app it is possible to pay with MobilePay. Post Danmark21 also offer this functionality. Via a byproduct called

20 Denmark’s largest union of purchases issuing credit cards (Forbrugsforeningen.dk) 21 Danish postal service

Page 64 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

MobilePay AppSwitch, apps are able to integrate to the MobilePay app and therefore enable an easiness of payment. The price is currently DKK 1000 in establishment fee and 1 percent in transaction fee (Mobilepay.dk, c). MobilePay has in total four different ways of payment; by phone number (GSM22) technology for 1) stores and 2) online stores (online stores need a special Payment Service Provider23 agreement), by 3) NFC, QR code or Bluetooth via an integrable terminal and by 4) a software development kit for integration of apps (Mobilepay.dk, d). Current prices relating to each way of payments are as follows: 1) MobilePay Business provides four different prices for four different service agreements; establishment cost (DKK 0 at present time) for all services, monthly fee pending on which agreement chosen ranging from DKK 0 to DKK 199 (see appendix 9) and transaction fee of one percent with a transaction maximum of DKK 5. 2) Mobile Pay Online does not have any direct price since a special payment service provider agreement is needed and how MobilePay has negotiated those is unknown. 3) The price of MobilePay Point of Sale is determined individually through a negotiation, thus price is unknown. Furthermore, this solution includes a specific supplier dependency. 4) The price of MobilePay AppSwitch is a mentioned above DKK 1000 in establishment cost and 1 percent transaction fee with a minimum limit of DKK 1 (Appendix 9 – Products and prices of MobilePay).

MeeWallet offers so far a standard price. A Meewallet terminal (the egg) cost DKK 750 for merchants if not member of Forbrugsforeningen. Members of Forbrugsforening is free of charge. A monthly subscription fee is DKK 75 and transaction fees are fixed DKK 0.75/transaction (Meewallet.com, b). MeeWallet only provides a payment solution for physical stores, which limits the product functionality.

Swipp is also limited to physical stores and therefore provides only two different solutions. Price examples are not public available but requested prices are informed to be; Point of Sale integration has no establishment fee and no monthly fee. The phone number solution provided by Swipp is the same. The only cost related to Swipp mobile payment solutions are transaction fees. Pending on the volume of transactions prices goes from DKK 0,60 to DKK 0,90 (Appendix 10 – Products and prices of Swipp).

The three products also differs in the potential maximum use of solution. MobilePay in general are amount limited due to legal security restrictions. The app uses the credit or debit card infrastructure,

22 Global System of Mobile Communications 23 PSP such as Teller A/S, Euroline AB, Nordea, Clearhaus, DIBS, ePay, QuickPay or Wannafind

Page 65 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

which limits the daily transaction due to potential fraud (Finansraadet.dk). The bi-product MobilePay Online does not have amount restrictions because of the payment service provider link. The maximum amount for MobilePay in general is DK 3000 while MeeWallet has unlimited amount due to the wallet functionality developed on a private ecosystem (Interview 3, p. 1-2, 10). Swipps account-to- account infrastructure enables the possibility of a daily use of DKK 10.000 (Swipp.dk).

The differences in products are present but the main observation is the numerous bi- product line of MobilePay compared to Swipp and MeeWallet. The advantage of amount limits enables potential possibilities in the immature industry. Nevertheless, it is not a significant factor that makes consumers deselect the industry-leading product MobilePay and therefore the hypothesis is rejected.

Hypothesis H3.7 – The different nature of Swipp as a product enables opportunities in other industries

For example, Apples battle for market regarding operating systems (and computers). Microsoft’s software product Windows had a market share of approximately 98 %. Today Mac OS X has increased in usage from approximately one % to eight % (W3schools.com) which is a fantastic accomplishment due to the fact that Microsoft still is the most dominant and important player in the operating systems market. However, how did Apple increase the market share when the Microsoft had a superior and satisfactory product? Apple created a truly disruptive and superior product in the music industry, the iPod. By creating a product that in the perspective of history revolutionized an entire industry, Apple capitalized on a blue ocean type strategy. Combining technology and entrepreneurial creativity Apple is now a world leading company across many industries with brand and products24 that makes them one of a kind.

The account-to-account infrastructure of Swipp, Swipps smartphone integration and the redundancy of a clearinghouse company potentially enable other product functionalities. Imagine a PBS functionality integrated in Swipp. Instead of using the costly NETS product PBS payment service (BS25), Swipp could in theory be used as a payment reminder and actual payment service. Bills and invoices would be paid based on actions with a swipe rather than automated monthly easy forgotten statements.

24 iMac, iPhone, iTunes, iPod, iPad, Apple Tv, iOS, Mac OS X, Apple care, OS X Server, iCloud, AirPort utility, etc. 25 BS – Betalingsservice

Page 66 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

As seen above, areas in different industries can be explored in order to become a significant player in the Danish market. The hypothesis is therefore accepted.

Hypothesis H3.8 – Marketing initiatives are used to gain market share

Industry rivalry usually takes the form of jockeying for position and market share using various tactics where advertising are one of them (Porter, 1998). As of now, all products are free of charge for consumers, price for retailers are not radically different and a similarity of origins. This could indicate that Swipp should resort to other available tactics to conquer market share in a MobilePay dominated market. Investigating the public available actions Swipp has initiated since the launch in 2013 leads to two interesting observations. First, a double-digit million kroner amount was used on a commercial with an intension of ‘making Swipp known by every person in Denmark’ – Martin F. Andersen, director of Swipp. Secondly a collaboration between Swipp and Matas, a materialist store chain of 292 shops (Matas.dk) has been published many places (Finans.dk, a; Børsen, 2015). The common denominator regarding both initiatives is a delay compared to MobilePay and therefore a lack of diversification. MobilePay began publishing their first commercials in May 2013 (Tv2.dk) and these initiatives has been followed up by many different commercials. All describing a new functionality.

These arguments of Swipp always being too late is emphasized by MobilePays many award wins (App of the year 2013, Special Circle Award, Best mobile platform, Best financial services, etc.) and even a word addition to modern Danish Dictionary directly derived from a MobilePay functionality: ‘at Swippe’ (Finans.dk, b).

The hypothesis is accepted because Swipp has made attempts of marketing initiatives which in theory will contribute to higher rivalry intensity but the effect of these are questionable due to a lack of due diligence and timing.

Hypothesis H3.9 – The low exit barriers makes industry rivalry very high

In this case, the industry definition needs to involve and expand to more than mobile payments. In fact, since the mobile payments industry is part of a larger payment industry, all actors in the payment market have the opportunity to utilize an in-depth expertise if entry and exit barriers are low. According to Porter (1988) low exit barriers is negative for the established companies since potential new companies do not risk a big loss if they enter the industry. As described in chapter 7a, no standard has been established yet and there are no completely established companies thus far. Moreover, due

Page 67 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

to the lack of technological standardization and the functional characteristic of ‘be able to pay with your smart or mobile phone’ regardless the technology, it seems that exit barriers are very low. Since the mobile payments industry involves a completely new and different product, a standard technology will definitely arise at some point. NFC or Bluetooth is both technologies that connect devices and designing an app for a smartphone that is compatible with either technology are assumingly not high cost related and therefore not related to high cost of exit.

This is not the banking industry, which is regulated. This new industry is part of many industries but does not have that high governmental regulation such as the banking industry and therefore, the hypothesis is accepted.

Hypothesis H3.10 – Global competitors will only make industry rivalry more intense

The competitive rivalry in payments globally has intensified over the past years with banks, card companies, tele companies, payment companies, supermarket chains and large technology companies all trying to engage with the consumer. The traditional players in the consumer related payment industry such as banks, payment companies and card companies are trying to hold on to their customers by creating new offerings and products. The rapid technological development however has created new ways and new opportunities of traditional payments and handling business. Globally it has resulted in card companies like Visa, MasterCard, and American Express are looking at opening up their market through new offerings based on pre-paid cards, mobile wallets, and touchless cards among others. Payment settlement company PayPal also sees opportunities in expanding their business into similar but for them new markets (https://www.paypal.com/dk/webapps/mpp/send- money-online). Companies that has a mobile payment product but do not exist in the Danish mobile payment industry, include Apple (ApplePay), Facebook (Messenger functionality), Samsung (Samsung Pay), Google (Android Pay) as the largest corporations. The thesis has chosen to focus on these competitors even though the global market consists of many more potential competing companies. The global competition among these companies mentioned does not reflect a long history of rivalry. Some companies such as Apple and Samsung have a long history of rivalry but in a different industry. The competitive rivalry in different industries among these conglomerates has in general been growing and intensified over the past years, all trying to engage with customers directly and own the relationship enabling a potential massive flow of useful information data. The size of the

Page 68 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

conglomerates in conjunction to product development and availability needs mentioning despite the non-present industry status.

The mobile payments industry has reached a level for potential growth also described in (chapter 7b - ILC) which means that the size of the industry will no else equal be larger in the near future. Therefore, it could be argued that competition should not be about capturing market share from each other, but rather capture parts of market that has not been captured. Which in the end indicates that the intensity of rivalry will intensify if competitors local or global manages to develop and bring innovative initiatives to the table, perhaps using company capabilities from other industries. This is an important pointe in the chase of being a potential and equal competitor in an industry where rivalry will intensify in the future. The hypothesis is accepted.

Sub conclusion

As described in the analysis above it is clear that MobilePay has the advantage of being first movers in terms of level of penetration, usage, collaborations and bi-product offers. Grant (2010) argues that industry rivalry usually takes the form of intense competition for position by price competition, advertising battles, product differentiation, product introductions etc. In this case, the rivalry involves all three mentioned ways of competing. That is very much aligned with the lack of knowledge and usage of Swipp (Appendix 15). MobilePay are still very much first movers regarding partnership initiatives and product and business development by having many different products and service agreements, both online and physical stores. These initiative is also very much aligned with utilizing the gained first mover benefits and customer base. Despite these obvious disadvantages for Swipp, Swipp is actively trying to gain market share due to the product differentiation. Advertising regardless the company may positively influence the industry as a whole, as they increase demand and awareness.

Bargaining powers of buyers

Societies has evolved and different paying methods have been practiced. Going from commodity swaps to check payments to digital payment methods has changed the nature of payments along with technology and consumer demand.

The industry buyers includes two groups of mutual dependency, end-consumers and retailers. Retailers needs an end-receiver in the form of bank account-linked phone number or a physical

Page 69 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

terminal or Application Programming Interface (API) kit that integrates to a PoS system. Retailers whether online or offline pays in general an establishment fee and a transaction fee. Consumers on the other hand needs an app to process a purchase.

Hypothesis H4.1 – The consumers’ price sensitivity makes bargaining powers high

As mentioned earlier there are only three competitors and all solutions provides the consumer with a free of charge structure. So far. When asked consumers believe that additional cost would make them change product but this is only speculation at this time. Today, monetary switching cost are nonexistent and other parameters needs to be identified to answer this hypothesis. Consumers are highly focused on simplicity, user experience and speed (Interview 4, p. 1, 2, 9). This indicates that functionality and design of the app is important. In terms of apps, there are constantly new trends and functionalities and companies are constantly trying to hit the new trends that may become the new hit and thus enable a larger customer base, which in the end will increase transactions and therefore earnings. Design and functionality between the two biggest products, Swipp and MobilePay is arguable quite similar and none of the products has been involved in any large publicity scandals. Working with payments, consumer privacy including bank accounts and credit card access, trust and security is vital, despite the current lack of consumer focus (Interview 4, p. 3; Interview 5, p. 2). The industry as described in chapter 7b – ILC is in its early stages and consumers does not have many different choices with significant different benefits. Since the missing ability to integrate vertically for consumers and the lack of size and competition, it is argued that consumer bargaining powers are low and therefore the hypothesis is rejected.

Hypothesis H4.2 – The retailers’ price sensitivity is low

The relative differences in prices between the current three products, MobilePay, MeeWallet and Swipp does not matter at present time. This I partly due to a similar price structure as credit and debit cards. Secondly, the usage of mobile payment apps are not yet close to the same usage of credit and debit cards. So far, only one solution has the ability to affect retailers cost of mobile payment due to product usage, but to increase the cost for retailers when consumers are introduced to a completely different and new way of payment method would be inconsiderate. The new payment method is in a stage where retailers only provides a consumer with a new form of payment. The potential benefits of acquiring sales and behavioral related information is still to be facilitated. The indirect cost related

Page 70 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

to sales such as transaction cost, marketing cost and banking cost has been a long-term standard expense and a radical disruption of an industry standard takes time.

It is argued to be unlikely to experience a day-to-day shift in payments methods among retailers. A potential stream of information is becoming available and detailed data can be used for better and more detailed consumer analysis, which in the end can result in an even lower price sensitivity.

Hypothesis H4.3 – The number of available solutions affects retailers bargaining power

If any product provider choses to add charges on each transfer and their competition remained free, it could shift market shares and the number of users in the market due to consumers’ price sensitivity. As mentioned earlier profitability was not a high priority due to the immature nature of product and industry. However, along with the rising number of retailers offering customers mobile payment opportunities, MobilePay has published a positive deficit this year (Borsen.dk, b). That indicates retailers are providing MobilePay with the revenue that makes the business case profitable.

Customers of retailers has a high bargaining power towards retailers. They are a deciding and important factor since they control the revenue of retailers. Actions of retailers are therefore limited and the deciding factor of which product to offer involves more than cost. Seen from a purely merchants perspective, variables such as buyer preference and behavior is becoming more and more important. The technological development in real time data availability and information provides a potential set of individual marketing campaigns and loyalty programs, hence a potential additional sale or at least better management of costs. However, the three products available in the industry are in early stages of offering such data, which makes bargaining power of retailers very low (Appendix 11 – Price examples).

Bargaining power of suppliers

Hypothesis H5.1 – The bargaining power of mobile payment suppliers are low due to the cross industrial industry and the new potential information flow

As described in chapter 3b, Danish payment infrastructures has not evolved in decades and the use and demand for information technology integration in advanced countries, hence industries are becoming a factor of mandatory importance (Grant, 2010, p. 301–303). Contemporary words such as big data and cloud computing are more than just buzz words; it potentially enables real time payments and information. There is a lack of transparency in the current settlement process with the value of

Page 71 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

free float enjoyed and dominated by banks continues to remain very high (Chapter 3a). Without a modern and contemporary payments infrastructure at banks, the market is open for new players for greater disruption. MeeWallet are already innovating this area due to their own ecosystem (Interview 3, p. 1-3). Global companies such PayPal, Apple, Samsung, Visa and ClearXchange and virtual currencies like Bitcoin, all with the capability to build alternative payments infrastructures. The suppliers and potential suppliers of the industry does not have to be local companies. Developing a compatible infrastructure can be used on a global scale. However, the current mobile payment industry’s suppliers involve a smartphone, hence hardware, software and connectivity. As of now, the three functioning solutions require data connectivity to open the app, require operating system such iOS or android (app dependency) and a smartphone, which means that bargaining power of suppliers is high, theoretically. Practically, the industry is at present time a byproduct of different industries, developed internally and smartphone usage and availability is very high, which makes a price increase in one of the mentioned requirements relatively insignificant.

A potential future with transparency, multiple products with different infrastructure, speed and global efficiency to serve the needs of the end consumer could be very influential in the bargaining power of suppliers. For now the suppliers bargaining powers are low, therefore, the hypothesis is accepted.

13c. Qualitative analysis As mentioned in the methodically section, the majority of the collected data comes from qualitative and quantitative data, when analyzing customer behavior. After describing Swipp’s position in the market today and the opportunities and potential threats they have in the mobile payment market, this paragraph will give an understanding of the consumers’ preferences and issues with mobile payment. This will lead to an understanding of how Swipp will be able to approach their consumers, so they are willing to adopt, use and trust their mobile payment system.

1. Qualitative – Themes Before analyzing the two focus groups, we found topics from earlier research and expert interviews, which were found to have an impact, when investigating consumer’s issues and preferences when using mobile payment systems. These topics are presented and described below.

Page 72 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

2. Adopting mobile payment system Previous studies found that the willingness to adopt a mobile payment system could differ and could limit the possibilities for Swipp to get a bigger share of the payment market if the consumers were not ready to adopt to a mobile payment solution. Furthermore, the analysis will look at the respondent’s willingness to switch to Swipp from MobilePay.

3. Perceived risk During the focus group, the participants were asked to consider and discuss the risk they thought they would be facing, when using mobile payment compared to traditional payment forms. They were asked to consider the potential risk and how the mobile payment safety could affect their future choice of system.

4. Personal data Personal data contains the information, which the consumers are providing, when signing up and using the mobile payment systems. The use of data is not only looking at the fear of illegal use but also the information the companies get legally and the potential use of the information.

5. Future expectations To capture the respondent’s expectations to the future we played them two videos that introduce them to some of the features, which are expected to be part of mobile payment systems in the near future. Furthermore, it was encouraged to discuss their own expectations to their own use of mobile payment in the future and whether or not they thought, it could have an effect on their shopping experience when using a mobile payment system.

6. Switching from MobilePay to Swipp Switching contains two aspects for the respondents to discuss. Firstly, they were ask to argue how willing they were to switch between mobile payments systems in general and attributes their current application had that caused them to stay with their current application. Secondly, what could make them change to another application such as Swipp or another application.

Page 73 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ii. Result of the qualitative analysis From the above selected variables, the two focus groups were introduced to the topics, which made them discuss and evaluate the importance of each topic. In the following paragraph, we will introduce the key findings from the two focus groups. The findings will then be analyzed along with the three interviews with the experts on the mobile payment market.

1. Focus group interview Overall, both interviews went as we had hoped. All the respondents from both focus groups showed up, which gave us a group with five respondents and a group with six respondents. The division of the two groups was based on age, gender, and education/income. The reason for these criteria was to create two groups with as much diversity as possible. The advantage with the diversity was there came different angles on the topics and a better discussion, since not all faced the same challenges or saw the same opportunities. Since the two focus groups consisted of relatively few respondents, it gave each respondent plenty of opportunities to state their opinion to each topic, without having to worry about how much time they spent. The respondents in both groups seemed reticent in the beginning of the interview, but as the interview went on all the respondents started to loosen up, the answers became more detailed, and more attitudes came through. During the interview, the moderator had to ask some of the respondents directly to make sure all the respondents made a statement regarding their attitude toward the question. In the first group we found some difficulties in getting a discussion going, there were many one-person answers with no follow up reply from others in the group. However, the respondents managed to engage more and more as the interview went on. Group number two, however, had a better flow in the different discussions and the dynamic in the group was better, resulting in more in-debt discussions. This gave some more detailed answers about each attitude toward the topic, since they were challenged in their arguments.

In hindsight, the data collection could have been optimized, if there had been some adjustment in the process. In the first group, the moderator could have forced the respondents to go more into depth with their answers in order to get a more clear understanding of their attitude toward the themes. In the second group, the moderator could have managed the answering time, so all the respondent had more influence on each topic, since some of the respondents had stronger attitudes toward the topics and sometimes the discussion got out of topic. The general perception of the outcome in the two focus groups are that they discussed and managed to express their attitudes toward the introduced topics.

Page 74 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

iii. Results of focus groups In the following section, the results of the two focus group is introduced according to the predetermined topics described in the above section.

1. Adopting mobile payment system During the two focus group interviews and the interviews with the market experts it was found that consumers was, as expected, more than willing to use mobile payment systems as a tool to transfer money among friends. In both focus groups the main focus, when talking about mobile payment, was how it made it easier to split bills, pay friends and in general transferring money among each other.

”Jeg sad faktisk lige og tænkte på det. Jeg synes det er rigtig smart når vi har, mig og mine kammerater, vi skal købe et eller andet ind og der så bare er en der ligger ud. MobilePay har den der split funktion, så taster du dem ind der skal være med og så deler den selv ud. Det synes jeg er rigtig smart.” Frederik (interview 4)

Overall, the respondents were positive toward mobile payment and its functions. There was some concerns about the consequences mobile payment could have to society. The minor fear experienced was that we were going toward a cash-less society.

”det er en ulempe at det er ved at blive et pengeløst samfund” Britt (Interview 4, p. 2)

This fear was not a common theme in the focus groups, however a small concern, a concern Kim (MeeWallet) argues is far from a reality we are going to experience.

”Det kontantløsesamfund, det er en statsløsning, det er ikke noget der er pragmatik i, endnu” Kim MeeWallet (Interview 3, p. 6)

The respondents reported that they would prefer to use mobile payment instead of a card even though they found the solution to be more complicated than debit or credit cards. They found it natural to stand with the phone when they were standing in line waiting. Then it would be easier to use the phone to pay for the groceries, since it already were in their hand.

”Men det er nok noget psykologisk i det, fordi man netop er vant til at sidde med den, når man tjekker sms’er, når man tager billeder og når man er på Facebook. Så det der med, at have den fremme og taste ind det er på en eller anden måde snedigere, sådan psykologisk, end at man skal hive sin pung frem og finde dankortet og modtage det og aflevere det igen. På en eller anden måde bliver det bare noget man er mere vant til at have telefonen” Stine (Interview 5, p. 5)

Page 75 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The respondents in the focus groups found it more convenient to use mobile payment in the future, since they are already using the phone in different situations. The consumers stand with their phone in their hand and are more and more experienced with using the phone for different things than just calling or texting.

”Det er super smart, som du siger, man kan gøre alt. Man behøver ikke at finde dankortet op af sin pung og man forlader jo ikke sit hjem uden sin mobil – det gør jeg i hvert fald ikke. Man har den altid på sig, det har de fleste. Det er bare smart, at man bare kan nøjes med at bruge den også ude i butikkerne. Jeg ville helt sikkert bruge det, hvis jeg havde mulighed for det, i stedet for, at betale med dankort” Zakia, (Interview 5, p. 5)

This statement was commonly agreed with among the other respondents. It seemed to be a natural development that the mobile phone became their primary payment system.

”Nu er så meget samlet på telefonerne allerede, så hvorfor skulle man ikke kunne samle endnu mere. Vi er vant til, at alle funktionerne er samlet, så tænker det bliver meget naturligt. ” Michael (Interview 5, p. 6)

2. Perceived risk Perceived risk has had a lot of focus among scholars. In the interviews with our experts, we found different opinions on how they thought consumers valued risk with mobile payment. Troels (interview 2) from Nordea argued that Swipp have integrated their payment system within the mobile payment application because it was safer and that it would please the consumers that Swipp was safer than MobilePay. On the other hand, John G. Pedersen (Interview 1) found consumers risk being a secondary priority for the consumers. He was convinced that consumers would trust the payment system to be without any major risk of fraud.

”…For mange kommer sikkerhed i anden - eller tredje række..” – John G (Interview 1, p. 3)

Owner of MeeWallet Kim Vindberg Larsen agrees with John G. Pedersen. He saw the consumers trusting the application until it was proven that there was an issue with fraud.

The different opinions among our specialist makes the results from our two focus groups even more important. Just like our experts, we found different attitudes toward the perceived risk of using a mobile payment system. Among the fears, our respondents in the focus groups, found the fear of giving away your phone number, when purchasing with a mobile payment system. The fear of losing control over who would obtain your phone number could limit the use of mobile payment.

Page 76 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

”Jeg er sådan lidt, jeg bruger det kun privat, fordi man udlevere jo sit nummer hver gang man bruger det. Jeg kan ikke lide at alle mulige skal have mit nr. Ikke fordi jeg tror, at alle mulige har tænkt sig at bruge det, men jeg synes det er ubehagelig at en eller anden vildt fremmede kan få det. Så jeg bruger det kun til folk jeg kender” Julie (interview 1)

Another concern was the safety. If the phone was stolen and the person could get access to and use the mobile payment system. It seemed, because it was an electronic device, the fear was more significant compared to the traditional debit and credit card. The discussion regarding the 4 digit code that should be the same as a 4 digit code on your mobile payment application divided the respondents. Some of the respondents found it less safe with the mobile payment solution than the debit card.

”Jeg kan være lidt nervøs nogle gange omkring sikkerheden. Hvor nemt er det, at få adgang til min MobilePay, hvis min mobil bliver stjålet. Det er sådan nogle ting, jeg godt kan tænke lidt over (…) Der tror jeg bare, at der er en del hacker der er gode til at knække de firecifrede koder” Stine (Interview 5 p. 6)

The attitude toward the risk of adopting mobile payment was in general low among the respondents. However, the overall attitude toward the safety of using mobile payment was positive in both focus groups. As the discussion developed, the risk of mobile payment seemed to become less important and became a secondary concern for the respondents. The respondents have a lot of trust to the banks behind both MobilePay and Swipp. They compared the safety of mobile payment to the safety they have with their debit and credit card and without knowing if the same rules applies, they assume it must be the same. The trust toward the safety when using mobile payment system is generally high among the respondents.

”Hvis den bliver hugget, så må man jo bare spærre dankortet, hvis det er det der er forbundet til MobilePay” Michael (Interview 5 p.6)

The attitude toward the risk of using mobile payment in the two focus groups was relative low. Not only was the assumption that the safety of the banks transferred to the mobile payment system, but they also had the assumption that the safety is the same as a debit or credit card. Overall, they had the attitude that it had to be proven it was not safe before they started fearing for the safety. The risk was even perceived to be lower when using mobile payment, because you are more aware of your phone compared to your debit and credit card. The awareness means you notice earlier if you lose you payment system, since you more often check your phone compared to your wallet.

Page 77 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

“Jeg tænker i forhold til, at miste sin telefon, så mister man alt. Hvis jeg mister mit dankort, så går der ret lang tid før, jeg opdager jeg har mistet det. Men hvis jeg mister min telefon, så vil jeg opdage det med det samme, i forhold til, at spærrer og sikkerhed og alt det der” Zakia (Interview 5, p. 6)

3. Personal data As we go into a world where more and more personal data gets stored and where companies knows more about how we as consumers behave than ever before, this could be a concern among our respondents in our focus groups. When using mobile payment systems consumers give away information about themselves, which companies can use in many different ways to create a better buying experience and to increase profit (Interview 3). The two groups discussed how it could affect their buying experience if companies had the possibility to use their information and how it affected their willingness to use mobile payment.

There was a wide range between the attitudes among the respondents, when the discussion came to the use of personal data. One thing the respondents had in common was that they did not like it if using mobile payment meant they would get more advertising or if different pop-up ads would appear on their phone. This lowered the quality of using their mobile phone as a payment system.

”Jeg vil tænke på det som man kan blive spammet med markedsføring og alt muligt” Julie (Interview 4 p. 4)

The fear of unnecessary advertising among the respondents had a big influence on their perception of the experience and in worst-case scenario; it could make the mobile payment experience so bad that they would consider not using it at all. Even when arguing that the advertising could help the consumer make better choices in the stores and help consumers getting a better buying experience. The value that this could gain did not offset the potential discomfort the respondents found with the advertising. It seems the respondents find the use of their data to advertise as an invasion of their comfort zone and it does not create positive value even though the information could be useful to get a better buying experience.

”Men med dit spørgsmål, jeg ved ikke om jeg synes det vil være fedt, at det bare poppede noget op på min telefon, at den bare åbner app’s på min telefon efter jeg har betalt. Det synes jeg er en indgriben, jeg ikke har lyst til. Hvis man lige har købt et eller andet, så åbner den bare app’s på min telefon” Thomas (Interview 4, p. 5)

Page 78 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Even though the respondents dislike the use of their date to communicate with them, it seems they do not fear to give their data, when using mobile payment. On the contrary, giving data has become so normal that the respondents do not even question the data they have to give.

“Jeg sætter ikke engang spørgsmålstegn ved at give mit CPR-nummer, hvis jeg ved det skal bruges i en sammenhæng” Zakia (Interview 5 p. 7)

The respondents argues that the younger generation do not question the demand for information and maybe the older generation are more concerned about giving their personal information.

” Jeg tror vores generation er sådan lidt mere afslappet omkring det” Zakia and Christian (Interview 5)

Since the focus group consisted of the ages between 25-53, we did not get respondents from the older generation. The quantitative analysis will help to confirm or disprove the hypothesis derived from our focus group.

4. Future expectations To understand the potential for mobile payment systems it is important to get an understanding of the consumers expectations to their future behavior. Our experts are not in doubt. They found that mobile payment is not close to reach its potential and they believe consumers are going to use the paying form more and more in the future. There is a common understanding that mobile payment is going to be used in the same way we use debit and credit cards today. They find mobile payment as a substitute to debit card and cash, which will give the consumers more options when shopping. They see mobile payment to become a substitute to the traditional payment systems.

”Jeg er sikker på, at vi om noget tid og med det mener jeg, om forholdsvis lang tid, vil se en helt almindelig brug af mobilbetaling, ligesom vi ser brug af dankort i dag. Der er ingen tvivl om, at det her marked, det vil komme til at presse dankortet helt vildt og det er egentlig også udmærket” (Interview 1)

Furthermore, the experts agree that the mobile payment market is going to develop drastically the coming years, which makes it interesting what the consumers are expecting in the future of mobile payment.

“…når sommerferien er overstået, så ser den her betalingsverden helt anderledes ud, men det kan vi komme tilbage til.” (Interview 2)

Page 79 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The attitude toward mobile payment in the future was very positive among all the respondents. The respondents expected to purchase more with mobile payment in the future and for a higher amount. The reason they did not buy more today was the limited options available in the market.

”Når det bliver mere udbredt, så vil jeg selv bruge det mere” Christian (interview 4 p. 5)

After watching the two videos about some of the opportunities there lies in mobile payment, the respondents saw both positive and negative developments. Having mobile payment being more than just a payment form, but also an alternative to the wallet. The respondents found that having an application that could combine different cards in one application as an asset that would make it more preferable than the traditional debit and credit card. Having the possibility to gain discounts by using mobile payment that are combined with loyalty cards could create more value and make the consumers better suited to use their loyalty card.

”…hvis det bliver billigere at bruge penge. Hvis det er billigere end gratis, så er det jo der man går hen, det kan jeg bare ikke se hvordan, det skulle kunne lade sig gøre” Thomas (Interview 4 p. 5)

Having more than a payment system on the mobile phone is getting both a positive and a negative effect on the willingness to use mobile payment. The focus group found that having all the information in one place could make it more complicated if you lost your phone. Others argued that they liked having things divided, so they were not too reliant on the mobile phone.

“Det er super smart, men lige nu er det et alternativ til alle de her ting. Men hvis det bliver sådan, at du mister din telefon, så mister du dine nøgler, din pung osv. så jeg ved slet ikke hvad man skal gøre, af sig selv. Som Alternativ er det jo super smart” Christina (Interview 5, p. 6)

On the other spectra, some of the respondents found it natural that all the information is stored on the phone. Having more information on the phone is a natural development, which is already occurring with music and e-mails. If it was possible to have everything from credit card to your driver license in your mobile payment system, it would make it more convenient, since the need of a wallet would disappear.

“Man bruger det også mere og mere også der hjemme, i forhold til lydsystemer og alt mulig andet. Tænker det bare er en normal udvikling. Men det er rigtig, hvis man mister den, så er alt væk. Men altså det er lidt lige som hvis man mister sine nøgler, så kan man jo heller ikke komme ind. Det sker jo også, men man finder jo ud af det. Men det er rigtig nok, det er mange ting i én” Christian (Interview 5, p. 5)

Page 80 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The respondents found the limit on the amount of money you can use on mobile payment per transaction and in total influenced how you choose your mobile payment system in the future. If mobile payment became more common to use and you had a low daily limit then you would get tired of the application and switch to another solution. This could be a concern for them as consumers if the maximum limit was low, especially in the case of MobilePay.

”Hvis de gerne vil have, at man kun skal bruge MobilePay og har en sjov lørdag i byen, så vil man hurtig kunne bruge de 2000kr. Hvis man både skal købe taxa, indgang, mad og drikke. Så når man hurtigt loftet og så skal man alligevel have dankortet frem, så kan det jo næsten være lige meget” Michael (Interview 5, p. 7)

The respondent also had some of their own ideas of how mobile payment could create a better buying experience, compared to the traditional debit card or cash. The majority of the recommendations relied on saving time, which could indicate that this factor is the most value-creating factor for the respondents. This will be tested in the quantitative analysis. One of the recommendations was to use the mobile phone as a scanner, so you could scan the product before purchasing it. This could both safe time at the line and give the employer a possibility to have less staff at the check-out.

”Hvis du går rundt med din mobiltelefon og scanner dine varer, så putter den det ned i din kurve og betaler automatisk når du går ud” Britt (Interview 4 p. 6)

Overall, both focus groups were positive toward the future use of mobile payment. All the respondents expected to use mobile payment more in the future and some preferred to use mobile payment more often than debit/credit card or cash.

5. Switching from MobilePay to Swipp We found that the respondents had no issues adopting a mobile payment application; however, it was observed that there was a preference towards MobilePay compared to Swipp. All the respondents found MobilePay more intuitive compared to Swipp because it was a separated application. This was one of the main reasons along with that MobilePay was the first on the market. The respondents found it to be difficult for another mobile payment system to make them change, because their application covered their needs now.

”Så længe den løsning jeg har, gør det jeg har brug for, så kan jeg ikke se hvorfor jeg skulle skifte?” (Julie

Interview 4)

Page 81 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

When the discussion came to adopting Swipp as an alternative to MobilePay the respondents had many concerns regarding the platform and the signing-in process was rather difficult. Having to use NemID was a major deal breaker for the respondents, who found it too time consuming and too complicated. They found simplicity to be an important factor when they wanted to sign up for a mobile payment system. They even found that the long process made the perception of the app to be less flexible compared to MobilePay.

”Hvis man tænker MobilePay og Swipp, så er fordelen ved MobilePay, at du kan oprette det her og nu. Du behøver ikke NemId som man skal med Swipp. Fx hvis jeg lige pludselig ser en pølsevogn og er sulten, så kan jeg lige hurtig oprette MobilePay og betale. Skal jeg bruge den anden, så skal jeg bruge mit NemId. Det er et minus man skal det første gang” – Michael (Interview 5. p 3)

Not only was the lack of flexibility an issue, when discussing the opportunity to switch to Swipp, but also the concern that the receiver did not have the application and could not receive their money. There was an agreement in both groups that having Swipp would give them difficulties, since they would have to confront the receiver of the money if they had Swipp. This issue was irrelevant with MobilePay as there was a common understanding that everybody had that application and therefore could receive money. Finally, the respondents found it problematic that not everyone could use Swipp, whereas everyone could use MobilePay. The lack of possibilities gave a negative attitude and even a wondering to why Swipp was not available to everyone and it was clear that the respondent found this as a big problem.

” Alle kan bruge MobilePay men ikke alle kan bruge Swipp” Mie (Interview 5 p. 3)

”Jeg vil bare synes det vil være mærkeligt, hvis de ikke også gerne ville have Danske Banks kunder. Selvom, at det vil koste penge hver gang du vil lave en overførelse, men så kunne det jo også være, at de kunne få dig ind som kunde – det ved jeg ikke” Michael (Interview 5 p. 4).

The experts also found Swipp’s possibility to only allowing their own bank clients to use the application a limitation. They find it limits the possibilities to broaden the knowledge and usage of Swipp, which eventually will have the consequence that Swipp will not reach its potential.

”…jeg er i Danske Bank, og det er jeg egentlig glad for. Men jeg havde da gladelig brugt Swipp hvis det var, at jeg kunne gøre det. Det kan jeg så bare ikke og der er vi faktisk inde ved et af de problemstillinger eller forhindringer, der er omkring udbredelsen af mobilbetalinger, de forhindringer branchen selv er med til at sætte op for sig selv” John G. Pedersen (Interview 1, p. 2)

Page 82 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

The discussion in the focus groups continued, since they did not have a specific reason to why they did not use Swipp instead of MobilePay. In both focus groups, the discussion on why they use MobilePay instead of Swipp was interesting and showed the power MobilePay has with their position as a first mover in the market. An interesting first respond from one of the respondents in the focus group was “kom MobilePay ikke før Swipp” Frederik (Interview 4,). It is interesting how his first reaction was the main reason for choosing MobilePay, that they were first on the market and not the different attributes in the two payment systems. As the discussion went on many interesting points were made, on why MobilePay was their primarily application of the two. One of the primarily reasons for the preference of MobilePay was related to their friends and family and what payment system they used.

”Jeg tror bare det var fordi, det var det folk omkring mig begyndte at bruge. ” Frederik (Interview 4, p.6)

Reference and the usage of friends and relatives could be a major factor for the respondent’s choice of application. The respondents found it important that others in their social network used an application that was compatible with the one they had. If people in their network use another application they would change to that one, otherwise the mobile payment application did not give them the most important value, which is the possibility to transfer money between each other.

“Jeg tror også helt sikkert, det vil være en klar vinder. Så handler det om det socialnetværk, hvem bruger hvad, hvis alle omkring dig bruger en løsning så er det vel den man bruger. ” Thomas (Interview 4 p. 6)

One of the few problems with MobilePay was its daily cash limits. With a low limit, the respondents were concerned with reaching this limit too often, if it became more common to use mobile payment. One of the respondents argued that MobilePay, perhaps, was more targeted towards younger people where the limit was not an issue. With Swipp, she found that it was targeting older people with a higher consumption. However, the lack of dissemination of Swipp had to change for otherwise it had no effect.

“Altså beløbsgrænsen, kunne da klart blive en begrænsning i sig selv. Især fordi der er andre løsninger der har en højere beløbsgrænse pr. dag. Det tror jeg vil kunne få mange til, at skifte. Hvis det bliver mere udbredt og man bruger det mere og mere. Så kunne jeg godt forstille mig, at folk skifte” – Britt (Interview 4, p. 3).

Safety also had a small impact if they had to switch to Swipp. They argued that both services could end up being identical in what they could offer the consumers, which would mean they only could compete on safety.

Page 83 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

”Ja, så bliver det bare spørgsmålet om sikkerhed, vel, til sidst. Begge ting er vel lige bekvemt” – Julie (Interview 4, p. 5)

Sub conclusion of the qualitative analysis

The overall attitude toward mobile payment was positive. There was a willingness to adopt a mobile payment that could be used for more than just transferring money. The development of always having your mobile phone present meant it would be a natural thing to use it for payment as well. There was a common understanding among the respondents that adopting a mobile payment system would not become an issue.

Personal data had the respondents more divided. The fear of companies spamming the phone with advertising could make the respondents avoid using mobile payment. This was a big contrast with the experts’ opinion. They saw this opportunity as a positive attribute for the consumers, since it gave them opportunities to get a better buying experience. Fearing for the data you provide by using a mobile was not a concern among the respondents. They were used to give information to be able to use devices on their phone. They had a great hypothesis that older non-users could be more concerned, which will be examined in the quantitative analysis.

The future for mobile payment are filled with potentials. According to the experts, the stage we find mobile payment now is only the beginning and the possibilities are many. The respondents were also very positive about their future usage of mobile payment. There were some concerns about having many essential information located at one place, where others found that especial entreating. The limitations with the amount that is possible to transfer could be an issue.

The respondents found it difficult to find a reasoning to switch from MobilePay to Swipp, since MobilePay covered all their current needs. The limitations regarding an application that was integrated in their bank application made it less fixable compared to MobilePay. MobilePay have the advantage that everyone uses it, which gives them a superior advantage towards Swipp. However, can the total limit and the single transfer limit be a factor that can convert MobilePay users into Swipp user, if mobile payments becomes an everyday activity? In addition, safety could change the attitude of some of respondents; if fraudulent incidents occurred for MobilePay the incentive to change to Swipp would be high.

Page 84 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

13d. Quantitative analysis The purpose with the following chapter is to complement the qualitative analysis and to test some of the hypotheses that were constructed earlier in the thesis. The purpose is to be able to make a general picture of the users of mobile payment.

The analysis in the chapter will be based upon a statistic material analyzed with the statistical tool SPSS.

1. Data collection The recruitment for the questionnaire came from three different networks. The primarily data came from the newsletter from LO PLUS26 who had the questionnaire in their newsletter on June 16, 2015. The other networks used was facebook.com and linkedin.com. Having the possibility to upload the questionnaire in LO PLUS newsletter provided a larger target group with a larger demographic spread, higher answer volume and a better validation on each question. In return, LO PLUS A/S had some demands, regarding the questionnaire, which resulted in some restrictions. The restrictions contained the amount of questions allowed in the questionnaire, which meant fewer possibilities to get a wider understanding of the different topics. More people than expected answered the questionnaire, which provided us with an optimal starting point for the quantitative analysis.

2. Preparation of data The data set consisted of 1.303 respondents who began the questionnaire. We removed all the respondents who did not finish the questionnaire to obtain the best possible results. After the removal, there were in total 1.173 respondents, which means 130 did not finish the questionnaire. To make sure that the dataset had no outliers due to misunderstanding a question or answers that we found frivolous, we scanned the answers and removed all the answers considered misleading. Furthermore, we removed the respondents where the majority of the answers contained an”ved ikke” answer. Lastly, we removed all the respondents under the age of 18. This was done due to the conditions of both MobilePay and Swipp where minor users need an acceptance of a guardian or parents

26 Landsorganisationen i Danmark (LO) is an umbrella organization for 17 unions, representing 1.1 million members. LO Plus A/S is a free benefit and discount system for all member of LO's affiliated unions. LO Plus A/S is owned by Alka, LO and the unions.

Page 85 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

(Mobilepay.dk, c; Swipp.dk). After removing these answers, the final result was 1.133 respondents, which is 86,9 % of the original sample remaining in the analysis.

The questions regarding age, the amount spend with mobile payment in stores and online and transfers was pooled into categories for easier use. Age was pooled into categories with a nine years span starting with the age group from 18 to 25. The amount spend in stores, internet and for transfer were pooled into categories with a 100 kroner span between groups. Finally, all the “ved ikke” has received the value 6, during the questionnaire. These values have been changed into missing values, so that these results would not give a misleading result of the analysis. A different approach could have dealt with the “ved ikke” answers in another way. An example of another approach is not to modify the data, which would result in an average that would be unnaturally high among the responses. An alternative approach could have been to replace all the “ved ikke” answers with the median. However, this would also give a misleading answer due to the large amount of “ved ikke” answers. The reason it would be misleading is the answer category “ved ikke” was used when the respondents did not have an attitude toward the topic, which in the end is the reason why it should not have an influence on the statistics and the understanding of the respondents’ attitude.

3. Data validation Having 1.133 respondents gives a valid starting point to interpret consumers’ attitude toward mobile payment. However, there can be some biased results due to different factors that have to be taken into consideration, when analyzing the results. On of these factors is the majority of the data were collected through LO Plus, with 77% of the answers in the questionnaire. The majority of LO members came from unions with no to medium-long educational background, e.g. office clerks, which resulted in an overrepresentation among the respondents. The overrepresentation toward a certain category of people could in a worst-case scenario, give a wrong indication of the trends in the population. However, since the remaining respondents came from our network through Facebook (18%) and Linkedin (4,5%), we find the data more representative, since our network is arguable having a different profile than LO Plus’ members. Since they mainly are students or have bachelor or master’s degree.

The Danish population have a distribution of 50,3 % women and 49,7 percent men. Our data collection have a skewed distribution with a larger majority of women (60 %) compared to only 40% men. This means the opinion among women will have a higher impact compared to the Danish

Page 86 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

population. It is important to examine whether the female population have another attitude toward mobile payment, so their overrepresentation in the sample do not tamper with the results of the study. In the chapter below, Frequency analysis, we will investigate if there are any obvious differences between men and women’s usage of mobile payment.

ii. Frequency analysis Using a frequency analysis and a cross table analysis provides an understanding in whom the questionnaire are heavy users and light users of mobile payment. Furthermore, it gives an indication of the historic use of mobile payment among the respondents before analyzing their attitude towards mobile payment.

60 % of the respondents are using a mobile payment system. It is clear that the majority of the users are among the younger section of respondents. The respondents in the age group 26-35 are the respondents with the highest percentage (92%) among all the age groups and there is a clear tendency; fewer are having a mobile payment application the older they become (see appendix 12.1). That tendency is confirmed by the experts (Interview 1, Interview 2, Interview 3), who all argues that mobile payment primarily are used by ‘younger people’ and it is difficult to get the older generation to adopt a mobile payment system. This will be analyzed further in the thesis.

Among the respondents that are using a mobile payment application, MobilePay (95%), is as expectedthe most popular application. Swipp are second on the list with 30% , which indicate that the majority who have Swipp also have MobilePay on their phone. MobilePay are strongly represented among all age groups, who are using mobile payments. In the different age groups Swipp’s representation differs more, compared to MobilePay. Swipp have the highest representation among group of the 36-45 year old. 41 % of the people in the age group, who are using mobile payments, are using Swipp. Swipp having an overrepresentation among this age group matches what our three experts have concluded. They argued that Swipp as a product did not have the same appeal towards the younger groups, but targeted families (Interview 2).

The majority of the respondents using mobile payments are using it to transfer money between friends, colleagues and family (96%). This was expected since the first functionality available for the users was to transferring money between each other and therefore, not surprising the most used

Page 87 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

among the respondents, compared to online and retail. The respondents are in general not transferring a high amount of money between each other (Under DKK 100).

Using mobile payment, when visiting smaller shops are the second highest among the respondents, with 41 % of the respondents.

iii. Cross tabulations The cross tabulation analysis will compare two variables to investigate the dependency between the two. This gives the opportunity to answer some of the hypothesis.

Older people are more afraid of the safety then younger respondents

To test the hypothesis the focus group introduced, regarding the feeling of safety is more important for the older respondents compared to the younger respondents, we will make a cross tabulation between “age” and “Jeg syntes, at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer”. To see if there is a correlation between age and fear of the safety of mobile payment, we will first look at the predicted values and the actual values, in appendix 12.1. By looking at the predicted values between age and “Jeg syntes, at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer” it is possible to see the residual. The higher the residual is, the higher the potential for a correlation between “age” and “Jeg syntes, at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer”. Secondly, The Chi-Square test helps to determine if two discrete variables are associated. If there is an association, the distribution of one variable will differentiate depending on the value of the second variable. However, if the two variables are independent, the distribution of the first variable will be similar for all values of the second variable (Jensen and Knudsen, 2011). With a p-value of 0,00, we found no correlation between older being more afraid of the safety compared to the younger. Furthermore, using Cramer’s V we can determine the strengths of the association between age and “Jeg syntes, at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer” after chi-square has determined significance. Cramer's V is a way of calculating correlation in tables, which have more than 2x2 rows and columns. It is used as post-test to determine strengths of association after chi- square has determined significance Cramer's V varies between 0 and 1. Close to 0 it shows little association between variables and a value close to 1, it indicates a strong association. We also see the lack of influence safety have on age, since only 6 % of the one variable can be explained by the other

Page 88 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

variable, according to Cramer’s V. In conclusion, we can reject the hypothesis that safety is more important for older people compared to younger. To see the full cross table see appendix 12.1.

Why not using mobile payment With 40 % not using mobile payment there is a big potential to get more users if knowing what some of the reasoning for not using mobile payment are. Investigating the non-users will help Swipp to get an understanding of how to approach potential users and at the same time give an understanding what their attitude are towards mobile payment and it potentials.

First, we will investigate the correlation between non-users and their fear of the safety, if using mobile payment. A cross table analysis between “bruger du mobilbetaling” and ”Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer” have been conducted. Looking at the residuals in the tables and the Chi-square we found there could be a correlation between non-users and the fear of the safety. The perceived risk of using mobile payment, among non-users seems to have an influence on their willingness to use mobile payment. According to Cramer’s V is it found that 24,9 % of the reason the non-users are not using mobile payment is due to their perceived fear of the safety of the application compared to other alternatives. This is a significant influence on the non- users to why they are not using mobile payment. According to all three experts, we know that safety with mobile payment is a problem and in some cases mobile payment are even safer than the alternative. It is important for Swipp to send the message to the potential users that safety is not an issue when using mobile payment.

We can accepted the hypothesis H6.1: Fear of safety is a key factor for not using mobile payment among non-user

iv. Factor analysis To be able to use our variables in the dataset easier and to get a better understanding of the variables and its links between each other, we will pool the variables into factors. This makes it possible to describe the respondents’ attitude toward mobile payment. Pooling the variables into factors provide us with the opportunity to illuminate which variables can have the most impact on the respondents.

Page 89 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1. Methodology There are two approaches to consider before starting pooling the variables into factors. There are an explorative and a confirmative approach. The main difference between the two approaches is the explorative factor analysis that assumes all the factors residual are uncorrelated. Later in the process, you can transform the factors to improve the interpretation of the results. It is the contrary with a confirmatory factor analysis. With the confirmatory approach, you can allow both the factors and the residual to correlate and then test if the correlation has a significant influence, with a Likelihood Ratio Test (Bollen, 1989).

We have decided to use the confirmatory approach because this gives a possibility for a more meaningful result, since it is more difficult to claim that a certain result is statistical significant, when using a confirmatory approach (Bellq, 2010).

There are two approaches to determine the amount of factors, which can be extracted from the data, the Common Factor and the principal component method. The purpose of the analysis is to reduce the amount of variables into factors, which will be used in a multivariate analysis, therefore, is the Principal Component Method preferable, since it keeps more of the variance in the dataset (Jensen and Knudsen, 2011).

2. Conditions When making a factor analysis the most important criteria is that, the variables in the data are correlated with itself. If this is not the case, the amount of meaningful factors is equal to the amount of variables (Hair, 2010). This will eliminate the purpose of a factor analysis, since a reduction of the variables is impossible and the explanatory power will not be increased if reducing the variables. To determine if, there is a correlation in the data a correlation matrix is conducted, where it can be determinated if the data is suitable. Finally, the data has to be on an interval scaled. Having, data on a scale gives the possibility to compare the variables with each other. Question 34-49, in the data, are used in the correlation test, which will determine if it is suitable for a factor analysis. After the correlation test, it is deemed that question 36 will be removed, since it was found it did not have sufficient correlation with the other questions, and the factor analysis will therefore contain of question 34-35 and 37-49. The forthcoming analysis is based on data analysis from appendix 12.2 – Factor analysis.

Page 90 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

v. Generating factors After we determined that the data is correlated with itself, we have to evaluate KMO and Barthlet’s Test of Sqhericity to determine if data is suited for a factor analysis. With a KMO of 0,806 it makes the data valid for a factor analysis, since the critical limit is below 0,5, which it exceeds with a large amount. Barthett’s Test of Sqhericity tests whether the variables correlate with each other. The P- value is 0,00 which, means that the variables are correlated and suited for the further analysis of the factor analysis, a confirmation of the prior correlation test.

In the table Communalities, it is possible to see the variants after the Extraction. An evaluation of each variable can be done by looking at the Extraction. If the variable have a value above 0,5 is it an indication the variable should be included in a factor. The number shows how much of the variants are kept in the original variable when entering a factor analysis. The elimination of factors are done through a hierarchical principal, where the variable with the lowest value is extracted and then running the test again. This procedure continues until none of the variables have a value below 0,5.

The Scree Plot and Total Variance explained are investigated to understand how many factors there should be in the analysis. The Scree Plot shows each factors’ eigenvalues in a graph. The graph illustrates, that when there is a crack in the graph and the graph flattens out, the crack gives an indication of the amount of factors there should be in the analysis. With the Total Variance Explained it is the Cumulative % that indicate how big the explanatory power the factors have. The Rotated Component matrix recommends four factors: “Service and Safety”, “Motivation”, “Convenience” and “Buying experience”. One variable was moved s_47 “Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre købsoplevelse“ was originally in Motivation but had a strong cross loading with “Buying experience” and it was found the variable was more suitable in “Buying experience”. The decision can give issues with the reliability, which is examined later in the thesis. To limit multi collinearity and to make the interpretation of data easier, the calculation of the factors was done with Compute Variables instead of having SPSS create the factors.

Page 91 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Below is the distribution of the variables into the four factors:

Source: Own creation

Factor 1: Service and safety This factor has the highest concentration of variables. The variables contains questions that gives the consumer a feeling of safety and give the feeling of increased service level. Regarding the theory, this factor could be look as the elements that can remove their perceived risk toward the product and give them a more comfortable relationship with the service. The improvement the consumer gets is not only intangible assets but also more tangibles assets. This could free more time in their business everyday life, which also have been one of the focus for modern consumers.

Factor 2: Motivation Motivation is the influence the consumers get from their surroundings, which can have a positive or negative effect on their attitude toward mobile payment. In addition, the consumers own expectations Factor 1: Service and safety S_43 Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden ,754 s_46 Mobilbetaling er enklere ,735 s_49 Det giver mig flere muligheder og større fleksibilitet ,724 s_42 Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort eller kontanter ,685 s_45 Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort) ,642 Factor 2: Motivation s_37 Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis mine venner bruger det ,808 s_38 Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere i fremtiden ,722 Factor:3 Convenience s_34 Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer ,744 s_35 Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever op til mine behov og forventninger ,716 s_40 Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge ,666 Factor 4: Increasing buying experiance s_44 Det er nyt og smart ,796 s_47 Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre købeoplevelse ,667 s_41 Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser bedre ,468 toward the future and their future usage of mobile payment can influence their attitude toward mobile payment.

Factor 3: Convenience

Page 92 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

This factor have many similarities to factor 1: Service and Safety, however it was found that the factor was able to explain other aspect of the consumer’s attitude toward mobile payments. Convenience is related to actual usage, the functionality, and the expectations of the respondents’ mobile payment application. Convenience is all tangibles assets, which separates it from factor 1.

Factor 4: Buying experience Buying experience contains variables that indicates, if mobile payment can provide a better or worse buying experience for the respondents. The factor contains, more generalized variables regarding buying experience, and contains only intangibles values for the consumers. These features makes it suitable to become the dependent variable in a later regression analysis.

vi. Reliabilities analysis A factor analysis is considered a subjective analysis method. To minimize subjectivity, some algorithms and limits in SPSS are applied. However, subjectivity in the end is the basic element in a factor analysis, which results in many theoretical concepts and can be abstract to understand and interpret. Therefore, it is important make sure the Reliabilities and validation of each of the questions in the factor analysis are measuring the same and in the right way. For the purpose, a reliability test is conducted. This analysis are going to test the internal consistent of question, in scale, from the respondents. This means we are testing how much of the variance in scale that are in common for the include variables.

1. Methodology Firstly, it is important that all the questions are scale in intervals, which is it in our case. For a full data information, see appendix 12.3.

First, we look at Case Processing Summary, where it appears how many have answered all the questions in the factors. The amount of fully answers is still at a relatively high level, which makes the analysis relevant. Looking at Reliability Statistics, we find Chronbach’s Alpha, which is one of the most essential, when looking at the factors. Firstly, we see there are very little difference between the non-standardized and the standardized meaning the standardization do not have a large influence on the analyses. The Item Statistics shows if the means values differentiate from each other. If they do it is an indication that there is a large different between standardized and non-standardized

Page 93 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Chronbach’s Alpha. To be able to accept that the scales reliability, Chronbach’s Alpha needs to be at a minimum of 0,60. All the factors have a minimum of 0,60 and with means values within a required range. The factor Buying experience have the lowest Chronbach’s Alpha value with 60,02, which means it just are in the acceptable area. Meaning only Buying experience only cover 60,02 % of the abstract concept. It is find understandable that this concept can be difficult to define, since it is the most abstract factor of all the factors. It relates to the future and not a factor that relies to an action the respondents have tried before and already have an attitude towards.

To make sure the scale of the questions are included in the factors are similar the Intern-Item Correlation Matrix are used. If the scales are moving in different directions, there is a need for recoding. The Intern-Item Correlation Matrix, indicates no need for recoding and the analysis can continue.

The final table to investigate to insure the reliability is the Item-Total Statistics. This table shows the variables relation to the whole picture. First, analyzing the column with Corrected Item-Total Correlation, which shows the correlation between the variables and the sum of the other variables. The higher the correlation the more variance to the variable have in common. With a low correlation is the consequences that the variables do not share variance and are not suitable for the analysis. There is a large correlation among the variables internal in the four factors, since none of the variables is below the critical value of 0,3 (Jensen and Knudsen, 2011). The reliability is strong and indicate that data is suitable for further analysis.

The last column to investigate is Cronbach´s Alpha if Item Deleted. This column indicate what effect it would have for the model if the concerned variable were removed. Deleting a variable, and the Cronbach’s Alpha value increases means it should evaluated if the variable is suitable for the analysis, because removing the variable gives a stronger explanatory base. If Cronbach´s Alpha drops, t is an indication the variable is an important part for the factor, and should be included. There were found one variable where Cronbach´s Alpha increased if the variable was left out. The question “Det er smart og nyt” if removed gave a Cronbach´s Alpha value of 0,621 instead of 0,602. The variable was kept in the analysis, since it was found it only gave a minor change leaving it out of the factor.

Page 94 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

From the reliability analysis can we conclude that the factors have the possibility to explain the abstract concepts each of the factors contains. Therefore, is it possible to use these factors to accept or reject our hypotheses we earlier presentment in the thesis in a regression analysis.

vii. Regression analysis The above-created factors will be applied in a multiple regression analysis. The purpose with the regression analysis is to investigate to what extend the factors can explain what is important for respondents, when using mobile payment. By using a multiple regression analysis, we are able to create a direct comparison between the variables and how they affect each other.

1. Conditions When using a multiple regressions analysis is it possible to test the connection between different independent variables. To be able to do this, it is important the variables uphold different conditions. Four conditions needs to be applied, before starting a regressions analysis: Linearity, Independency and normally distributed error term and constant variance, no severe outliers and no multicollinearity. For a more complete description of the conditions, see appendix 12.4.

2. Methodology We will conduct one regressions analysis with all factors the independent variables, except Buying Experience, which will be the depended variable. Buying Experience have been selected as the depended factor, based on the experts and the focus group emphasis on an increasing buying experience would result in more willingness to use mobile payment. In addition, we found that buying experience best cover the literature of the modern costumers and their constantly searching for a possibility to improve their experiences’.

Regression analysis: Increasing Buying Experience Firstly, we look at the ANOVA-table to make sure the model have any explanatory power. The null- hypotheses is that there are no explanatory power in the regression – therefore, the goal is to reject the null-hypotheses. Looking at the P-value, which is 0,00 and do not exceeds the critical value of 5 %. We can reject the null-hypotheses and conclude the regression have a required explanatory power to proceed.

Page 95 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Before using the regressions analysis, we have to reject another null-hypothesis. The null-hypotheses 2 is that there are no correlation between the independent and the depended variable, meaning H0:R =0. To reject the null-hypotheses we go to Model Summery, where we find Adjusted R2. Adjusted R2=0,215, meaning 21,5 % of the variation in the depended variable, buying experience, can be explained with the independent variables. Furthermore, we can see in Model Summery, that the Durbin.Watson value is 1,899, which is within the critical area of 1,5 and 2,5. This indicate that there

Buying Experience = 1,484 + Service and safety * 0,370 + Convenience * 0,182 + Motivation * 0,128

are no multicollinearity in the regression analyses. Another check for multicollinearity is found with Coefficients, where the TOL and VIF values are located. The values have to be above 0,25 on TOL and under 4 for VIF if there are no multicollinearity. Both the TOL and VIF indicate no multicollinearity and the hull-hypotheses is rejected and a regression can be conducted.

From the standardized beta-coefficients, it shows that Service and Safety, with 0,370, is the factor, which have the largest effect on buying experience. Convenience and Motivation have similar effect on buying experience. This means a relative improvement of Service and Safety will have a larger positive effect on costumers buying experience compared to the two other factors. It is interesting to notice that service and safety also have twice the effect on costumers buying experience compared to convenience and motivation, however, convenience and motivation have a positive effect on costumers buying experience and should not be neglected.

We can conclude that if all the external factors are even, Swipp should focus on increasing the consumer’s perception on service and safety toward Swipp’s mobile payment solution. This give the best buying experience for their costumers, which will give them an advantage toward MobilePay and future competitors. When making decisions on behalf of a regression analyses is it important to have other factors in mind, when making the decision to improve Service and Safety instead of one of the other factors. The financial aspect in one of the most important for Swipp to have in mind. If the cost of increasing Service and safety by one is significantly higher than increasing one of the other factors then there could be an economical perspective in increasing on of the less efficient factors simply because it is cheaper to gain a better buying experience.

Page 96 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

If comparing with our qualitative analysis we find some compatibles results. Finding an improving service with extra features and a possibility to get through the buying experience faster has a great value for the consumers. Safety was not a big issue for the respondents in the focus group, but all the respondents in the focus group already used a mobile payment application. This could be a reason for the trust in the product, hence that analysis between safety among users and non-users. The non-users of mobile payment found safety to be one of the major reason for not using mobile payment, which could be one of the important reasons that it have a large influence in the quantitative analyses but not so important in the focus group. The experts also found service and the increasing possibilities that lays in mobile payment, to be an important element for the future of mobile payment. Convenience was by the focus group an important factors simplicity for the focus group who found it important that mobile payment did not get too complicated with too many options but stayed a payment system. Finally, motivation also had an importance for the focus group and the experts who empathized on the surroundings and who used mobile payment was a main factor to why people used their mobile payment system. Overall, we can conclude that the factors found in the qualitative analysis in a large extend match the focus groups attitude. The experts had the majority of the factors in their expectation of the future, however, it seems safety have a larger impact then first assumed.

We can accept the following hypothesis, H7.1: Improving service is important when using mobile payment H7.3: simplicity is important for the consumers to get a good buying experience

13e. Cluster analysis The purpose with the cluster analysis is to identify and map the different customer segments for Swipp and their consumptions patent. This will contribute to get a deeper understanding of the users and potential users of Swipp and help to answers some of the hypothesis from chapter 11.

1. Assumptions The demands for a cluster analysis is fulfilled since there are no demands to any scale levels on the variables. The focus will mainly be on question that has been collected with a metric interval and therefor contains nuanced information about the respondents. By only focusing on this date are we

Page 97 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

avoiding potential Matching coefficient, which have the purpose of making it possible to combine metric and non-matric data. The advantage of avoiding Matching coefficient maximizes the information the interval scale data gives, since Matching coefficient limits the information given in the interval scaled data.

There will be no standardizing of the factors, as the calculation of the distance already have include in the conduction of the factors. This is also visible in the mean value and variance do not differ significantly from each other (appendix 12.5)

2. Methodology The variables used in the creation of the cluster are the two factors who had the largest influence on buy experience in the regression analysis. The two factors used as comparable variables are Service and Safety Motivation. The respondents who had answered the questions in the two factors will be include into the cluster analyses. Respondents with the answer “ved ikke” and the respondents who did not answered the question is excluded from the analysis.

The cluster uses a large part of the variables, the questions all regards the respondents attitude toward mobile payment. The purpose is clarify segments from the collected data, this is done by using an explorative approach. The method separates the respondents into smaller homogeneous clusters, which makes the other clusters differ from each other. The segments are unknown in advance, since they are created on behalf of the conducted data. Having SPSS creating the clusters can give some complications, since SPSS will create a cluster structure whether or not that cluster exist. Therefore, is it important to look critically on the created cluster to determent weather or not these makes sense in the context. The cluster are construction with a Hieratical approach along with Wards Method. This method tries to generate clusters where the variance are minimized. This gives an indication on how the data are going to be distributed and gives a knowledge about how many clusters that should be in the analysis. The method builds upon the assumption that each respondents belong to its own cluster. With this assumption are the mini-clusters is pooled into larger clusters one by one until all the respondents are in one big cluster. The selection of the amount of cluster are subjective and is done by measuring the distance between the clusters, when pooled together. Looking at the Agglomeration Schedule is it possible to see the distance between the added an additional respond. When there is a large jump in the data, it is an indication of potential clusters, since the difference between the two clusters are so

Page 98 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

big we can reject the pooling of the two clusters. After a Hieratical and Wards method, we make a third analysis on our cluster construction, a Two-step Cluster analysis. This analysis is to verify or hieratical and Wards method, regarding the amount of clusters and that they are correct. Since the amount of clusters are based upon a subject judgment, in the hieratical can make it unstable, which makes it important to test the result in another analysis. The method is an explorative method and its purpose is to cover natural created clusters, which may not be visible in the dataset. At the same time, the method is cable of handling larger data sets, compared to the hieratical method, which can have some issues when using large amount of data. The method generate automatically some clusters, which is suitable for the dataset.

Finally, a One-Way ANOVA is conducted. This gives the possibility to compare the pairing differences. The methodology looks at the variables average and find how many of the averages are not significant different from each other. The hope is to find, as few non-significant variables, since this, means there are a big difference between the clusters.

3. Cluster After the analysis of the possible cluster constellations, we found two suitable clusters that had difference characteristics and could explain some of the behaviors we see in the market and some of the demands the different segments have toward mobile payment. Furthermore, this can help Swipp to determine what segment fits their product the best or how they should develop Swipp so they can target their segment better.

ii. Selected factors for cluster construction Cluster analysis: Motivation and Service and Safety

We found in the reliability analysis on the composing scale two factors with a strong reliability since their Cronbach’S Alpla had a value of 0,794 for Service and safety and 0,771 for motivation. They had a better ability to explain the abstract concepts and was suitable for the variables to create the segments for Swipp. Two clusters were relevant for Swipp, which differentiated from each other on such an extent that it was suitable to create separate clusters. There were 656 valid responds, with 477 missing, meaning they did not respond or responded “ved ikke” in one or more of the questions

Page 99 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

in the two factors. The amount of responded include in the clusters have been deemed to be sufficient to get an understanding of the two segments. See appendix 12.6 for the exact calculations from SPSS.

1. Profiling Firstly, by conducting a Compare Means and using, the two clusters person types as the independent variable and use, the two factors as the dependable variable. This gives us an opportunity to identify the clusters and name them. The individual average from each cluster is compared with the total average, this gives an understanding of the influence Motivation, and Service and Safety have on the two separate clusters.

First Mover

The Conservative Service Service andSafety

Motivation

Source: Own creation

The size of the bubbles, in the graph above indicate the size of the cluster. The location of the cluster indicate the size of their means compared to the two factors.

In the above graph, we see how the two cluster clearly separates them from each other, which means there are a big difference between the influence from increasing Motivation and Service and Safety on the consumer’s attitude toward mobile paying. In the following chapter, we identify the clusters, which means we get a better understanding of who are in the two clusters. See appendix 12.6 for SPSS data.

Page 100 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

2. Clusters In the following chapter, a description of the two cluster are conducted. There will be a focus on what separates them from each other and what makes them unique. Furthermore, it will give an understanding of which cluster that are keener toward mobile payment and what the characteristic is of that kind of people. This gives Swipp and better understanding of who is a potential new user of their mobile payment system and it will help answering some of the hypotheses.

By using cross tables will it be possible to understand the connection among the respondents in the two clusters. To find a connection the Chi-square, have to be significant. There was not found a significant different between the two cluster regarding; gender, the usage of the mobile payment system Swipp and Mobilepay, the usage of mobile payment in convenient stores and online, how often mobile payment are used to transfer money, the amount spent in stores, transferred and online. For a full overview of the significant of the Ci-square test. Below is an overview of the different variables influence on the different clusters all is within the 95% interval, which means it can with 95% probability have a significant influence on the cluster.

Cluster The First Mover The Conservative

Age Under average Over average

Location Larger cities Medium and smaller cities

Income Over and under average Average

Uses Mobile payment Over average Under average

Transferring Over average Under average

Online shopping Over average Under average

In store purchase Over average Under average

Source: Own creation

Unfortunately is there a clear picture of people not using mobile payment had difficulties answering the questions whit out using “ved ikke” this could indicate a lack of attitude toward mobile payment

Page 101 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

which again could indicate they are not interesting for Swipp. The reason is they will be very difficult to overturn into users since they do not have taken into consideration the options it gives or whether or not the service are necessary for them. With that in mind, it is preferable that they are not within the two segment since they have not made up their mind regarding the solution and therefor are far from a potential user compared to the respondents within the two segment.

Cluster 1: First movers Cluster 1 is the smaller of the two clusters with 32 % of the eligible respondents. This cluster has a small overrepresentation of men if looking at the expected count in appendix 12.6. 48 % men and 52 % women represent the cluster, but at a significant level. First mover is the younger of the two clusters with an overrepresentation of respondents under 35 years old and a big underrepresentation of people over 35 years old. People in cluster 1 is located in the larger cities with 49,5 % of the respondents. Looking at the economics of cluster 1, we find two tendencies with an overrepresentation of respondents with the lowest level of income but also an overrepresentation of respondents with the highest level of income. Considering the previous information’s about the cluster. With a high concentration of young people in the larger cities, it is expected the respondents with the low level of income are students and therefor are clustering in the low-income level. Looking at the usage of mobile payment, we find an extremely high level of users in this cluster. 93,8 % of the respondents are using mobile payment of the user of mobile payment 98 % are using Mobile Pay making it the most used payment system, which is expected since we found MobilePay to be the most use by all the respondents. Swipp is the second most used mobile payment system with 31,5 % using Swipp. MobilePay and Swipp are represented close to the same level as we found for all the respondents and gives no indication for any difference preference in this cluster compared to the total respondents. Mobile payment are primarily used to transfer money between users, 91,4 % are transferring money. Respondents in this cluster transfers money more often compared to the dataset. The cluster is overrepresented when it comes to transferring money 1-2 times a week or more often. The amount transferred are lower compared to the dataset. With an overrepresentation of payment DKK 100 and under, however not with a significant Chi-square level. When comparing the means against the two variables that was the foundation for the cluster, Motivation and Service and safety, is it found that motivation have the biggest impact on this cluster, see appendix 12.7. The cluster must be considered a group of people that have intention on using mobile payment more in the future and where the

Page 102 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

surrounding are important for the choice, when it comes to mobile payment. This is important for Swipp to have in mind if this segment is the segment they what to target with their service.

Cluster 2: The Conservative The Conservative cluster is the larger of the two clusters with 68% of the eligible respondents. The segment have 57 % women and 43 % men approximately the same distribution as the First Mover segment. The Conservative segment is significantly older with a majority of respondents in the age group of 46-55 year old with 28,9 % of the respondent in this cluster are represented by this age group. They are overrepresented in all the age groups above 36 years of age (50,4%), make this segment significant older than the first mover segment. The Conservative segment do mainly live in the smaller cities and have an income with the majority earning between 200.000 and 400.000 Kroners. 76,9 % are using a mobile payment solution. Of the respondents using mobile payment are 94,3 % using MobilePay and 30% are using Swipp. The conservative are mainly using mobile payment to transfer money, however not to the same extent as the First mover segment. 74,4 % of the Conservative are transferring money via a mobile payment system. For two of major buying opportunities, stores and online, are the same tendency’s, with a smaller usage from the Conservative segment. Of the respondents using mobile payment are the frequency of using mobile payment in general at the same level as the First Mover segment, when looking at transferring, purchasing in stores and online. However, there is a small indication that they could be overrepresented when looking at transferring large amount of money, 401-500 Kroners and 501-600 Kroners. The Chi- square indicate that there are no significant difference, which could be due to the small amount of large transfers. It will be important to keep an eye on this development, if there in the future are a tendency that this segment are spending larger amount of money than First mover segment. When comparing the means, of the segment, with the two variables, Motivations and Service and Safety, we find an interesting difference compared to the First Mover segment. The Conservative finds Service and Safety more important than Motivation. This could indicate the two segment have to be approached differently, The Conservative needs to find a reasoning for using mobile payment. They needs to find the extra value mobile payment can provide them and have the feeling of safety at the same time. The Conservative do not have the same expectation of the future of mobile payment and do get influence by their surrounding in the same extend as the First mover.

Answering of hypothesis

Page 103 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

H8.1: Men uses mobile payment more often the women

Looking at the two clusters, we can conclude that there are no relationship between gender and the willingness to use mobile payment. The Chi-square test is shows no relationship between gender and the clusters they are pooled into. The asymp. Sig (2-sided) are way above the critical level of 0,05 and therefore the hypothesis is rejected.

H8.2: Heavy users of mobile payment spend more money than light users

There are no indication that the more you are used to pay with mobile pay the more you also spend. On the contrary the Expected count indicate the opposite, however the Chi-square indicate there are no relationship with an asymp. Sig (2-sided) far above the critical value of 0,05.

H 8.3 – Young people uses mobile payment more often than older people do

We can accept this hypothesis. There is large gap between the behavior of the two segments and since First movers is overrepresented by younger people compared to The conservative segment it indicate a connection between younger people are more open for the usage of mobile payment. The Chi-square test likewise indicate a significant influence of the age and what cluster they are placed in with an asymp. Sig (2-sided) value of 0,00.

H7.2: The usage of mobile payment among friends have a higher influence on the younger users We can accept younger users influenced by their peers to a larges extend, compared to the older users. Looking at the means of the two clusters, we find that the influence of Motivation to be significantly higher for the first mover and the hypotheses is accepted.

Sub conclusion The quantitative analysis has given some strong indication on the respondent’s attitude toward mobile payment. Non-users perceived a higher risk using mobile payment compared to the responding already using mobile payment. Safety among non-users was found to have a large effect on why they did not use mobile payment. There was not found a relation between age and fear, meaning that the older respondents did not fear the safety of using mobile payment more than the younger users. The dataset was tested and found acceptable for a factor analysis. Four factors was created, Buying Experience, Motivation, Service and Safety and Convenience. All the factors was able to explain the subjectivity of the variables with in the factors and was suitable for a regression analysis. Buying experience was the factor most suitable as the depended variable, in the regression analysis. Service

Page 104 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

and Safety had the largest impact on buying experience making it the most important factor for Swipp to focus on, since improving Service and Safety would give the largest impact in Buying Experience. Finally, a cluster analysis was conducted. After the analysis, two segment was found. The First Mover and The Conservative. The First Mover segment contained primarily of younger respondents, living in the larger cities and used mobile payment more often. Motivation had a relative higher impact on the segment, meaning the usage of friends and future expectation was more important for them compared to The Conservative. The conservative segment contained mainly of older people living in the smaller cities and used mobile payment very little or not at all. For The Conservative Service and Safety had a significant important for their attitude toward mobile payment. The knowledge of the two segments gives Swipp the opportunity to target their advertisement toward a certain segment knowing what demand of mobile payment is there.

13f. Generic strategies: When being a part of an industry dominated by one player, choice of strategy based on a market and consumer analysis is argued to be the most important factor in chase for market share. Creating a strategy that aims for a shift in product use must involve the current industry situation and preferences of consumers. The two types of generic competitive strategies form the basis for strategy development in all businesses regardless of size. The narrow focus strategy whether the strategy is based on low cost or differentiation is not aligned with the characteristics of a new product that creates revenue by usages. In general, a company that sees a potential in an upcoming industry with an oligopolistic cross industry structure, needs to take a broader scope of target, based on cost leadership or differentiation.

i. Cost leadership The account-to-account infrastructure of Swipp has the potential of being a game changer. Swipp is able to provide a less costly solution, in total, compared to MobilePay and MeeWallet makes them unique. Since it is argued, that the industry is still in an early stage, where growth should be exponential and profit less important, Swipp have opportunities to develop parallel with the industry growth, at a lower cost. The great usage of the competing products Swipp needs to be taken into account because the preferences of consumers is seen in the choice of product. Marketing campaigns have been launched and partnership deals have been written. However, Swipp as a product cannot compare to MobilePay. The functionality is still more intricately and that makes consumers to opt out

Page 105 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Swipp (Interview 5; Appendix 15). The benefits of choosing Swipp, e.g. higher amount limits, possibility of withdrawing a money transfer and faster visualization of transfers has not created a significant larger customer base, despite obvious advantages. This implies that the actual usage of mobile payments is relatively low which only supported by the findings of the quantitative frequency analysis where it is found that most users only transfers money versus actual payment transactions. The cost for consumers has the potential of being a factor of choice but owner of MobilePay, Danske Bank has postponed the introduction of direct consumer related costs (Computerworld.dk, b). As long as consumers do not have a direct cost, other variables will drive the industry. The merchants’ will have a potential of affecting the industry if cost outweighs the benefits. Merchants have the choice not to provide customers with this form of payments. So far, the industry maturity of mobile payments has not provided the link between consumers and products owners with new and greater benefits, such as detailed individual information flow. The nature of payments and its comprehensive need for usage to be a recognized payment form only emphasizes the needed broadly industry wide focus compared to the narrow market focus.

Looking at the market leader, MobilePay, we find the market has moved toward a larger collaborating among merchants and mobile payment application. When engaging in collaborating with a merchant cost can become an important factor. The cost a merchant has, when engaging in a payment system of any kind is important, for their decision-making. As earlier mentioned, Swipps cost structure makes it possible to offer a lower cost for the collaborated merchants. In a situation, where Swipp has the possibility to offer a cheaper solution compared to the competitors in the payment market their product will become superior. However, the cost can be limited to a minimum the customer base are more important the marginal cost difference. The cost structure are so reliant on the consumer base that cost becomes minor important, hence there are no expenses if there are no consumers.

Cost leadership of Swipp is currently not a significant factor due to the stage of industry maturity, even with a different and cheaper product based on account-to-account structure. The product advantages is not outweighing the lack of simplicity and functionality. So far, it is seen that parameters such as integration of consumer preferences and consumer usage is the most important factors. In theory, cost is always an important factor of successful business models but cost of mobile payments does not provide a simple conclusion due to its cross industrial nature. Cost of mobile payments is often part of a larger and more complex revenue among the players, local or global.

Page 106 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ii. Differentiation Swipp have primarily been focusing on lowering their cost, so they have a competitive advantage towards the other competitors. Swipp have not been successful getting the acknowledgment from the consumers they had hoped. Trying a differential strategy could be a possibility to get a better position on the Danish market. The respondents from both focus groups and the respondents from the questionnaire found that improvement of the application could increase their buying experience. In the analysis of the questionnaire, we found two different segments that could be interesting for Swipp, First Movers and The Conservatives. The two segments had different preferences towards what kind of improvement that would improve their buying experience. Swipp has two options trying to get The Conservative to start using mobile payments more often or try to get some of the already established users, from The First Mover segment switching to Swipp. Firstly, considering The First Movers segment, we found Motivation to be a strong factor for their use of mobile payment applications. To get the attention of the first movers, it is important that future expectations of using Swipp, is understood and that their surroundings are using Swipp. The focus groups provided the same conclusion, it was important friends and family used the mobile payment to be able to transfer money among each other. This implies that an important issue of Swipps mobile payment application is a lack of compatibility with Danske Bank costumers, which limits the possibilities to get a broad base of users. This fact gives MobilePay a competitive advantage since they cover everyone and if just one person in a group or network are costumer in Danske Bank, it can result in everyone using MobilePay instead of Swipp. Secondly, considering The Conservative segment it revealed a group of people that are more focused on the Service and Safety. The possibility to differentiate Swipp regarding Service and Safety could attract new users. Overall, Service and Safety is the most important factors for the respondents according to the regression analysis conducted in the quantitative analysis.

Due to the early levels of industry maturity, mobile payments provides various opportunities to differentiate a product. MobilePay have differentiated themselves by collaborating with Dansk Supermarked and Rema 1000. Dansk Supermarked and Rema 1000 has been key factors for promoting MobilePay in their stores. These initiatives have increased MobilePays consumer base. Swipp also has the opportunity to adopt the approach of collaborating with retailers to position their application better in the market. So far, MobilePay have established a strong connection with convenience stores. The markets that involves payments is more than convenience stores though, and it is therefore argued that Swipp has the opportunity to conquer other retail markets. It is important that collaborations involve large organizations due to the importance of large customer bases, hence

Page 107 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

large volumes of transactions. If the organization do not have a great customer base, the effect of a collaboration will vanish. There are many different opportunities for Swipp to engage in a collaboration, which differences from MobilePay. An interesting industry to enter could be the clothing industry. The Danish household spends DKK 14.539,40 a year on clothing, making it an interesting market for mobile payment (Dst.dk, b). For example, Hennes & Mauritz (HM) could be a potential partner for Swipp. H&M are a large company with a large customer base and H&M has 79 physical stores located in Denmark making them one of the largest clothing chains in Denmark. Additional H&M has a large customer base in Scandinavia if a strategic Scandinavian focus is chosen at some point. This is only theoretical due to the lack of knowledge and focus regarding other Scandinavian countries.

Another example of industry that possesses the characteristics of providing a payment solution with the much needed customer base, transaction volume and differentiation, is the transport industry. The industry is in general two sided; it involves a commercial side and a consumer side. Swipp’s arguable benefits of higher amount limits and possibility of withdrawal is seen as a significant way of differentiation in the commercial side of the transport industry. Product delivery without credit agreements can involve a large amount of cash. According to Troels Asmussen from Nordeas business development it is still practiced among Royal Unibrew beer delivery trucks that payment transactions to small pubs and kiosks is handled in cash (Interview 2, p.7). This means that there is a potential amount of risk related to this type of business such as potential theft, robbery or careless money handling. By having account-to-account structure and a significantly higher amount limit, Royal Unibrew or other companies that has the same process, could eliminate this risk and provide the small business with a better and safer solution. Furthermore, it will provide the businesses including both the buyer and seller with more transparency and better reconciliation opportunities.

The other side of the industry, the consumer side, involves taxis and public transport. MobilePay already has a collaboration with DSB, which does not provide Swipp with the possibility of differentiation through collaboration. However, taxis provides that opportunity. Moreover, having Uber pressuring and disrupting an industry that has not evolved for decades (Version2.dk, b), Swipp has the potential of being a trusted partner in servicing customers when using taxis.

Collaboration in industries that have a certain sets of characteristics, despite the differences among the industries, is therefore a potential strategy differentiation.

Page 108 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1. Exploring industries without collaborations Mentioned many times, Swipp as a product differentiate among competitors due to its account-to- account structure. This fact implies that Swipp should be more attractive compared to MobilePay or MeeWallet in an industry, but which one? Consider the payment service industry. NETS owned payment service (Betalingsservice) described in chapter 3b provides a service that offers an automated payment solution, based on account-to-account transfers. Broadly speaking, the service provides companies with an automated process of monthly payments based on data exchanged and customers does not need to enter anything when paying bills. Swipp can provide the same service to companies and customers by using the request functionally available. Since this has not been seen yet, this option is strictly theoretical but aligned with the capabilities of Swipp and the need of companies, it is a potential option that is justified mentioning. When having monthly payments, one typically is registered in database with address and phone number. Swipp needs no more than that to enable an automated payment process where customers will be introduced to a payments reminder in the form of a pop-up request. The request does not involve entry of a large amount of number. The bill is paid by a swipe. The conscious choice of swiping also functions as a reminder of which bills are paid opposed to an automated process where it is necessary to open a letter or to accessing online bank. Removing a service link could provide both the company and consumer with a more cost efficient solution.

The justification of the above mentioned theoretically Swipp solution, is based on the domination of NETS in the payments service market, mentioned in chapter 3b. Swipp as a product can explore this market since its capabilities and functionalities enables them to do so.

Chapter 14. Recommendations Based on the previous analysis of the industry and consumer preferences, the thesis will provide a number of tangible recommendations that is created to be seen as a benchmark for Swipp to apply when strategizing for a significant role of the Danish industry for mobile payments. The recommendation will be presented in the form of bullet points and with a timeframe of approximately a one year because of the dynamic nature of the industry. At present time, the introductory stage of the mobile payments industry possesses the characteristics of evolving in multiple unknown directions, and it is therefore argued that a timeframe beyond approximately one year will be insignificant due to the uncertainty and the early stage of the industry.

Page 109 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Product

 Develop a separate Swipp application, which is not located in the mobile bank application.  Enablement of all potential consumers, by integrating credit and debit card into the application.  Develop an in-store terminal, which allows consumers to pay without using a mobile number.  Provide an integration opportunity with loyalty programs and company specific discount schemes.  Develop an integration kit for e-commerce and other company specific applications, such as H&M or Taxa 4X35.  Simplifying the numbers of steps to access and use of the application.  Make the new application compatible with the most common used connecting technologies, such as NFC, Bluetooth and QR-code.

Consumer

 Multiple information initiatives and promotions about new features and functionalities  Become more visible and stay visible, by appearing in in stores, magazines, internet advertisements and television campaigns.  Providing tangible benefits, such as discounts, time savings or personalized offers in purchase situations through integration of loyalty programs or discount memberships.  Make sure that the consumers perceives Swipp as a secure service at same degree as other form of payment.  Make sure to target The first mover segment, hence easier adaptation.  Create a platform ensuring fast and rapid product feedback

Strategy

 Make sure to be as updated as competitive products in the industry.  Explore industries that has not been targeted yet, such as the clothing, transportation or event industry.  Explore collaboration opportunities with large global (IT) conglomerates.  Obtain and uphold a rapid time to market strategy.

Page 110 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

 Increase the use of Swipp by marketing initiatives or great and different consumer benefits to enlarge the consumer base.  Be a first mover in product development or be a more cost efficient follower.  Be an industry influencer.  Make sure to define, acknowledge and strategize by what kind of product Swipp is.

Chapter 15. Conclusion We found that the rapid developing industry of mobile payments ironically belongs in a market, which have not changed significantly in the later years, the payment market. Swipp entered the Danish market as second mover after Danske Bank already had introduced their MobilePay in 2013.

The analysis of Swipp’s external situation provided some indications of obstacles and challenges in the industry and where a product such as Swipp could be a potential success in the future. The analysis found it to be difficult for new entrants to enter the mobile payment industry. The entry barriers is high for new companies. The high entry barriers does not involve the fabrication and development of the application, but rather in the compatibility and integration with already existing payment systems. Furthermore, getting a sufficient consumer base acts as a significant barrier for new entrants in the industry. However, the analysis also indicated that large global conglomerates, such as Apple, Google and Samsung, are potential threats to Swipp. These companies have already developed mobile payment applications, but not in a form that can be used in Denmark, so far. As the industry matures and the revenue increases, these major companies are expected to enter the Danish market and play a significant role. Beside the already developed mobile payment application, the global conglomerates brings a very large consumer base, who possess a significant history of hands-on experience within multiple applications and new IT trends.

The analysis found the mobile payment industry have the characteristics of oligopoly competition due the few and actual functioning products. MobilePay being the top product have already consolidated their position as the number one provider of mobile payment application, making the competition difficult for Swipp. Both the primary and the secondary sources of data found MobilePay superior compared to their competitor, making Swipps penetration opportunities in the industry difficult. MobilePay and Swipps applications are close to being similar, making MobilePays numerous collaboration with merchants one of the key features that differentiate them in the market. MobilePay have managed to explore the collaboration better than Swipp, which was found to be one

Page 111 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

of the reasons for their stronger position in the industry. Swipps struggles with getting a strong consumer base can partly be credited to MobilePays strong position in the market, where the consumers do not find a reason to change product. The respondents in the focus groups specifically stated that they did not see a reason to change to Swipp, since they already used MobilePay.

The bargaining power of buyers was analyzed in two separate groups’ with separate needs and demands; end-consumers and retailers. Retailers have one major focus of fulfillment, when looking for a provider who can handle their transactions and that is a system used by a large number. If the payment service provider do not have a large consumer base, a retailers bargaining position increases significantly. This is because using a provider with a small consumer base do not result in a significant disadvantage toward their consumers. However, when the payment service provider has a large consumer base, a retailer has a need to implement the system to make sure consumers can buy products and pay with whatever at hand. Swipp is still in the development stage, with a limited consumer base, compared to cards such as MasterCard and Visa/Dankort, providing retailers with a relative strong bargaining power. With the development of mobile payment, this is expected to change, since more will use mobile payment in the future and the retailer’s power will decrease over time. For consumers, bargaining powers in the mobile payment industry is low due to the lack of differentiation among the few payment service providers. The lack of product differentiation makes consumer mobile payment alternatives limited. However, it also indicates that switching cost is low which can be argued as a potential bargaining power among mobile payment products.

In general, the threat from suppliers was found to be low. The globalization has enabled software development not only to be local but also global. The global effect provides a supplier with limited bargaining opportunities towards Swipp. The software needed to provide a paying application is arguable relatively simple. The complicated part is related to safety. Swipp has been able to develop the safety internally due to the existing infrastructure, making a supplier less important for Swipp.

The qualitative analysis captured the consumers’ attitude toward mobile payment and some of the elements surrounding mobile payment, such as safety, future expectation and their willingness to switch to Swipp. Furthermore, the answers was compared with the experts’ attitude towards the topic, which gave a good perspective on a gap between the consumers’ and the experts’ understanding of mobile payment. The respondents were positive towards mobile payment and had an expectation to use mobile payment more often in the future. There was some fears regarding the safety of mobile payment, a minor fear regarding intruders who could exploit a person’s application. The experts did

Page 112 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

not expect consumers to have this fear regarding mobile payment. Instead, they expected consumers not to see safety as an issue. In the quantitative analysis, it was found that the fear often came from people not using mobile payment. An interesting finding was that people using mobile payment did not have a fear and therefore trust the product, but non-users had a fear regarding safety. Despite the increasingly expected use of mobile payment, some concerns of how companies would use their mobile payments platform was experienced. The concern referred to a potential interruption with different offers, deals form companies, and spam. The experts on the other hand, found the possibilities of offering discounts and loyalty cards through the application, only providing consumers with an additional benefit, compared to other payment opportunities.

The quantitative analysis based on the questionnaire found the dataset suitable to create factors improving the explanation of the abstract topics of the variables. Four factors were conducted; 1) Motivation, 2) Service and Safety, 3) Convenience and 4) Buying Experience. Buying Experience was found to be the most suitable for the dependent variable in the regression analysis. The regression analysis indicated that an increase in Service and Safety had the highest power in the regression analysis. The findings indicated that the respondents preferred an increase in Service and Safety to increase their Buying Experience. Another interesting finding was the difference between the two clusters The first movers and The conservatives. The first movers, that contained young respondents living in the larger cities, used mobile payment more often in stores, online, and in transferring money among each other. Here, it was found to be important for The first movers that the factor Motivation had a relative higher impact on them compared to The conservatives. This was also found in the focus group where many referred to the importance that their friends and relatives used the same mobile payment application. The conservatives’ Service and Safety had a significant higher influence on their buying experience. This made two different approaches possible to make consumers adopting Swipp.

To understand which strategy Swipp should take on in approaching new and current users, the generic strategies framework was applied. The analysis found that there are limited possibilities to become a cost leader in a market, where expenses have such a small influence on the users, both end-user and the retailers. However, in the future, mobile payments is likely to increase in usage and Swipp will have some structural advantages, which can lower the cost compared to MobilePay, nevertheless a cost leader in the current market is not a scenario that gives Swipp the best opportunity to succeed. Differentiation can provide Swipp with several opportunities to become a leader within the mobile payment industry. MobilePay has already been leading the way with collaborations within the retail

Page 113 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

industry having Dansk supermarket as a partner. This has provided MobilePay with an initial advantage in the retail industry and have pushed their product towards the consumers. Swipp have the option to enter other industries and become a leader providing mobile payment services by initiation collaborations with other large companies such as H&M, which could be interesting for Swipp, making Swipp a key payment solution in the clothing industry. A potential and completely innovative differentiation is that Swipp has the opportunity to enter monthly payment, such as subscriptions and other monthly fixed cost. Swipp have the opportunity because of the account-to- account structure. Providing an alternative to Nets “betalingsservice” where the consumer participate more in the transaction. Swipp as a part of the Danish bankers association ‘finansrådet’, will have an opportunity of being part of a new way of settling payments in the payments industry, opposed to a global player wanting to disrupt the Danish payment ecosystem. This is argued to be new strategy exploring the payment industry rather than having a parochial and predetermined focus on the mobile payment industry that is dominated by successful competitor.

Finally, a set of recommendations was presented to provide Swipp with the best opportunities to obtain success in the future. In general, the focus Swipp needs to have is to differentiate themselves from MobilePay, making them more attractive and visible towards consumers.

Chapter 16. Discussion Our choice of framework was based on the best way of shedding light on a new and undescribed industry. From our initial topic interest to the final product, it was necessary to set a cutover date in the writing process due to the sudden increase in product development of both MobilePay and Swipp. The many initiative initiated provided us with a challenge, having to critically verify and align secondary data. We experienced that the collected primary data had the risk of being outdated due to the early stage regarding consumer awareness and product development. However, it is argued that, since the research questions was designed to explore and identify consumer attitudes rather than detailed needs and potentials, the primary data retains its reliability. Furthermore, the lack of actual payment usage distinctively different from money transfers found in the primary data collection only emphasizes the reliability. In an industry where no product standards or capitalization has emerged, a fast approach and processing is argued to be the optimal process. This was not possible in our case due to external factors but we are aware of the potential misalignment of primary and secondary data. Our focus groups, expert interviews and questionnaire was executed based on our interest and

Page 114 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

secondary data. Then the primary data was added a new and parallel collection of secondary data, which provided us with greater understanding of our research topic. The validity and reliability is argued to be high because our cutover date was set before starting the analysis, and the analysis is based on a large number of primary data, only supported by secondary data.

i. Apple, Google, Samsung… and NETS A more detailed analysis of potential global entrants could be interesting for further research. Having only read about ApplePay, GoogleWallet, SamsungPay etc. and not experienced any hands on, the uncertainty of differences in product, functionality and strategy is high. However, the conglomerates possesses all the characteristics of potential driving the industry to new levels, at least in theory. A hands-on product experience combined with a closer and detailed analysis of one of the conglomerates would be very interesting seen from a Danish industry perspective.

One of the interesting topics that has arisen during our process of writing is the subject of how to create a profitable business model. Even though we found many potential profit-creating factor due to the cross industrial industry characteristic, we did not see a straightforward and direct way of capitalizing on mobile payments.

Since the thesis is based on the actual products and services present in the Danish industry, we have not discussed NETS upcoming solution. NETS announced that they were in the making of creating their own mobile payment solution. The historical close link and ingrown collaboration already implemented in the Danish payment ecosystem makes NETS a potential significant entrant. Capitalizing on a deep ecosystem knowledge and long-term partnership will provide NETS with potential competitive advantages. Their product needs all the important characteristics, mentioned in the conclusion, to play a significant role. If succeeding in that, NETS have additionally been part of the three dimensional link of retailers, consumers and product in the form of the “Dankort”. These theoretical thoughts makes NETS a potential serious contender in the Danish mobile payment industry.

Page 115 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ii. Second-mover disadvantage An interesting aspect that we have come across during the empirical investigation is the concept of first-mover advantage. Being the second mobile payment application on the Danish market, it could be interesting to conduct more research, on how MobilePays first-mover advantage have affected the reception of Swipp. Considering that MobilePay has 1.6 million users it will be interesting to see, if this provide some competitive advantages for Danske Bank, that has made it harder for Swipp to penetrate the industry. It furthermore raises the question, if Swipp’s lack of success only relies on bad timing? Although our findings give indications of MobilePay being more convenient for consumers compared to e.g. Swipp, new research on the subject could potentially discuss the ratio between first-mover advantage and the importance of product-quality.

iii. Legal aspect Due to the delimitation of the legal complications surrounding the mobile payment industry both by itself and as a substitute to the payment industry. A deeper understanding of the challenges regarding safety and use of data, when consumers’ uses mobile payment. An understanding of the legal perspective could potentially have showed further opportunities or obstacles for Swipp’s future decision in the industry. Especially Swipp’s possibility to allow the consumers to transfer more money compared to MobiliePay may or may not give Swipp a large advantage depending how difficult it is for MobilePay to get permissions to raise their amount allow on their application.

iv. The government’s role in mobile payment industry For future studies, it would be interesting to investigate the government’s potential role in the industry of mobile payments. If mobile payments becomes part of a wallet function, including loyalty cards, payments and other functions in one application, it could be interesting to investigate the opportunities to incorporate driver’s license, passport, health care card and other card issued by the state. Having the possibility to incorporate government issued cards could make mobile payments even more attractive for the consumers since mobile payments would not only be an alternative payment form but also be an alternative to more comprehensive wallet.

Page 116 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

v. Technology Internet of Things (IoT) is the new IT phenomenon. IoT in short, is a network of physical objects or ‘things’ embedded with electronics, software, sensors, and network connectivity. Due to the connectivity, objects can collect and exchange data. It is now possible to program a refrigerator, providing a device with information of for example product expiration or automated notifications of missing groceries. The technology is evolving and developing and could potentially redefine markets and industries. The speed of technology innovation provides a great element of uncertainty for markets and industries in the long term. With that in mind, only emphasized by the history, it enables us to question the technologies used today. Will the digital wallet be a norm? Will bitcoin be the most accepted currency, globally? Only time will tell.

Page 117 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Chapter 17. Bibliography Accenture, 2013. It’s Anyone’s Game in the Consumer Electronics Playing Field. Aktouf, O., 2004. The False Expectations of Michael Porter’s Strategic Management Framework. Revista Universidad & Empresa, 6(6), 9-41. Aliyu, A., Tasmin, R., 2012. The Impact of Information and Communication Technology on Banks‟ Performance and Customer Service Delivery in the Banking Industry. Internation Journal of Latest Trends in Finance and Economic Sciences No. 1. Andal-Ancion, A., Cartwright, P., Yip, G., 2003. The Digital Transformation of Traditional Business. MIT Sloan Management Review. Andersen, H., Andersen, V., Fivelsdal, E., Gamdrup, P., Jensen, H., Kirkeby, O., 1994. Introduktion – Videnskabsteori og metodelære. Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg. Andersen, I., 2009. Den skinbarlige virkelighed, 4th edition. ed. Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg. Ariely, D., Norton, M.I., 2009. Conceptual consumption. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 475- 499. Association for Computing Machinery, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (Eds.), 2013. International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ. Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, 2013. Bitcoin: A first assessment. Bayus, B., 1998. An Analysis of Product Lifetimes in a Technologically Dynamic Industry. Management Science, 44(6), pp.763-775. BBVA, 2012. Mobile Payments - Paying with a mobile device, Innovation Edge. Bellq, J., 2010. Doing Your Research Project. Berger, P.L., 1990. The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books, New York. Berlingske, B., 2014. MobilePay giver kæmpestort underskud for Danske Bank. Birks, D., Malhotra, N., 2007. Marketing Research: An Applied Approach, 3rd Edition. ed. Pearson Education Limited. Bollen, K., 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Staqtistics. John Wiley and Sons. Børsen, 2015. Mobilkrig optrappes: Swipp i samarbejde med Matas. Børsen Finans 9. sep 2015. Børsen, 2011. Danske Bank tæver Nordea i ny mobilbank test. Børsen Finans 25. feb 2011. Bothun, D., Glisson, S., Haas, R., Isaac, C., Lieberman, M., 2013. Consumer Intelligence Series:

Page 118 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Opening the Mobile Wallet, PwC Consumer Intelligence Series. Price Waterhouse Cooper. Bryson, C., 2013. Mobile Payments. Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems Volume 7 Number 3. Ching, A., Hayashi, F., 2010. Payment card rewards programs and consumer payment choice. Journal of Banking & Finance. Collin, F., 2003. Konstruktivisme (Problemer, positioner og paradigmer). Samfundslitteratur Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Contini, D., Crowe, M., Merritt, C., Oliver, R., Mott, S., 2011. Mobile Payments in the United States Mapping Out the Road Ahead. Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., Öörni, A., 2003. Consumer acceptance of mobile payment solutions. G.M. Giaglis (ed.), mBusiness 2003 – The Second International Conference on Mobile Business, Vienna, 2003, 211–218. Dahlberg, T., Öörni, A., 2006. Understanding Changes in Consumer Payment Habits - Do Mobile Payments Attract Consumers? Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 6(36). Danmark, Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014. Fremtidens detailhandel. Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen. Danmark, Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2012. Konkurrencen på bankmarkedet for privatkunder. Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen. Danmarks Nationalbank, 2011. Omkostninger ved betalinger i Danmark. Danmarks Nationalbank, Kbh. Danmarks Nationalbank, 2005. Betalingsformidling i Danmark. Danmarks Nationalbank, Kbh. Danmarks Statistik, 2014a. It-anvendelse i befolkningen 2014. Kbh. Danmarks Statistik, 2014b. It-anvendelse i befolkningen 2014. Kbh. de Chernatony, L., Holloway, I., 1999. Experts’ views about defining services brands and the principles of services branding. Journal of Business Research, 46(2), 181-192. de Chernatony, McDonald, M.., Wallace, E., 2011. Creating powerful brands. Routledge. Dilling, S., Svarrer, O., 2010. Danske Banks mobilbank rammer plet. Politiken. Drucker, P.F., 2006. Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles, Reprint. ed. HarperBusiness, New York, NY. Dwarf Quaterly, 2011. Mobilshopping - En håndholdt handelserevolution, Online Strategy, Design og Udvikling. Dwarf A/S. European Payments Council, 2010. White Paper Mobile Payments - 1st Edition. European Payments Council, Brussels.

Page 119 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Featherman, M.S., Pavlou, P.A., 2003. Predicting e-services adoption a perceived risk facts perceptive. International Journal of Human- Compiter Studies, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 451-374. Finansrådet, 2013. Clearing and Settlement of Retail Payments in Denmark. First Data Corp., 2014. Annual Year Report. Forresester, J.., 1959. Advertising: a problem in industrial dynamics. Harvard Business Review, March-April, pp. 100-10. Fuglsang, L., Bitsch Olsen, P., 2004. Videnskabsteori i samfundsvidenskaberne : på tværs af fagkulturer og paradigmer, 2. Udgave. ed. Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Gadamer, 1977. Philosophical Hermeneutics. University of California Press. Gawer, A., Cusumano, M.A., 2014. Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation: Platforms and Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management 31, 417–433. doi:10.1111/jpim.12105 Gerhardt Schierz, P., Schilke, O., Wirtz, B.W., 2010. Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: An empirical analysis. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9 (2010) 209–216. Goldman Sachs, 2014. Top of Mind - All About Bitcoin. Grant, R.M., 2010. Contemporary strategy analysis: text and cases, 7th ed. ed. Wiley, Hoboken, N.J. Grundy, T., 2006. Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter’s five forces model, Strategic Change. Strategic Change Volume 15, Issue 5, pages 213–229, August 2006. Hair, J.F. (Ed.), 2010. Multivariate data analysis, 7th ed. ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Henry, A., 2011. Understanding strategic management, 2nd ed. ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford ; New York. Holm, C., Kirt, V., 2011. Mobile Application Branding - The case of Nordea & Danske Bank (Thesis). Copenhagen Business School. Holt, F.., 2002. Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of consumer culture and branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 70-90. Jensen, J.M., Knudsen, T., 2011. Analyse af spørgeskema med SPSS, 2nd ed. Johnson, G., Scholes, K., Whittington, R., 2008. Exploring corporate strategy. Prentice Hall, Harlow. Karagiannopoulos, G.D., Georgopoulos, N., Nikolopoulos, K., 2005. Fathoming Porter’s five forces model in the internet era. info 7, 66–76. doi:10.1108/14636690510628328

Page 120 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Kim, S., Lee, H.G., 2009. Understanding dynamics between initial trust and usage intentions of mobile banking. Information Systems Journal, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 283-311. Klepper, S., 1996. Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle. The American Economic Review. Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014a. Betalingskortmarkedet. Erhvervs- og vækstministeriet, Valby. Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, 2014b. Nets’ adfærd i forbindelse med indløsning af internationale betalingskort (Afgørelse). Erhvervs- og vækstministeriet. Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen, n.d. Fremtidens detailhandel. Koslow, S., 2000. Can the truth hurt? how honest and persuasive advertising can unintentionally lead to increased consumer scepticism. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 34(2), 245-267. Kvale, S., 2007. Doing interviews, The sage qualitative research kit. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Lewis, D., Bridger, D., 2001. The soul of the new consumer: Authenticity-what we buy and why in the new economy. Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Linck, K., Pousttchi, K., Wiedemann, D.G., 2006. Security issues in mobile payment from the customer viewpoint. n Proceedings of the 14th European Confer-ence on Information Systems (ECIS 2006), Göteborg. Lin, H.H., Wang, Y.S., 2006. An examination of the determinants of customer loyality in mobile commerce contexts. Information and Management, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 271-282. Malhotra, N.K., Birks, D.F., Wills, P., 2012. Marketing research: an applied approach. M. Brandburd, P., R. Ross, D., 1989. Can Small Firms Find and Defend Strategic Niches? A Test of the Porter Hypothesis. McDonald, M.., de Chernatony, L., Harris, F., 2001. Corporate marketing and service brands- moving beyond the fast-moving consumer goods model. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 335-352. McKinsey, 2014. The road back: McKinsey global banking annual review 2014. New York. Meijer, C.R.W. de, Bye, J., 2011. The increasing adoption of mobile payments in Europe - and remaining challenges to growth. Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems Volume 5 Number 3. Mintzberg et al., H., 1998. Strategy Safari – The Complete Guide Through The Wilds of Strategic Management. FT Prentice Hall.

Page 121 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Mitchell, V.W., 1999. Consumer perceived risk: conceptualization and models. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33 Nos 1/2, pp. 163-195. Mobey, 2011. Business models for NFC payments. Mobey Forum. NETS, 2014. Årsregnskab. Nygaard, C., 2005. Samfundvidenskabelige analyse metoder, 1st edition. ed. Forlaget samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg. Ondrus, J., Pigneur, Y., 2005. A disruption analysis in the mobile payment market. INFORGE - Ecole des HEC. Ondrus, J., Sarker, S., Campbell, D., Valacich, J., 2005. Mapping the Need for Mobile Collaboration Technologies: A Fit Perspective. O’Shaughnessy, J., 1988. Competitive marketing: a strategic approach, 2nd ed. ed. Unwin Hyman, Boston. Pedersen, J.G., 2012. Her er Danmarks bedste mobilbank-applikation. Mobilsiden.dk. Politiken, 2013. Flugt tager til: 94.000 kunder har forladt Danske Bank i år. Politiken. Pollay, R.W., Mittal, B., 1993. Here’s the beef: Factors, determinants, and segments in consumer criticism of advertising. The Journal of Marketing, , 99-114. Porter, M., 1985. The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press. Porter, M.E., 1998. Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors: with a new introduction, 1st Free Press ed. ed. Free Press, New York. Rasborg, K., 2004. Socialkonstruktivismer i klassisk og moderne sociologi. Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Reichheld, F.F., Teal, T., 2001. The loyalty effect: the hidden force behind growth, profits, and lasting value. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass. Richard A. Krueger, Casey, M.A., 2009. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research, 4th ed. ed. SAGE, Los Angeles. Shaw, E.H., 2012. Marketing strategy From the origin of the concept to the development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing Vol. 4 No. 1, 2012. Sinelnikova, E.M., Dvoretskova, T.V., Kagan, Z.S., 1975. [Intermediate plateaux in kinetics of the reaction catalyzed by biodegradative L-threonine dehydratase from Escherichia coli]. Biokhimiia 40, 645–651. Skatterådet, 2014. Bitcoins, ikke erhvervsmæssig begrundet, anset for særskilt virksomhed.

Page 122 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Slade, E.L., Williams, M.D., Dwivedi, Y.K., 2014. Devising a research model to examine adoption of mobile payments: An extension of UTAUT2. Smowton, C., Lorch, J.R., Molnar, D., Saroiu, S., Wolman, A., 2014. Zero-effort payments: design, deployment, and lessons. ACM Press, pp. 763–774. doi:10.1145/2632048.2632067 Speed, R.J., 1989. Oh Mr Porter! A Re-Appraisal of Competitive Strategy. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 7 Iss: 5/6, pp.8 - 11. Thompson, J., Frank, M., 2014. Strategic Management – Awareness and Change. Thurén, T., 2012. Videnskabsteori for begyndere. Rosinante. Ulett, G.A., Ziegler, V.E., Clayton, P.J., Biggs, J.T., 1975. Letter: More on the treatment of delusional depressed patients. Am J Psychiatry 132, 1332–1333. Verifone Danmark A/S, 2014. Årsregnskab. WDS, A Xerox Company, 2014. WDS Mobile Loyalty Audit 2014. Wright, P., 1987. Research Notes ans Communictions a Rerinement of Porter’s Strategies. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 8, 93-101. Yang, Y., Liu, Y., Li, H., Yu, B., 2015. Understanding perceived risks in mobilepayment acceptance. Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 115 iss 2 pp. 253-269. Yan, H., Yang, Z., 2015. Examining Mobile Payment User Adoption from the Perspective of Trust. International Journal of u- and e- Service, Science and Technology. Yin, R., 2002. Case Study Research – Design and Methods. Saga Publications Ltd, London. Zmijewska, A., Lawrence, E., 2006. Implementation models in mobile payment. Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference, Puerto Vallarta, 2006, 19– 25. Zmijewska, A., Lawrence, E., Steele, R., Towards, R., 2004. understanding of factors influencing user acceptance of mobile payment system. Paper Presented at the IADIS International Conference WWW/Internet. Internet source Scmp.com – http://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/technology/article/1362046/hi-tech-advances- smartphones-are-opening-world-possibilities

Phonearea.com

a. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Microsoft-Payments-Inc-the-future-of-Windows-mobile- payments_id68007

Page 123 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

b. http://www.phonearena.com/news/10-of-the-greatest-smartphones-from-10-years-ago-2015- edition_id64937

DST.dk

a. http://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/emner/forbrug/elektronik-i-hjemmet.aspx b. https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/emner/forbrug/forbrugsundersoegelsen

Danskebank.dk

a. http://www.danskebank.dk/da-dk/erhverv/nyheder/pages/danske-business-december- 2014.aspx b. http://www.danskebank.dk/da-dk/mobilepay/Pages/mobilepay

Investopia.dk – (http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/121014/5-most-important-virtual- currencies-other-bitcoin.asp)

Ue.dk – http://www.ue.dk/telekommunikation/31072/bankernes-Swipp-koeber-teleselskabernes- paii

Alm.Bankdata.dk – https://alm.bankdata.dk/page1323.aspx

Bureaubiz.dk –

a. http://www.bureaubiz.dk/Nyheder/Artikler/2015/Uge-9/Swipp-vokser-Men-der-er-fortsat- lang-vej-op-til-MobilePay b. http://www.bureaubiz.dk/Nyheder/Artikler/2015/Uge-9/Swipp-vokser-Men-der-er-fortsat- lang-vej-op-til-MobilePay

Paii.dk – https://www.paii.dk/om-paii/presse

Reuters.com

a. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/10/us-apple-nfc- idUSKBN0H50I820140910#BSS4MvomGOFaTpUH.97 b. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/31/vodafone-money-idUSL5N0MS2SG20140331

Visaeurope.com – https://www.visaeurope.com/making-payments/applepay/

Page 124 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Androidcentral.com – http://www.androidcentral.com/samsung-pay-gain-gift-card-compatibility- and-new-issuers-later-year

Forbes.com

a. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2015/03/17/after-poaching-paypals-president- facebook-is-going-after-the-payments-business/ b. http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2014/06/05/will-community-banks-disappear-threats- to-old-school-banking economist.com – http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/05/economist- explains-18 sondagsavisen.dk - http://sondagsavisen.dk/filmboegermusik/2014-12-26-swipp-er-arets-vaerste- reklame/ mobilepay.dk

a. http://mobilepay.dk/da-dk/Pages/faq.aspx b. http://www.mobilepay.dk/da-dk/Pages/mobilepay.aspx; http://trendsonline.dk/2015/04/03/nu-kan-du-bruge-mobilepay-online-med-dankortet/ c. http://www.mobilepay.dk/da-dk/erhverv/Pages/mobilepay-appswitch.aspx d. http://www.mobilepay.dk/da-dk/erhverv/Pages

Swipp – http://swipp.dk/brugerregler

Version2

a. http://www.version2.dk/artikel/danske-bank-19-millioner-danskere-bruger-mobilepay- 76868 b. http://www.version2.dk/artikel/foetex-aabner-traadloese-betalinger-mobilepay-96272

Fraudid – http://www.fraudid.dk/#!Fuld-fart-p%C3%A5-den-mobile-udvikling/c1bau/3B77E257- 8DC4-444B-BF14-B21A09F60509

Recordere.dk – http://www.recordere.dk/indhold/templates/design.aspx?articleid=12408&zoneid=5

Theglobalmail.com – http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/feature-too-big-to- disrupt/article22163574/

Page 125 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Paypal.com – https://www.paypal.com/dk/webapps/mpp/send-money-online

Tv2.dk

a. http://finans.tv2.dk/nyheder/article.php/id- 73468284%3Aafg%C3%83%C6%92%C3%86%E2%80%99%C3%83%E2%80%9A%C3% 82%C2%B8relse-bitcoingevinster-er-skattefrie.html b. http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/nyheder/danske-bank-har-stor-succes-med-mobilbetaling

CNBC – http://www.cnbc.com/id/101581641

Business.dk a. http://www.business.dk/finans/mobilepay-giver-kaempestort-underskud-for-danske-bank b. http://www.business.dk/finans/nu-kommer-modangrebet-paa-mobilepay

Verifone.dk – http://www.verifone.dk/da/Denmark/Start/Betalingsterminaler/All-in-One/

Dr.dk – http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/viden/tech/her-er-de-ti-mest-populaere-apps

Fortune.com – http://fortune.com/2012/06/29/goldman-sachs-puts-the-value-of-apples-iphone-and- ipad-customer-base-at-nearly-295-billion/

Mondato.com – http://mondato.com/blog/beyond-nfc-the-next-generation-of-m-payment- technology

En.tagpay.fr – http://en.tagpay.fr/tagpay-platform/#mobile-financial-services europeanpaymentscouncil.eu iisd.org – https://www.iisd.org/business/banking/sus_key_drivers.aspx borsen.dk

a. http://investor.borsen.dk/artikel/1/148218/forbrugerraadet_stop_bankernes_spekulation.html b. http://borsen.dk/nyheder/avisen/artikel/11/119245/artikel.html svinfusion.com – http://svinfusion.com/svinsider/ mgafrica.com – http://mgafrica.com/article/2014-12-10-in-kenya-m-pesa-is-kingand-says-the-best- is-yet-to-come

Page 126 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

thewirelessbanana.com – https://www.thewirelessbanana.com/news/history-of-the-sim-card/ forbrugsforeningen.dk – http://www.forbrugsforeningen.dk/Om-forbrugsforeningen computerworld.dk

a. http://www.computerworld.dk/art/227976/danske-bank-satser-stort-paa-mobilepay- forlaenger-gratis-periode b. http://www.computerworld.dk/art/232462/danske-bank-dropper-alle-planer-om-at-opkraeve- gebyr-for-brug-af-mobilepay technewsworld.com – http://www.technewsworld.com/story/81319.html?rss=1 meewallet.com

a. http://meewallet.com/en/2015/08/13/exclusive-interview-welcome-to-my-world/ b. http://meewallet.com/en/2015/08/13/exclusive-interview-welcome-to-my-world/ trendonline.dk – http://trendsonline.dk/2015/03/24/vaekstfonden-laner-millioner-til- betalingslosningen-mee/ finansraadet.dk – http://www.finansraadet.dk/Bankkunde/Pages/dine-bankforretninger/dine- betalingskort/dankort.aspx w3schools.com – http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp mobil.nu – http://mobil.nu/artikel/Swipp-nye-klaeder-og-landsdaekkende-partnerskab-med-matas- 60312 finans.dk

a. http://finans.dk/live/erhverv/ECE8004683/Swipp-indleder-det-store-angreb-p%C3%A5- Mobilepay/?ctxref=ext b. http://finans.dk/live/erhverv/ECE7283905/Mobilepay-gemmer-p%C3%A5-mere-end-bare- %C3%A5rets-ord/?ctxref=ext meremobil.dk – http://meremobil.dk/2015/02/mest-solgte-mobiler-jan15-hitliste/

Page 127 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

17a. Appendix Appendix 1 – History of NETS holding A/S Nets Holding A/S er en nordisk udbyder af betalings-, kort- og informationsservices med hovedsæde i Danmark. Selskabet har mere end 2.000 medarbejdere i fem lande. De lokale forretningscentre ligger i Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki og Tallinn. Kunderne er banker, private virksomheder og den offentlige sektor.

Virksomheden har heddet Nets siden 2010, da danske PBS Holding A/S og norske Nordito AS, moderselskab for BBS og Teller, fusionerede. Men historie går tilbage til 1968, da produkter og services primært blev betalt kontant og af og til med check.

Siden de tidligste dage med hulkort og computere på størrelse med huse har Nets arbejdet koncentreret og dedikeret for at gøre håndtering af betalinger og information så nem som mulig. Bestræbelser har ført til produkter som de nordiske automatiserede betalingsydelser “AvtaleGiro” og “Betalingsservice”. I 1983 lancerede Nets det nationale danske betalingskort, Dankort. Uden at overdrive kan man sige, at dette betalingskort ikke alene ændrede den måde, danske virksomheder og forbrugere handler med hinanden på, men det ændrede også det danske samfund ved at skabe et helt nyt mønster for udveksling af penge og information. Andre produkter der kan nævnes er eFaktura, eSecurity og NemID.

Lokale løsninger og direkte debitering som Betalingsservice, AvtaleGiro og eFaktura håndteres av Payment & Information Services. Front-end- og back-end-løsninger til udstedere og indløsere håndteres av Cards, som også tilbyder processing og services til de Nationale betalingskort, Dankort og BankAxept. eSecurity tilbyder elektronisk dokumentsignering og services til internationale banker og virksomheder med henblik på at sikre e-mails, arbejdsstationer, netværk og applikationer og udstede id-kort til medarbejdere til adgangskontrol.

Merchant Solutions tilbyder betalingsløsninger til virksomheder. Teller er en del av Merchant Solutions og håndterer indløsning af nationale og internationale betalingskort, primært på det nordiske marked. Teller håndterer også betalingskortaftaler for lokale og internationale kort, bl.a. Dankort, Visa, MasterCard, American Express, JCB og China UnionPay

I foråret 2014 blev Nets solgt for 17 milliarder kroner til de to amerikanske kapitalfonde Advent International og Bain Capital og pensionsselskabet ATP. Danske og norske pengeinstitutter med forskellige procentvise andele var modtagere.

Page 128 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Kilde: www.Nets.eu & www.Wikipedia.dk

Page 129 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Appendix 2 – Swipp Mobile app guide SWIPP:

Money transfers:

1) Open app, 2) login to your mobile bank app using username/Cpr and password, 3) press menu, 4) press SWIPP, 5) insert amount, 6) press next, 7) find recipient (no search help), selelct, 8) press transfer

Retail payments:

1)

MobilePay:

Money transfers:

1) Open app, 2) login using 4 digit code, insert amount and mobilnumber (search help), 3) press next, 4) swipe to the right

Retail payments:

Technology: NFC, phone number, Bluetooth

Page 130 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Appendix 3 – Interview 1 John G Pedersen Interview John G.

John: Jeg hedder John G. Pedersen og jeg er har været i det her game i 15 – 20 år. Det har jeg primært fordi, der startede noget der hed internettet på et tidspunkt og tænkte det kunne være sjovt, at skrive noget på det der internet som ingen læste andet ind os selv. Så begyndte vi at skrive om telefoner, fordi der var nogen der havde nogle åbenlyste problemer med, at få telefonerne til at sende sms’er, tilbage i 1996. Det blev så starten, på det jeg ligesom laver, kan man sige. Jeg har ikke nogle uddannelse indenfor det her, det er learning by doing og det er deep facts opbygning over rigtig mange år. Jeg har så startet en virksomhed omkring det her, som vi har kørt op til at være landets ledende medie omkring det her marked, altså smartphones, tabelets og bærbarelektronik. Det selskab solgte jeg så i 2005 og har arbejdet for det frem til år 2013, hvor jeg så har startet for mig selv, med et tilsvarende emne bare (2.28) med et lidt anderledes koncept. Der er mange der snakker om, at jeg ved en masse om det her marked, men det er altså viden der er optjent af hårdt arbejde fra den virkelige verden ikke studier. Jeg er ikke ansat eller betalt eller noget af teleoperatør eller producenter jeg er helt og afdeles uafhængig.

Martin: Super! Hvordan vil du karakterisere en mobilbetalingskunde? Hvem tror du typisk det vil være, der bruger mobilbetalinger?

John: Det kommer an på hvordan du spørg mig, om nu eller fremadrettet? Altså tager vi en typisk mobilbetalingskunde som vi ser dem nu, så er det en eller anden form for first-mover, som har lyst til at have de app’s installeret på sin telefon og gider at rode i det og har tillid til at systemet er sikkert nok. Det er ikke Leif og Susanne som bor i ude i Brønshøj i deres lejlighed, hvor de har boet de sidste 30 år. Det er teknologi first-movers. Det her marked vil tage et pænt stykke tid, før det bliver udbredt til helt almindelige slutbruger, af forskellige årsager, som jeg kommer til at snakke om, om lidt. Men den typiske kunde er en teknologi first-mover af en eller anden karakter eller en teknologi interesseret, der synes det her er spændene. Det kan også være en Finans - eller bank interesseret, med en eller anden form for (5.20)der har noget interesse i markedet for betaling eller erhvervsdrivende eller er bare generelt teknologiinteresseret.

Martin: Hvordan ser du så, nu nævnte du selv fremtiden, hvordan ser du så den kommer til at ændre sig, fremadrettet?

Page 131 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

John: Jeg er sikker på, at vi om noget tid og med det mener jeg, om forholdsvis lang tid, vil se en helt almindelig brug af mobilbetaling, ligesom vi ser brug af dankort i dag. Der er ingen tvivl om, at det her marked, det vil komme til at presse dankortet helt vildt og det er egentlig også udmærket. Nu har dankortet jo også haft et monopol og problemstillingerne omkring monopoliseringen af dankortet begynder så småt, at vise sig nu hvor der er sket problemstillinger om hvad der kan udbydes og tilbydes i forhold til mobilbetalingsløsninger. Dankortet og Nets er en stopklods på det, fordi det er lidt sådan en stort (6.16) for de her systemer. Men der kommer til at gå lang tid, før vi kommer derud.

Martin: Som vi har opfattet markedet lige nu, så har de fleste selvfølgelig brugt MobilePay, langt hen af vejen. Så generelt har vi opfattet omkring en app, er at når man først har en app som virker, så skifter du ikke, hvis du har en app der virker til det forbrug du gerne vil have. Hvad tror du kan få en kunde til, at skifte mobilbetalingsapp, fra fx MobilePay til Swipp eller Snapchat eller hvad der ellers er kommet af forskellige udbyder af mobilbetalinger?

John: Jeg tror, at vi vil se, at de netop vil have flere forskellige mobilbetalingsapp på deres telefoner. Jeg tror ikke på at de kun ville holde sig til en. Nogle steder hvor man kan betale med Swipp andre steder med MobilePay og andre steder med noget helt andet. Vi har lige set, at Olieselskabet OK har introduceret en betalingsapp, hvor man kan betale for deres brændstof via en app, som de har lavet. Det er jo bare en af de betalingsløsninger. Jeg vil gerne lige understrege, at på nuværende tidspunkt, betragter jeg ikke, som sådan MobilePay som en mobilbetalingsløsning. Fordi de er begyndt på det, i nogle udvalgte forretninger, i mindre steder som, fodboldklubber og frisører osv. Men der er stadig langt til en stor udbredelse. Indtil videre ser vi jo kun, person til person, pengeoverførelser på MobilePay og Swipp, ikke kun selvfølgelig, men det er det vi ser primært og der kommer til at gå lang tid før vi har set en fuld implementering.

Martin: Lidt nysgerrigt, hvilken mobilbetalingsapp bruger du, til fx overførelser til privat personer ?

John: Jeg bruger MobilePay. Det har ikke noget at gøre med, at jeg ikke har lyst til, at bruge Swipp. Det har noget at gøre med, at Swipp har jo valgt en strategi hvor de samarbejder med nogle banker og jeg er tilfældigvis ikke kunde i nogle af dem - jeg er i Danske Bank, og det er jeg egentlig glad for. Men jeg havde da gladelig brugt Swipp hvis det var, at jeg kunne gøre det. Det kan jeg så bare ikke og der er vi faktisk inde ved et af de problemstillinger eller forhindringer, der er omkring udbredelsen af mobilbetalinger, de forhindringer branchen selv er med til at sætte op for sig selv.

Page 132 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Som vi ser markedet lige nu med mobilbetalinger, er det ikke noget man som firma kan tjene penge på direkte endnu. Der kommer højt sandsynlig noget brugerbetaling af en eller andet art, kunne man forstille sig. Hvordan ser du, det kan skabe en værdi for virksomhederne, fx hvis man tager MobilePay og Swipp, som er de to danske lige nu som er størst. Hvilke værdi synes du det skaber for dem, at de har skabt en mobilbetalingsflade ?

John: Altså.. hvilken værdi det skaber at tilbyde det ?

Martin: Ja !

John: Det skaber en værdi af form, af at man signalere over for sine kunder at man er med fremme i bussen, man er med fremme på det seneste nye. At man ikke er sådan en støvet gammel virksomhed som kun tænker i kontanter eller checks, for den sags skyld, som også var et betalingsmiddel i gamle dage. Jeg tror vi vil se, især nye iværksætter, nye selvstændige iværksætter der starter egen virksomheder, som vil tilbyde mobilbetalingsløsninger som MobilePay og Swipp som det eneste de tilbyder. Hvis jeg skulle starte en frisørsalon eller noget som helst andet hvor jeg gerne vil tiltrække nogle kunder som var lidt yngre end 50 plus, så vil jeg fuldstændig droppe dankort og implementering af betalingskort generelt i en virksomhed, alene besværet og omkostningerne ved det vil langt overstige det man vil kunne tilbyde ved en mobilbetalingsløsning. Så vil jeg sørger for at fortælle folk og give dem en pjece med eller hvad det måtte være, at her betaler vi med enten kontanter eller med en af de her nye betalingsløsninger. Så man kan hjælpe folk med at installere nu hvor de alligevel er i forretningen, det tager jo ikke lang tid at oprette en MobilePay konto, som almindelig forbruger. På den måde kan man drage fordele af det og så vil der selvfølgelig være mange i starten, der synes det er spændende at prøve at betale med de her løsninger frem for at betale med dankort.

Martin: Nu snakker du meget om virksomhederne ude i butikkerne, men hvordan ser du for den Danske Bank og for alle de banker der har slået sig sammen? Hvad får de ud af at udbyde, udover de selvfølgelig får de der virksomheder, men pt er der jo ikke rigtig nogle penge i det endnu. Men hvad får de på nuværende tidspunkt ved at udbyde Swipp og MobilePay til butikkerne, hvilken brandværdi og relationer får de og får de noget kundedata også, tror du ?

John: Ikke andet end de aftaler der er skuret sammen. Om de får adgang til deres kundedatabase, det tror jeg nu ikke, men det er klart at de skaber en relation til virksomheden ved at udbyde en

Page 133 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

betalingsløsning. Som jeg talte med nogle af dem om på en tidspunkt, så havde jeg da klart set nogle fordele i, at kunden i det her tilfælde, forretningen, har en forretningsrelation med Danske Bank eller Nordea, frem for at have det med Nets eller en anden betalingskortudbyder. Altså man har en relationen direkte, man har ikke nogen mellemled. Den største forhindring lige nu, som jeg ser det, er faktisk det med Nets, bl.a. som sidder som gateway mellem forbrugeren og forretningen. Der så man jo senest at MobilePay introduceret deres, eller Danske Bank introduceret deres, MobilePay Business.

De begyndte udrulningen MobilePay til net butikker, så man kunne betale via deres løsning med net butikker , men i starten blev det uden dankort, så alle de folk der ikke har dankort, kan ikke bruge det her, de skal som minimum have et visakort, som er et del af dankortet, for at de kunne bruge den løsning her online. Det er jo et kæmpe problem for Danske Bank, at de skal igennem Nets før de kunne det her. Nu er de så indgået et samarbejde med Nets omkring det og det kommer garanteret i løbet af sommeren. Jeg tror på, at vi på sigt vil se de her udbyder som Nordea og Danske Bank, vi forsøge at komme uden om andre udbyder end dem selv. De vil skabe deres eget betalings – gateway. Der er jo ingen grund til at sende kunderne over og være kunder hos Nets, som så skal være kunder hos Danske Bank eller omvendt, det er bedre at det er en til en relation, selvom at Danske Bank sådan siger i øjeblikket at de går meget ind for at alle skal lave det de er gode til og de indgår samarbejde med dem de synes er bedst på markedet til at udbyde, men det er ikke andet end varmt luft og spind mand lægger ud. Fordi sandheden, hvis man kunne ansætte de rigtige personer internt til at kunne lave det her og scorer alle pengene selv, så ville man jo klart gøre det – især når man har den størrelse som Danske Bank.

Martin: Som jeg forstår det, så har Swipp ikke Nets ind over det, det er kun Danske Bank der har det, ikke?

John: Swipp fungerer lidt anderledes, fordi man jo overfører fra det samme pengeinstitut til det samme pengeinstitut, til de folk der er i samarbejdsnetværket, kan man sige. Danske Bank går på tværs af det hele, det er det der er Danske Banks udfordring, i mens de andre forsøger at holde deres egen lille lukket fest blandt deres egene.

Martin: Det er vel både deres udfordringer og deres styrke ?

John: Ja det kan man sige, ja!

Page 134 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Er markedet i vækst eller er det mættet? Den mobilbetalingsform vi ser nu, tror du det er den form vi kommer til at se på langt sigt eller er det en midlertidigløsning indtil der fx kommer NFC eller Google Wallet og Apple Pay?

John: Jeg har skrevet så meget om NFC baseret mobilbetaling, i de sidste langt over 10 år. Det er lidt over 10 år siden jeg skrev den første artikel med, at nu blev dankortet erstattet med mobilen som betalingsmiddel, fordi nu havde man NFC. Det tror jeg simpelthen ikke på. Det har haft langt over 10 år implementering, siden da er der kommet teknologier der er langt smartere end NFC chip. Det er fuldstændig rystende at vi skal se, at de forskellige udbyder som fx, Points som udbyder betalingsterminaler og Nets, at de sælger terminaler til forretninger som understøtter NFC- betaling. Det er selvfølgelig rigtig fint, at de gør det. Problemet er bare, at der ikke er nogle app’s der udnytter det, så de rander rundt og bilder forretningerne ind, at de er klar til fremtidens mobilbetaling. Hvilket i mine øjne overhovedet ikke kan blive mere forkert, fordi man ikke aner om NFC på nogle måder breaker igennem. Nu har det altså haft lidt over 10 år i Danmark til at breake og kanalisere. Det kan du også citere mig i, i jeres opgave. At grundlæggende set, når vi ser på markedet for mobilbetaling, så er der forbrugeren, den helt almindelige Leif og Susanne der bor ude i Brønshøj, intet sket på mobilbetalingsområdet, overhovedet! Der har været masse af snak om, at nu kommer der og nu kan vi, men der er absolut intet sket. Der er lige kommet nu her nogle enkle frisørforretninger hvor man kan betale med MobilePay, men i den brede forstand og for den helt almindelig x-factor seende, tyggegummisnaskende, popcornspisende dansker ved kakkelbordet i stuen hjemme i Brønshøj, er der absolut intet sket !! Der er sket noget på person - til personoverførelser ,til gengæld, som den Danske Bank har stået for. Men det regulerer mobilbetaling, er der ingenting sket ved. Det er ren snak langt det meste. Så det at tro, at nu kommer NFC og breaker og bliver det helt store nye, det tror jeg ganske simpelt ikke på. Det jeg til gengældt tror, er at vi kommer til at se nogle løsninger som vi allerede så småt begynder at se rundt omkring i udlandet osv. At mobilbetaling bliver intelligent, at man går ind i en zone i en forretning hvor ens tlf. Eller app bliver inable(18. 22) for betaling. Det er lidt den måde som Apple Pay fungerer, at det står i en betalingszone og så kan man overfører beløbet elektronisk til tlf. Så man kan accepteres på tlf. Man skal ikke hen og holde tlf. op mod en terminal for at aktivere en betaling, det kan man gøre fuldstændig wayerless. Der findes et firma i den nord jyske, som i faktisk burde tale med, som der har lavet noget der hedder Mee Wallet. Det er et eksempel på et super innovativt teknologi, som de i øvrigt selv har patenteret, som i virkeligheden går ud på, at du kan stå i Føtex i kasse køen og når det så bliver din tur og dine vare er skannet, så sender kasseapparatet beløbet til din tlf. trådløst. Det eneste du har gjort er at du har åbnet app’en og så skal du så bare taste din kode eller acceptere, alt efter hvordan app’en bliver bygget op og derefter er betalingen accepteret. App’en kan skelne at det er din tlf. og ikke at det er personen bag dig eller personen der står nr. 3 i køen. Denne teknologi er piv smart fordi det forgår fuldstændig trådløst. Jeg har set det blive demonstreret og det er voldsomt imponerende. Altså det er ren magi når man står der med sin tlf. i hånden og beløbet bare lige popper op på ens tlf. ud af det blå, at man ikke har skulle parre en enhed, men at alt bare er sket automatisk. Sådan noget kommer vi til at se meget mere af.

Page 135 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Det er også sådan noget jeg siger giver mere mening for hr. Og fru. DK. Der kan de se en bonus ved det.

John: De kan se en bonus ved det og man kan forstå hvad der forgår. Så vil man selvfølgelig også se nogle af de implementeringer som Danske Bank har lavet, at man betaler ved overførelser fra et mobilnummer. Det er egentlig sådan en rigtig fin, back to basis måde at gøre det på, altså det at man siger at det eneste kunden skal gøre er at taste det her ottecifret telefonnummer på den her virksomhed og så er pengene overført. Mon ikke Danske Bank arbejder med at man kan overføre til et firecifret og sekscifret nr. i stedet for et ottecifret eller at tlf. automatisk aflæser ens position hvor man står og forslår ud fra det. Fordi man lige står der hvor de har en løsning. Det tror jeg man kommer til at se noget af. Der er masser af muligheder og ting der ude. NFC det tror jeg ikke i den brede forstand. Det jeg til gengæld tror på det er, at vi vil se et gennembrud for mobilbetalinger, når vi kan betale med det, der hvor vi færdes i dagligdagen. Det er ligegyldigt om det så er på den ene eller anden betalingsmåde, men at man kan gå ned i det lokale supermarked og så kan betale med mobilbetaling – der vil det få et gennembrud, men først der. Det nytter ikke noget at det kun er i niche butikkerne, hvor man måske kommer hver 3. måned, det rykker altså ikke. Det der rykker noget er Føtex, Bilka, Coops butikker, Statoli, OK benzin hvad det nu må være, der hvor man kommer i dagligdagen.

Martin: Tror du nogle af de danske udbyder har en chance, hvis Google og Apple begynder at implementere i Europa eller er de så amerikaniseret så de ikke vil forstå det europæiske system?

John: Både og. Apple Pay er er utroligt smart lavet, det er der ingen tvivl om. Jeg tror dem der får det sværest i vores markedet, bliver så nogle som Nordea og Swipp. De har ikke nogle form for momentum i forhold til det Danske Bank har. Hvis vi kigger rundt på Facebook, så omtaler helt almindelige dansker der sælger børnetøj til hinanden, de omtaler MobilePay som et verbum, de bruger det altså i deres sprog. ”Har du det der Mobilpay” er der typisk nogen der skriver. Det er så dybt implementeret i folk der bruger det, at det er blevet en del af det danske sprog efterhånden. Det er voldsomt imponerende og virkelig godt gået. Det har Swipp slet ikke det der momentum. Jeg så for første gang i går, et skilt hvor der stod her kan du betale med Swipp – altså så sent som i går og jeg går altså og holder øje med det. Jeg tror vi godt kan komme til at se en situation i Danmark hvor folk betaler med Apple Pay og med MobilPay. Der skal man virkelig stå tidligt op hvis man skal overhale dem.

Page 136 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: MobilPay Har også fået lidt det samme som I-Pod havde. Den overtog navnet efter MP3- afspilleren

John: Ja, det kan man sige. Altså der har Danske Bank altså virkelig været fremme i bussen på det helt rigtige tidspunkt. Der er selvfølgelig nogle forbedringer de kan lave endnu, men slet ikke så mange forbedringer som Swipp står over for. På den måde er det også svært at få folk til at skifte, hvis alle har MobilePay og mange af dem som man handler sammen med har det og de butikker man kommer i har MobilPay, hvorfor skulle man så installere Swipp, kan man spørger sig selv om?

Martin: Ser du nogle alternative muligheder der kan true mobilbetalinger?

John: Øh… nej ! Jeg ser masser af muligheder for, at mobilbetalinger kan true alt muligt andet. Jeg er ret sikker på at mobilbetalinger vil hænge på fremadrettet og det vil være det nye vi kommer til at betale med. Men som jeg har sagt, vil der gå rigtig lang tid før det er helt implementeret, fordi vi har snakket om det i rigtig mange år og hvor der ingen ting er sket. Lige nu står vi overfor en branche, altså både banker, teleselskaber, forretninger og forretningskæder som Dansk Supermarkedet, som ser en forretning i det her. De har været inde og kigge på det, ligesom jeg har, hvor mange milliarder overførelser der er via dankortet og de ved godt mange af de milliarder bliver flyttet over på mobilbetaling fremadrettet. Nu er kunsten så for dem, hvordan får vi fingrene i nogle af de milliarder der kan overføres der, vi vil gerne bare have en lille bitte procentdel af det. Teleselskaberne argumenterer jo for, at de er med til at stille en linje til rådighed, altså dataoverførelseslinje, altså mobiltrafik, til rådighed for at overførelserne overhovedet kan finde sted. Mobilproducenterne vil sige vi enabler jo teknologien ved, at man kan installere en app på vores type telefon, det skal vi også have penge for. Forretningerne vil hurtig sige til Danske Bank og Nordea, vi er godt klar over at det her er vigtigt for jer at få rullet ud, hvad vil i give for at være repræsenteret det i vores forretning. Du ved, alle forsøger lige nu, Nets forsøger også at trække penge ud af det her. Det er den klassiske med, for mange kokke fordærver maden, det er faktisk en af årsagerne til at, vi har været så lang tid undervejs som tilfældet er nu. Der er simpelthen for mange der vil have en del af kagen, i stedet for man sagde, mon ikke vi alle sammen for lidt hvis vi får det her til at breake en gang for alle. Det er for mange kokke problematikken der har gjort, at vi ikke er længere fremme.

Martin: Når du siger Coop og nogle af de andre større supermarkedskæder, de vil også have andre incitamenter til at lave det, end ren og skær betaling, eller ved at få en bid af betalingskagen, det er vel lige så meget for at få noget kundedata. De har udover deres Coopkort , så kan de vel også bruge det til deres markedsføring af de enkle kunder, hvis de ved hvornår og hvordan de køber i deres butikker, kunne jeg forstille mig.

Page 137 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

John: Det er jo lige præcis, altså det data vil de jo også gerne have, ingen tvivl om det.

Martin: Tror du hovedårsagen er pengene , at Coop og andre supermarkedskæder vil gå med ind over det ?

John: Jeg vil ikke sige at det er hovedårsagen til , at de vil gå med ind over det. Men det er hovedårsagen til, at mobilbetaling ikke er brudt igennem endnu, det er pengene, at folk ikke har kunne enes om, kan man sige. De har sloges om det her i alt for lang tid, uden at komme frem til nogle løsning og alle vil have en del af kagen. Det er den primær årsag til, at der ingen ting er sket - for teknologien er der jo. Det er jo ikke, helt basis, er det jo ikke raketvidenskab, at sætte en tlf. på nede ved kassen i Brugsen og sætte 3- 4 forskellige tlf.nr. op og ligge 3-4 forskellige mobiltelefoner med SIM -kort i kassen og lade folk betale med den MobilPay de har i dag. Det er jo ikke raketvidenskab, det kan man jo gøre som det passer en, lige med det samme. Selv lokale værtshuse her i Odense hvor jeg bor, har MobilPay, det er bare lowtek- løsninger. Med en gammel smartphone de har liggende bag disken, med et SIM-kort i, længere er den sådan set ikke. Der er ikke nogle tekniske forhindringer for det her, der er nogle lovgivningsmæssige og andre ting der kan spille et pus, men hvis man virkelig vil, så kan man tilmelde mobilbetaling til sin forretning fra den dag i dag.

Martin: Så det jeg lige forstår, at det tekniske, fordi det er så relativt simpel, at det næsten kan være en ulempe ?

John: Jeg vil ikke sige, at det er en ulempe, det var bare for at understrege det her med, at det ikke er fordi teknikken ikke er der. Det er ikke fordi vi ikke kan få det til at ske. Vi kan jo allerede nu overføre penge til dig og mig, vi kunne sidde og overføre penge til hinanden hele dagen, hvis vi havde lyst til det. Små erhvervsdrivende der ikke lige frem er i forbrugerombudsforeningen søgelys, det vil Coop supermarkedet være, kan jo godt sætte et skilt op med deres eget tlf.nr. nede på fx det lokale værtshus, så de kan modtage mobilbetaling. Lige så vel som folk gør ude på de store loppemarkeder hvor der står skilte ”her kan du betale med MobilPay”. Så teknikken er der, infrastrukturen er der - alt er på plads. Der er så andre ting der forhindre de store i at gå med i det og udbyde det. Bl.a. Vil folk stå og fumle med det ved kassen lørdag formiddag, så køen vil blive endnu længere i Bilka. Det er Dansk Supermarked selvfølgelig ikke interesseret i, men teknikken er der, så derfor kan man jo sagtens tilbyde det.

Page 138 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Så det er nok smart nok, at sikre sig at kunden er helt tryg ved det, før de tør at implementer det helt, som et alternativt dankort. Når du siger de ikke vil have, at kunderne sidder og fumler med det. Du nævnte, at de helst ikke vil have at kunderne står og fumler med det, er det så lige så meget fordi de venter på, at der er nogle der tester det for at se om kunderne har forstand på det eller?

John: Det er mere med, at du kan bruge dankort i alle forretninger og der går kun ganske få sekunder så har man ekspederet betalingen via dankortet og alle folk kender det, det er implementeret, folk er vant til at bruge det. I en kasselinje hvor der står 25 mennesker i kø, så kan 15 -20 sekunder ekstra betaling pr. kunde, løbe op i rigtige mange minutter samlet set pr. kø i løbet af en dag. Det vil samlet set være meget ekstra folk kommer til, at stå i kø og det er man selvfølgelig ikke interesseret i. Man vil ekspederes hurtigt og smertefrit. Det kan godt være i starten man kommer til, at se man ved enkle kasser, kan vælge at betale med en betalingsløsning, såvel som man har set at nogle kasser kun tager mod dankort og ingen kontanter.

Martin: Så du siger, at der nok bliver en overgangsfase, lidt lige som de ekspederings frie kasser som er kommet mere og mere ind også , hvor det kun er nogle kasser der er sådan.

John: ja, som langs de fleste af gangene er lukket, hvor man ikke kan bruge dem alligevel – det er så noget helt andet.

Martin: Swipp har jo lige opkøbt PAII, hvad har det af konsekvenser for Swipp, af gode og dårlige?

John: Det har ikke nogle overhovedet, jo altså, det har forhindret endnu en konkurrent på markedet nemlig teleselskabernes egene løsninger. Teleselskaberne har så erkendt at deres forretning, ikke var at drive mobilbetaling. Men det kunne jeg godt have sagt til dem dengang de introducerede det, jeg forstod heller ikke hvorfor de skulle ind på det marked. Men de forhindre en konkurrent i at være på markedet.

Martin: Du synes ikke at der er nogle fordele i, at de har fået mobilbetalingerne?

Page 139 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

John: Nej, navnet er elendigt, brandet er ikke udbredt og kunderne er der ikke. Så der er ingen argumenter for, at det skulle kunne gavne dem på nogle som helts måde, ikke andet ind de forhindre endnu en konkurrent på markedet.

Martin: Jeg vil sige, at jeg heller ikke kendte det før, jeg begyndte at læse om det her. Hvad er din holdning til, den måde Swipp har brugt deres kampagne for at få nye kunder?

John: Deres tv-kampagne? Hvis folk ikke forstod mobilbetaling før så har deres kampagner ikke gjort det nemmere i hvert fald. De var da muligvis meget sjove, hvis man forstod det, men dybest set er det elendig markedsføring. Altså, ingen har fattet budskabet. Du har nu lanceret en kampagne, som ingen fatter noget som helts af, næsten ikke engang dem der ved hvad mobilbetaling er. Det er jo helt vanvittigt, det er så dumt at man næsten tager sig til hovedet. Der er et eller andet bureauer der har fået en ide om, at man skulle lave noget med nogen der har fået Swipp og det er samme båd som en reklame Toyota lavede for nogle år siden, med Bruce der kom ind og sagde ” jeg har fået Yaris”, nå men så gå ind til lægen hvis du har fået Yaris. Det er fuldstændig det samme koncept der ligger i det, bortset fra at Toyotas reklame var vanvittig genial og pisse sjov – det andet med her med Reimer Bo, som ellers er en dygtig journalist, var hovedrystende ringe. Danske Bank må have slået sig på lårene af grin. Det har ikke haft nole gavnlig effekt, det tror jeg ganske enkelt ikke på.

Martin: Især ikke hvis man tænker på, som jeg forstår det, at de ville have hr. Og fru. Danmark til at bruge Swipp og der tror jeg de skød meget ved siden af.

John: De skulle nok have haft en lidt mere pædagogisk tilgang til det.

Martin: Hvad ser du Swipps styrker og svagheder er på markedet ?

John: Svaghederne er nemme nok at få øje på. De er en lukket fest for dem der kunde i de institutioner der tilbyder det. Så kan det godt være at det er 80 pengeinstitutter, men hovedpart af kunderne ligger stadig hos Danske Bank, så det kan jo være flintrende ligegyldigt. Deres fordele lige nu må være, at de har kunne tilbyde meget høje overførelser, i forhold til hvad Danske Bank har kunne tilbyde. Men det er jo sådan helt regulatorisk. Det ændre sig jo hen af vejen også for Danske Bank, der laver ændringer på det. Men eftersom de ikke har haft Swipp særlig meget udbredt, så har det ikke haft nogle reelt effekt, at de har kunne tilbyde et større beløb. Et af de store problemer er, at man ikke har kunne søge en app inde i Appstore der hed Swipp. Man har skulle

Page 140 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

installere en mobilbankapp fra sin given bank, for at kunne bruge det. Så jeg synes at det er den grad oppe af bakke for dem.

Martin: Jeg må indrømme jeg kan ikke se den store forskel på at overføre penge normalt og så bruge Swipp. Udover at man selvfølge kun skal bruge et mobil nr. Det er vel den eneste forskel?

John: Præcis!

Martin: Hvis du nu var strategiskrådgiver for Swipp, hvad vil dine forslag så være til Swipp ?

John: Sælg lortet til Danske Bank. Ej det er gas. Jeg vil hurtigst mulig får et samarbejde eller en løsning op og stå, så ens løsning ikke kun fungerede med lokale kunder, men funger med alle kunder i markedet, ligesom Danske Bank gør. Jeg vil få en applikation ud på Appstore så man ville kunne søge den der inde, det er de to ting der vil være mest naturligt at fortage sig. Så vil jeg se, at få det implementeret ud i nogle forretninger i en frygtelig fart og kigge Danske Banks prisstruktur og gøre det billigere end dem. Altså give folk et argument for at have det. Lad dem få de første 5 år gratis eller noget i den stil. Så de simpelthen kommer ind på markedet.

Martin: Nu angående at Swipp har lagt mobilbetaling ind i deres mobilbanksapp, tror du de har gjort, så det virker mere sikkert eller hvad tror du grunden er til det?

John: Man kunne tænke det var pga. dovenskab, men det er nok pga. sikkerhed og det har jo været en af argumenterne for Swipp at de skulle være mere sikket end andre. Der er så mange myter omkring sikkerheden i de her systemer, som er fuldstændig forfejlet og misforstået. Det sender jeg lige en artikel omkring. Så kan du læse mere omkring sikkerhed i systemerne. Her fremgår det også at sikkerheden for Swipp er lige så lidt eller lige så meget som MobilPay.

Martin: Nu hvor du taler om sikkerhed, hvordan tror du kunderne i dag ser sikkerheden. Dem der bruger det nu, kan jeg forstille mig er lidt ligeglade hvis det er de der first - mover, der er sikkerhed nok ikke det mest væsentlige. Men den næste bølge der kommer, der kommer sikkerhed nok til at have en større rolle. Tror du det er en barriere for dem eller tror du det bliver nemt for dem at komme over det?

Page 141 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

John: Jeg tror, hvis man ellers sørger for at applikationen er let at bruge, det tror jeg er det vigtigste. For mange kommer sikkerhed i anden - eller tredje række. Danske Bank har valgt den helt rigtige strategi med, at de har sagt, at du kan oprette dig på næsten ingen tid, du skal hverken have fat i Nemid eller noget som helts andet. Alle forhindringer er væk. Det har erfaringer jo vist fra MobilPay, jeg vil ikke sige, at folk er ligeglade med sikkerheden, for det er de ikke. Men sikkerheden er ikke blevet en forhindring for Danske Bank. Det er jo desværre ofte det sikkerhed bliver, altså en forhindring for dem, fordi det bliver for besværligt at bruge det. Selvfølge lige det et problem, men som du vil kunne læse i den artikel jeg har skrevet, så er det lige så sikkert at bruge, som en firecifret kode og som Nemid i dag.

Martin: Super, det var lige det vi havde i tankerne lige nu. Jeg tænkte hvis vi kom op med noget i løbet af de næste pr. mdr. Er det så okay vi skriver en mail til dig?

John: Ja, gør i bare det!

Martin: super, tusind tak for hjælpen!

Appendix 4 – Interview 2 Troels Asmussen

Appendix 4 Troels Asmussen

Troels Nordea: En af de ting jeg sagde til samtalen var, at jeg jo fx ikke kunne finde ud af at kode og så sagde min chef (eller dengang kommende chef) at hvis jeg kunne kode, så skulle jeg sidde i IT afdelingen – så jeg laver forretningsudvikling og jeg finder på ting (for at forenkle det meget) og jeg hjælper med, at de rent faktisk bliver båret fra, at være blevet fundet på, til at de på et eller andet tidspunkt kommer ud i en eller anden form (typisk, en anden for en den jeg lige havde tænkt) men trods alt ud. For at gøre den lange historie kort, så startede jeg netbank og var der i 6 år eller sådan noget og rykkede så over (delvist som TV blev mere og mere mobile) og kom til at sidde med Nordeas mobilbank og de sidste to år ca. har jeg siddet udelukkende med mobilbetalinger og betalings (hvad kan man sige) hvor som helst, hvor der er et eller andet betalings-impact, det kunne være hvis man har noget ”In Game Purchases” i en PSP fx, kan man klemme et eller andet ind et eller andet sted, så den der sidder og spiller, lynhurtigt kan købe adgang til en togbus eller en level-up -så det spinder meget meget bredt og så jeg har jo en Nordea kasket på, så det er også en spørgsmål om at sige ”kunne det være Nordeas betalingsinfrastruktur” kunne det være vores kort, eller kunne det være et eller andet vi på en eller anden måde, så pengene fes igennem Nordeas systemer. Vi skal hvert fald være der. Apple Pay kommer højst sandsynligt til Danmark på et eller andet tidspunkt, men hvilke kort kan man putte i sin Apple Pay betalingsfunktion, det ville jo blive sådan en lang serie af kort og der vil det være sådan, at vores afdeling vil sidde og sige ”vi vil gerne have at Nordeas kort skal ligge i den der, for vi kan ret godt lide Apple” eller hvad ved jeg. Så det vil være os der skulle sidde og lave sådanne ting, så det er sådan lidt, at alt det de andre ikke gider og pille ved, gør vi.

Page 142 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hans: Vi læser begge to på CBS, jeg læser finansiering og strategi og Martin læser økonomisk markedsføring. Vi synes, at mobilbetalingsløsninger var spændende og vores udgangspunkt var Swipp og Mobilpay – måske skal vi til, at snakke lidt mere end mobiloverførelser, det håber vi lidt på, at vi kan forklare lidt om. Vores udgangspunkt er som sagt Swipp, men vi har ikke en decideret analytisk tilgang fra Swipp (hvad de har gjort og hvad de burde gøre) men er lidt fremme i tiden ”Hvordan ser markedet ud og hvad kan Swipp måske vinde noget på?” Der kunne man måske tage andre banker også.

Troels Nordea: Jeg vil jo sige, at jeg sidder jo også nu som en Nordea repræsentant, så vi er en del af Swipp, men vi er ikke Swipp og det er en vigtig pointe at lave. Hvis du talte med Martin Andersen som er direktør for Swipp, så vil du få en anden historie, for han skal selvfølgelig male et lidt mere blomstret billede (ikke fordi jeg har tænkt mig at dolke Swipp) men jeg vil måske sige, at der er nogen af de udfordringer, som jeg måske mere som bankrepræsentant kan fortælle og sige ”det kan måske være en udfordring for os som Nordea” hvor Swipp måske siger ”vi gør det her, fordi det er ”The Greater Good” eller et eller andet - og bankerne er jo konservative, det skal man jo vide og det er også en af grundene til, at Swipp er skældt ud og i den grad kommer til at blive det, fordi man simpelthen ikke tør, at bankerne skal bære den udvikling. Når det er sagt, så er der nogle tekniske småting man skal have på plads, før man virkelig kan stryge af sted.

Hans: Ja, dem prøver vi at afgrænse os lidt fra, når nu vi kommer fra CBS og ikke og fra ITU eller TTU.

Troels Nordea: Ja, det er helt i orden.

Martin: Tanken er også lidt, at lige nu, er der jo lidt lang afstand mellem forbrugerne og brugermobilbetalinger, så vi vil gerne få en forståelse for hvordan man kan mindske den afstand og gøre det mere brugervenligt – så vi vil både snakke med sådanne nogen typer som dig og nogen som skal bruge det. Her på torsdag har vi en fokus gruppe, så det er lidt de to ting vi skal have til at mødes og fundet ud af, hvordan vi kan få gjort afstand kortere.

Hans: Vi er lidt overbeviste om, at forbrugerne slet ikke er klar over mulighederne i det.

Troels Nordea: Det er fuldstændig rigtigt og det er sådan meget fair, fordi I ikke kunne skrive denne opgave på et smartere tidspunkt end I gør nu, for når sommerferien er overstået, så ser den her betalingsverden helt anderledes ud, men det kan vi komme tilbage til.

Hans: Lad os starte med din jobtitel i Nordea og dit jobansvar.

Troels Nordea: Jeg er (kan ikke høre hvad han siger omkring 5.50) og det der hedder Senior Business Developer i en afdeling der hedder mobil (?? 5.55.) Payment og fordi det er engelsk, skyldes, at det er en nordisk bank og fordi vores koncern sprog er engelsk, så derfor stryger vi om os, med engelsk titler. Jeg har produktansvar, altså jeg er Product Owner på Swipp i Nordea regi og det er i kraft af, at mobil og (??- payment) tager sig af alt mobilbetalings relateret i Nordea.

Hans: Sådan mere specifikt, hvad har din rolle været i Swipp og hvad er den nu?

Troels Nordea: Min rolle først og fremmest forud for Swipp lanceringen, der sad der en, ja jeg tror det blev kaldt ”bankgruppen” i sin tid – og det var sådan et ”Mash Up” af nogen forskellige af de største spillere, af dem der havde med Swipp at gøre. Det var Jyske Bank, Nykredit, Sydbank, lokale penge institutter, altså LOPI og senere kom der er også en fra RBF. Der sad der simpelthen et råd, der helt overordnet skulle finde

Page 143 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ud af ”Hvad skal Swipp kunne?” ”Hvor meget skal være fælles?” altså hvor meget er vi tvunget til at samarbejde om og hvor meget er ligesom vores eget problem – så der blev lavet sådan en meget tynd struktur for Swipp i første omgang, for at det kunne komme i luften - sådan et ”Minimum Viable Product” ”Hvad kan vi minimum komme ud med hurtigt?” men som er sikkert og moderne. Der var masser af overvejelser - så forretningsudviklingen på den del og den beslutningsfase, sad jeg selvfølgelig med i. Nordea havde ikke så meget fokus på Swipp i det første lange stykke tid, det betød, at når jeg så kom tilbage fra de møder, der var en gang om ugen, så lå der en stor opgave på forretningssiden. ”Hvordan får vi lige placeret den gøgeunge?” Man bruger jo kontrainfrastrukturen i Swipp, modsat MobilPay fx, som bruger kort infrastruktur. Mobil og (?? 8.25) Payment er en afdeling under ”kort” i Nordea, men infrastrukturen og betaling er konto til konto - så man kunne jo sige ” er det i virkeligheden ikke den afdeling i Nordea der hedder Transaction Products?” altså overførselsprodukter (BS og sådan noget) ”Er det i virkeligheden ikke dem, der skal eje det her og drive det?” og så kunne jeg være en eller anden forretningsudvikler på sidelinjen - så i starten gjorde jeg det alene, så kom jeg hjem og så lavede jeg forretningsudviklingsdelen her og prøvede at koordinere hvem der skulle lave noget og begyndte at ansøge, så vi fik ligeså stille sat et projekt op. Jeg havde en finsk kollega, som var her i starten også og som jo var finsk og da det her var meget lokalt, havde han på mange måder ikke rigtig mulighed for at hjælpe med mange praktiske ting, så det fik jeg rigtig meget tid til at gå med. Så skete der det, i løbet af sommeren 2013, at så begyndte produktet jo ligeså stille at komme ud, altså 1. maj, var sådan en meget fin fanfare lancering af MobilPay, men der var de forskellige banker faktisk begyndt at rulle Swipp ud, uden nogen fanfare, uden nogen reklame og uden nogen markedsføring – fordi man stadig ikke havde lyst til at reklamere for Swipp hos Jyske Bank, hvis det kunne gavne kunderne i Nordea og omvendt – og ”hvilke farver skulle man så bruge?” Så i starten var det meget en ”lad os finde ud af hvad vi skal her” og da man så ligeså stille begyndte at rulle ud, så begyndte man jo også tænke ”hvad skal der så ske?” og det er jo banker og vi var godt klar over ret tidligt i processen, at det der med at kunder overfører til hinanden privat, det blev lidt svært at tage penge for, man havde sådan en ide om, at man gerne ville have en pris for det, det kan man ikke rigtig snakke om, når man er flere banker sammen, for så vil der være karteldannelse – så alle sagde ”der skal bare være mulighed for at tage en pris” Det var ligesom det systemet skulle kunne, der skal kunne lige en pris i – så det blev jo ligesom hurtigt et race mod nul – Danske Bank var ude med nul og Swipp var ude med nu - færdigt arbejde. Selve forretningsudviklingen og den sådan praktiske ting, for det man talte om, var jo konto til konto, så det er jo bare, at stikke en ledning ind et sted i kontosystemet og det er ligesom det – og når man så kommer tilbage til nogen, der ved hvordan man rent faktisk laver sådan noget, helt ned i datacentralen og små systemer, så får man jo bare at vide, at man er en kæmpe lort, fordi der er en masse ting man ikke har tænkt over. Der lå en masse teknik i det og netop fordi jeg er forretningsmand (og selvom jeg selvfølgelig ved nogenlunde hvad ringer til hvad og sådan noget) så er jeg ikke IT mand, så jeg kunne ikke komme med en arkitekttegning. Ligeså stille begyndte fokus at skifte i Nordea også, så det blev ikke denne lille elitære gruppe af folk, der var meget moderne, men de forskellige enheder begyndte ligeså stille at fatte interesse.

Hans: Hvornår skete det cirka?

Troels Nordea: Det skete cirka i foråret sidste år – altså vi kom ud med vores app, som den sidste bank i december 2013 og det gjorde vi fordi det tog lang tid, at få det projekt sat i stand. Der er en meget spinkel struktur i Swipp og det har der været i lang tid. Man har en server med et telefon nummer og et kontonummer – forenklet sagt, er det dét. Èn bank ringer til den server og siger ” der er nogen der gerne vil

Page 144 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

overføre nogen penge til det her telefon nummer, har i et kontonummer?” ”Ja det har vi, det er 12345” ”Fint, her er nogle penge” Det var det man gjorde og så var det op til de enkelte banker om man havde en daglig limit - og så var der selvfølgelig nogle fejlmeddelelser frem og tilbage mellem de her applikationer. Grunden til at man lagde det i mobilbankerne og ikke som separat app, det var pga. sikkerheden. Ellers skulle man selv have fundet på noget i en fart og sikkerhed og fart er to dårlige ting at kombinere – så det var igen sådan noget hvor man sagde ”vi har en fælles infrastruktur, men hvordan I løser Swipp overfor jeres kunder i jeres banker, det er jeres eget problem” ”Vi ligger det ind i vores mobilbank, for det er nemt og hurtigt” Mig (Nordea) og Martin Backman førte for, at vi ligesom kunne lave det som en separat app fra starten af. Jeg havde sådan på fornemmelsen, at det med at blande ens realkredit lån og ens køb af fadøl ikke er en god ide, hvilket jeg også kunne se, for det arbejde jeg normalt havde med mobilbetalingsudviklinger, hvor jeg deltager i alle mulige seminarer rundt omkring i verden og i Europa - der kunne jeg se hvad trends’ene lå ovre imod og det var hvert fald en branding ting- man havde en betalingssystem der kunne være smart eller ikke så smart, sådan rent brugermæssigt, men om det var cool eller ikke var cool, betød rent faktisk noget for succesdelen. Der er masser af systemer i dag, som ikke er særlig fikse, men de er ”backet” af nogen der er fede og så har man det sådan lidt, at så ender det nok lykkeligt ”så lever jeg med, at jeg faktisk skal stå og svinge telefonen over hovedet, for at gennemfører betalingen” Vi har også nogle systemer, som er SUPER tjekket, super fede, men der er ingen der bruger dem. Et eksempel kunne være i New York, der kan du betale med mobilen i de gule taxaer, den teknologi der er imellem dit devise og taxien, det er lyd der bliver genereret. Alle telefoner skál have en mikrofon, så du kan bruge det med en Nokia 3310 – det er Peace Of Cake, men der er INGEN der bruger det. Det er virkeligheden synd, for teknologien er fin nok, men det har bare ikke vundet indpas, fordi du skal have en officiel app, hvis du skal betale for en taxa i New York – og du har bare mange apps i forvejen.

Hans: Hvordan ser du Swipp’s nuværende position?

Troels Nordea: Vi er jo klart en 2’er i det her – det er vi jo selv uden om. Vi kom for sent i gang, i det her store samarbejde var bankerne ikke så hurtige. Nordea stikker lidt ud i det her samarbejde, fordi vi er så meget større end nummer to. Vi har 23-24 % af det danske marked og nummer to i Swipp har 10 % og det er så Jyske Bank – så vi har jo en meget større ekspertise og berøringsflade på det her område, bare det, at vi har en nordisk afdeling der sidder med de her ting, der har vi jo allerede slået Jyske Bank (det er ikke for, at sige noget skidt om dem, for de er meget dygtige) men det er den samme mand som laver mobilbank, som også laver mobilbetalinger, som i øvrigt også er ansvarlig for ATM’er – så det er klart, at man ikke kan vide ligeså meget. Det skal siges, at jeg jo ikke er en klassisk bankmand, så jeg har ikke den der filial et eller andet og den der meget traditionelle tankegang, hvilken er en fordel når jeg laver det, jeg laver nu, men det er også en ulempe når man skal ud og sælge sådan nogen ting til nogle andre banker. Alle indtægtsmuligheder som man ikke har set før og som banker i særdeleshed ikke har set før, er jo den måde man tjener penge på, fordi man jo ikke kan forlange, at forbrugerne betaler for det. I sin iver bare for, at få forbrugerne til, at bruge det, har man givet dem forskellige tilbud gratis (stjerner, opsparing – et eller andet) Men nogen skal jo betale - og lige nu er det bare erhvervskunderne og de siger i forvejen ”der er lige tyve andre der har ringet med deres mobilbetalingssystemer, som bliver det vildeste, hvorfor skal vi vælge jer?” hvor vi så siger ”fordi vi er billige, fordi vi er billige!” Der er ligesom to ”Approachs” i det her: Der er Apple som er helt ligeglade. Den måde de tjener penge på er, at de tager den eksisterende pris det koster, at betale med plastik kort, der er nogle mennesker der får nogle penge der og der får de 0,15 % af det eksisterende fil, så der er ikke nogen der betaler mere.

Page 145 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hans: Apropos det, hvem ser du så som de største konkurrenter?

Troels Nordea: I første omgang med Swipp, er det jo selvfølgelig MobilPay. Jeg vil gerne sige til jer ”Det er også Apple Pay, Google Wallets, Microsoft Money eller hvad de nu kommer til at hedde på et eller andet tidspunkt” – men lige nu er det sådan, at man har én bank, som har fat i rigtig mange danske brugere og de stopper ikke deres udvikling nu (lige som lidt kommer det til, at gå helt amok, men det kan I sikkert snakke med dem om) De andre banker sidder så med en ide om ”at nu får de en platform, at snakke med vores kunder, er det særligt godt?” Det handler ikke så meget om, om de tjener penge på løsningen, det er sådan set sekundært – men primært er det jo et problem, at vores kunder lige pludseligt sidder ovre i Danske Bank og bare sidder og venter på at Danske Bank finder en måde, at kommunikere og gøre det attraktivt og siger ”Du kan godt bruge det fulde Mobilpay, så skal du bare lige åbne konsumér ovre hos os, nu kan vi se du er her alligevel, vil du ikke have to konti? Her er i øvrigt et plastikkort” Det kan hurtigt gribe om sig og Danske Bank var nok dem, der var allermest overrasket over den succes – men de sidder jo også hele tiden og spekulerer ”vi har et guldæg, hvordan skal vi få skåret det?” og der er bankerne klart ude og sige ”vi kan ikke have ét betalingssystem, som kun én bank repræsenterer, vi er simpelthen nødt til at have noget der favner bredere” Hvis vi ikke lavede Swipp, kunne vi lave en mobilbetaling der sagde ”hvis du skal overføre penge til din kammerat, så koster det fem kroner” – men selvfølgelig er ApplePay interessant, selvfølgelig er Google Wallet interessant og selvfølgelig er alt det, der er non Bank interessant. Heldigvis i Danmark, har vi dankortet, som holder folk lidt væk, fordi transaktion prisen er billig.

Martin: Hvad så med det NETS er ved at lave med Powertank?

Troels Nordea: Det er jo sådan et system, hvor man kan sidde hjemme i sin sofa og så ser man en reklame i fjernsynet og så er der en lyd eller QR kode på skærmen og så holder man sin telefon oppe, men inden da skal du have åbnet telefonen, du skal have tændt for Powertank appen (hvordan den end kommer til at se ud) og så skal du holde den klar, fordi nu kommer den reklame du rent faktisk gerne vil købe et produkt af. I teorien er det jo smart nok – produktet kommer frem og så swiper du og så har du købt og det er på vej hjem til dig. Det er en kort transaktion der foregår bag om det hele, så det er sådan set som det plejer at være – men alle dine data er bare ”stored” så du ikke skal sidde og taste kortnummer ind. De regner med at konverteringsgraden vil være højere, flere køber den minkpels, der er i en reklame på TV2 for tiden. Jeg er ikke klar over, om de har nogen limits, det tror jeg ikke de har – men det gør jo også at indrulleringen er blevet noget NEM ID, sådan noget lidt tungt og omstændigt, men når man først er i gang, er det rigtig nemt (men der kom man aldrig rigtig til, det er jo også det man ser med Swipp)

Hans: Hvis vi kigger på Swipp lige pt., ser du så nogen værdi for forbrugerne eller merværdi?

Troels Nordea: I dag er der lidt over 5500 erhverv, hvor du kan betale med Swipp. Det gælder de mærkeligste erhverv, region hovedstaden fx, som jo er hospitaler, sygehuse, ungdomsinstitutioner og alt muligt. De kører Swipp i dag, typisk til sådan noget som mad til pårørende på et hospital ”du kommer op, du skal besøge en syg onkel, du vil lige have en ostemad og den koster 12 kroner” Man kan jo ikke ansætte en sygeplejerske der står nede i en eller andet kiosk til det formål, så der vil man rigtig gerne af med kontanter, så det er selvfølgelig én måde at gøre det på. Samtidig har vi også sådan nogen som Royal Unibrew, som jo sælger Faxe Fad til alle mulige forretninger rundt omkring – 80 % af sådan nogle ølvognes omsætning er kontant (det chokerede mig) Dette har noget at gøre med, at man ikke har så meget tiltro til bar-virksomheder i Danmark – den ene uge er der bare gang i den og den anden ude er der tomt og ejer er i

Page 146 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Thailand – så du får din øl og hvis du er en virkelig god og dedikeret kunde, kan du få otte dages kredit og hver morgen når de der 30-40 ølvogne kører ud på sjælland, så har de sådan en seddel når de går i gang med at laste vognen – og hvis de så kan se, at en af dem, der har ottes dages kredit, ikke har betalt, så læsser man bare hans øl af og så må han betale og så må de komme ud næste gang – og så er kreditten i øvrigt næste gang omkring fire dage – de er benhårde – så de render rundt med en stor brun læderpung med penge i og så siger jeg ”går de så ned med det i en døgnboks om aftenen?” ”Nej nej, det er alt for dyrt og tælle sådan noget op” for så har de ti ture af 4500 kr eller et eller andet, så en masse af det, putter de lige sammen når de mødes med nogle af de andre ølmænd ude på depotet og får ordnet ”dine penge og mine penge” og ned i en stor sæk og ned i en eller anden filial – så Swipp var kærkommen og det har jo noget og gøre med beløbsgrænsen. Nu ved jeg godt Danske Bank har sagt 150.000 pr. pro anno, men det er jo stadigvæk noget der ligner 2000 kr om dagen. Det gør jo at Elgiganten, Skovsen, Whiteaway og lignende synes det er uinteressant, de kan jo ikke bruge det her rigtigt. Man skal jo ikke bruge særligt meget, det er den totale omsætning ”du må bruge 150.000 om året” Nej, hvis du har fået 75.000 de første tre måneder, så har du altså 75.000 tilbage du kan sælge for, så det er den totale omsætning. Man kan jo sige, at de har fået den position fordi de var først og bedst og de brugte de reklamekroner der skulle til – markedsføringsdelen var en stor del af det. Folk tænker ikke så meget over det, men det gør erhverv.

Martin: Hvorfor er det man ikke bare kan skrue op og ned?

Troels Nordea: Det er fordi, at du jo ikke er Nem-Id valideret, når du logger på. Du kunne i princippet bare tage mit Visa-Dankort, taste dine egne informationer ind og bruge mit Visa-Dankort – eller lad os tage mit Mastercard, som jeg ikke holder øje med forbruget på (det bliver jo kun trukket en gang om måneden) Så er der gået en måned, hvor du bare fyrer 1500 kroner af hver dag og så får jeg en regning på 45.000, hvor jeg bare tænker ”hvad for noget?” Dérfor er limit 200 Euro om dagen, det hedder ”e-penge-direktivet” De ændrer deres beløbsgrænse fra 15. maj til 80.000 og 150.000. Hvis du kun taster dit CPR nummer ind, så stiger dit årlige forbrug til 80.000 og hvis du derudover validerer dig med Nem-Id osv. så stiger det til 150.000 – men der er stadigvæk ikke frit slag og det simpelthen fordi sikkerheden ikke er høj nok, de har ikke kunde-informationerne på dig, på samme måde som Swipp fx har. Vi kører Nem-Id og det gør vi jo fordi, at vi er banker og vi er nødt til, at være sikre. Desværre skulle man jo nok have gjort tingene lidt anderledes. Man skulle have sagt til kunderne ”her er en Swipp løsning, den kan du bruge, bare kom i gang, tast lige det nødvendige ind, når du har tid kan du bruge dit Nem-Id og så har du dén her limit” Det havde været nemmere end at sige ”det er lidt bøvlet til at starte med, men så er det rigtig nemt” Der er ikke noget der må være bøvlet og det har jo også klart været noget med kommunikationen der er gået galt. Hvis jeg var Danske Bank vil jeg spinde rimelig stort på det, det er nemt at komme i gang, det er lige meget hvad det er for en bank – så de har også været gode til at kommunikere.

Martin: Swipp kan heller ikke overføre til Danske Bank kunder, eller hvordan er det?

Troels Nordea: Som Danske Bank kunde kan du kun være modtager, men vi kan godt overfører til en Danske Bank kunde, men vi kan ikke få penge ud kan man sige, da de ikke er med – endnu, lad os nu se.

Hans: Hvad tror du pt. kendertegner den typiske bruger af mobilbetalinger?

Troels Nordea: ”Ung” Der er der slet ikke nogen tvivl om det. Når det så er sagt, så breder det sig – og der hvor vi kan se i statistikken for Swipp betalinger (for en gangs skyld har bankerne taget sig sammen og

Page 147 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

været inde og måle på hvor man penge vil du overfører, hvem er det der overfører osv. osv.) Så vi har faktisk rimelig styr på hvad det er for nogle penge der bliver overført og hvem det er der gør det – og den største gruppe er mellem 24-45 år eller sådan noget, så de er ikke sådan speciel unge, gennemsnits- overførslen er også ret høj i forhold til Danske Banks. Danske Banks er første og fremmest noget der spredte sig som en løbeild blandt unge mennesker, hvor Swipp ligesom har det lidt mere konservative approach, noget ens forældre måske mere vil bruge, hvis man skulle købe en brugt varevogn eller noget og man skulle af med 2200 ”jamen så måtte man jo betale med Swipp” Det er noget som starter i noget ”First Mover” et eller andet sted og så spreder det sig op efter. I starten var det unge, men så blev det sådan lidt til ”mine venner har det ikke” Når ens børn ikke bruger det, jamen så ér det nok forældrene der skal bruge det og så får du lidt et hop i aldersforbruget ”min knægt kan ikke bruge det, det er vist et rigtigt bankprodukt, det er ikke bare for sjov” Så på den måde er vores snit-alder højere, men vores gennemsnittet er også meget højere per overførsel, i forhold til de udmeldinger Danske Bank kommer med. Jeg tror deres ligger på omkring 180 i gennemsnit, hvor Swipp ligger på næsten 400 kr.

Hans: Det er en stor forskel.

Troels Nordea: Ja det er en stor forskel. Det der undrer mig mest, er at Danske Bank har 180 kroner i gennemsnit – det synes jeg faktisk er højt, fordi de har mange overførsler, hvor der nærmest er kommet et nyt element, hvor folk i dag afregner med hinanden med Mobilpay, hvor man ikke ville have gjort det, hvis det ikke havde været der – forstået på den måde ”jeg skylder dig 20 kr., dem kan du lige få” Hvis man havde skyldt hinanden 20 kr. og der ikke havde været en mobilbetalingsløsning der havde været så nem som deres, så havde man sagt ”den tager vi lige på fredag, der tager vi en øl” Dette er også deres største udfordring, at de har så mange private overførsler der koster dem penge hver dag. Det er 150.000 om dagen cirka, det er virkelig mange penge.

Hans: Er det så mange?

Det koster 1 krone hver gang man laver en overførsel, så lige meget hvor god en aftale, de har lavet med kort-indløsere og alt muligt, så koster det imellem 70 øre og en 1,10 krone for hver overførsel – så det bliver altså til nogle penge – men jeg tror de penge er givet godt ud, de får jo lov at vise deres farve, deres fonde og deres kommunikation. I det hele taget, er jo Danske Bank brandet fra top til bund, så på den måde, er der også noget i det. De har ikke rigtig formået endnu, at lave en eller anden vekselvirkning – de var den bank sidste år der tabte flest kunder. Man kan sige, at den primære bruger af Mobilpay eller Swipp for den sags skyld – ”er det en kunde der er attraktiv set med bank briller, eller er det bare en kunde på 19 år med én konto?”

Hans: Hvad tror du?

Troels Nordea: Jeg tror det er en på 19 år med én konto – så man er nødt til at have noget volumen, man er nødt til at have nogle brugere, for ellers kan man ikke sælge erhvervsløsningen osv. så er det meget sådan cyklusagtigt, så man skal starte et sted.

Hans: Hvordan tror du potentielle forbrugere i fremtiden bliver overbevist om, at Swipp er bedre end Mobilpay og andre konkurrenter og andre betalingsformer?

Page 148 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Troels Nordea: 1. juni bliver Dankortet kontaktløst, det er grunden til, at de Dankort automater der har et kontaktløst logo, ikke har åbnet deres automater endnu. Mastercard har lavet et tilsvarende, som Danske Bank tilbyder. Joe and the Juice har det fx – men transaktionsgebyret er Visas og/eller Mastercards, ikke Dankort – så det er jo dyrere for butikken når jeg går ned og betaler med det, til gengæld går det hurtigere. Første Juni bliver dankortet kontaktløst og der vil man kunne tappe fem gange, uden at skulle taste sin pinkode – super smart, men det kommer også til at tage noget tid – men det er det, der kommer til at gøre danskerne vandt til at gøre noget andet når de betaler, end de gør i dag. I dag taster vi en kode og alt er godt, i morgen kommer du også til at have din pung med, så hurtigt går det ikke. Så længe du har dit kørekort, din sygesikring og alt det du har liggende i din pung udover et eller andet Matas kort, så længe det ikke kan ligge på din telefon, så længe det ikke er centrale personlige ting, så kommer du stadig til, at have begge dele. Jeg tror simpelthen ikke på, at man bare kommer til at skære hele lortet væk – i det øjeblik du er 18 år, så vil du altid have dit kørekort med dig og det gør, at du skal have det i en taske eller i en pung, dermed ikke sagt, at man kører hjem efter det, hvis man har glemt det, men den er der bare stadigvæk. Swipp kommer også til at bruge en parret teknologi fremadrettet, der kunne minde lidt om noget tablet (go??) På den måde kunne man jo sige, at vi lærer danskerne at tappe og når vi så er klar og danskerne er det, så laver vi måske en tap løsning (det gør vi, det gør de alle sammen, bare rolig) – men det er ikke det der kommer til at vinde krigen, det der kommer til at vinde krigen er de ”Value Added Services” der kommer til at ligge rundt om betalingen. Alle kan lave en betaling i dag og nogen kan lave det rigtig godt. Jeg tror ikke, der er nogen der kan lave det hurtigere end Appelpay i dag, det er 6 sekunder All Inclusive, du skal jo ikke åbne telefonen, det er det der er så absurd – dit kort kommer selv frem og hvis du ikke lige er sikker på, at det skal være det kort, så laver du et lille tap nede i bunden og så kommer de fem andre kort du har registreret – det er jo biometrisk identifikation. Alle lamper i EU sikkerhed er fuldt lyst op ”everything is good, nobody looses, everybody wins” Det kan vi ikke gøre hurtigere. Man snakker hele tiden om ree-tap ”man står ude i Bilka lørdag formiddag og det skal bare gå stærk” Ja ja, det tager tyve sekunder med kortbetaling i dag, sådan med runde tal. Det er ikke langsomt – jeg vil skyde på, at hvis du kontant skulle hive dine penge op af lommen, ville det tage dig væsentligt længere tid. De har barberet så meget tid af efterhånden, så du kan ikke sælge det på speed alene – du kan ikke gå ud og sige ”du skal bare råbe wihuuu, så har du betalt og du kan gå din vej” ”Jamen vil du ikke have din kø ned ude i Bilka” ”det betyder ikke så meget, en gang imellem har vi 4 i køen, men det er fredag eftermiddag, så det kan folk nok godt leve med – og til gengæld koster en kasse øl 59 kroner” Du er nødt til at bygge et lag på og dét bliver interessant at se. Det bliver kvitteringer fx, når jeg betaler i dag findes der en funktionalitet der hedder kvitteringer.dk. Kvitteringer.dk gør, at du tager den her app og så går du ind og så registrerer du dit Visa Dankort fx, hver gang du i udvalgte butikker kører dit kort igennem og betaler med dit Visa Dankort i Netto fx, så får jeg kvitteringen på i appen/telefonen og den ligner den kvittering du ville få i Netto og du får den indenfor fem sekunder efter du har gennemført handlen. Det er én ting, hvis vi nu tager ”Tiger” i stedet for, der får jeg også kvitteringen ”men hov, hvad er nu det? ”Det er et salgsbudskab der ligger hernede” Det kunne også godt være et garantibevis, en manual hvis det var ude i IKEA, rabatkoder, alt muligt – ”næste gang du køber noget, så klik her” eller ”tillykke med dit nye fjernsyn, vi kan se du ikke har købt et HDMI kabel, skulle du mangle sådan et, så klik her, vi ved jo hvem du er, for du kommer fra appen, så vi smider lige en ”ticket” med, at det er Troels og så står der 100 kroner og jeg behøves ikke taste noget ind, for de har jo allerede min adresse- så swiper jeg 100 kroner til Elgiganten og så får jeg i øvrigt en ny kvittering med et nyt salgsbevis” Det ville være én ting, det kunne også være finansiering, i stedet for en ”slidebar” med ”swip nu” kunne det være ”swip nu og betal senere” og så kunne man nede i parentes skrive ”500 kroner de

Page 149 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

næste 10 måneder” for en vaskemaskine til 5000 kroner fx og pengene bliver i øvrigt opkrævet via din Swipp applikation og så kunne man gå ind og se i en oversigt der fx hedder ”min finansieringsoversigt” og kigge ”når ja, jeg købte en vaskemaskine, den betaler jeg 500 kroner til, 3 cd’er på CDON.com, dem betaler jeg 32 kroner for, så sammenlagt betaler jeg, sammenlagt betaler jeg 556 kroner, de bliver trukket én gang og så fordeler Swipp selv hvem der skal have de penge og så har jeg en eller anden aftale med dem. Dét kunne man også lave. Det bliver jo noget med, at være de steder hvor folk er, med nogle services de kan bruge til noget. Hvis nu du var en lille kaffebar, så har du typisk et lille stempelkort og den 6. kop kaffe er så gratis. Sådan et papkort kunne man jo godt ligge ind i en Swipp applikation, så kunne man give forretningen et lille administrationsmodul, der siger ”hvis du gerne vil have et ”Shake nd Bake” loyalitetsprogram, så kan du vælge mellem de her 32 farver eller toner af brun og kaffekoppen er her ovre og du kan oprette dit logo, hvor du kan skrive Ingolfs kaffebar” Så når kunderne betaler med Swipp hver 6. gang, så bliver de opkrævet nul kroner og så får du dit salgsbudskab ind, så det bliver sådan nogle ting og det er her hele slaget kommer til at blive slået.

Hans: Så hvad med de små mobilbetalingsløsninger, der er ved at blive udviklet i de små innovative virksomheder og som kun fokusere på selve betalingsdelen?

Troels Nordea: Stor fejl, det er ikke nok.

Hans: På trods af at de kører uden om NETS.

Troels Nordea: Ja, fordi nok hader mange forretninger og banker NETS, nu er NETS blevet den store fjende - men overførsler, altså almindelig konto til konto, kører altså stadig via NETS – det skal lige der ud og vende for at køre ordentligt og for at blive beriget med alt muligt. Jeg kan også se, at de produkter som NETS tilbyder, det er dem der står bag ved Power Tap fx og de har jo masser af ting på hylden, som de kan ligge drypvis og introducere – men de mangler jo en mobilbetalingsform de kan sælge de her services til og det kommer jo også til at handle om, hvem der skal betale for de her services, hvem skal betale for kvittering.dk og kunne vi så sige ”hvis du tager i mod Swipp, så kan dit kasseapparat spytte kvitteringen ud digitalt i stedet for, så sparer du så bon-rullen og så skal I bare blive enige om, at den er fyldestgørende nok når folk kommer og siger, at den ikke virker og de vil have penge tilbage eller et eller andet.

Martin: Gør det så også, hvis du mener, det med merværdi skabelse, at de data I får ind nu, er vel ret vigtige at ministrere?

Troels Nordea: Det er klart vi som banker står med den opgave, at dyrke den potentielle kundebase vi har på erhvervssiden. Vi ved jo en masse om det at agere i dag, hvor mange betalinger de har, om det er høje eller lave betalinger, om det mest er mænd der køber ind eller piger, hvornår handler vores kunder osv. Det feedback får vi jo også fra vores online erhvervskunder: hver 3. der kommer ind, når til siden hvor de skal taste kortnummer og adresse ind og så er de hoppet fra, løs det problem for os. Danske Bank har løst det med deres onlineløsninger, delvist, du slipper for at taste kortnummeret ind, det kommer også i online for Swipp, det bliver også en sammensmeltning på et eller andet tidspunkt – for der er forskel i transaktionsprisen i dag, om du handler online eller i en fysisk butik, det kommer også til at ændre sig på et eller andet tidspunkt.

Hans: Ser du Swipps opkøb af Pay, som en generel tendens i hele markedet?

Page 150 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Troels Nordea: Ja, det er det. Man prøver at konsolidere sig, Google har lige købt alt hvad der er interessant i det der hedder SoftCard, tidligere ISIS (som de sjovt nok ikke hedder mere) som er ATNT og T-mobile og er det Sprit - 3 eller 4 store teleselskaber i USA kørte det her ISIS i en del år og det var en af grundene til, at Google Wallet ikke kunne komme ud, de kunne simpelthen ikke få lov og komme ud og bruge de her sikre elementer på telefonerne, for det ville teleselskaberne ikke tillade, fordi de havde deres egne løsninger de kom med lige om lidt - og det gik der så tre år med og så kom de endelig med der her SoftCard og så var det løb ligesom kørt på en eller anden måde. Til gengæld er der enormt mange byggeklodser i det system, som er pisse smart – det har Google så købt nu og det har de købt, så de kan komme ud og pre-installere Google Wallet på alle deres telefoner der kører KitKat og op efter, så det er jo også et statement, men de gør det jo selvfølgelig også fordi, at Samsung har været ude og købe Looppay, som så er en anden teknologi og som bygger på nogle andre principper – så der er gang i gryden. Lige med Looppay har jeg svært ved, det er jo sådan en, der sender din magnetstribe digitalt gennem luften og det harmonere bare dårligt med, at USA inden 2018 skal køre rent chip, så det er slut med magnetstribe – så der må være noget der, som jeg ikke lige har set – men man prøver at konsoliderer sig, men man kan også se, at Samsung ikke har ikke købt Looppay, fordi de godt kunne tænke sig, at tjene penge på transaktion, men fordi man skal bruge deres Device og alt det der følger med, så det er jo en meget større pakke man tænker i – og Google i særdeleshed.

Hans: Vi startede også vores undersøgelse med, at fokusere på hele området og så fandt vi ud af hvor bredt det var -teleudbydere og producenter osv.

Troels Nordea: Ja og bankerne i særdeleshed. Bankerne har jo sindssygt meget gear og gejl, som de kan bruge, hvis bare de havde det kreative element op på toppen og det har de ikke. Det vil sige, at fra du får en ide til den skal i luften, så skal du rette dig ind med tyve afdelinger, som lige skal bygge en lille stol, for du kan ikke bare sige ”dig og dig og dig, fra alle de her afdelinger, I samles her og når I ikke har noget og lave, så sidder I bare og ryger smøger og drikker kaffe, for så er der lige noget med noget Ned-Id og så er der noget der viser noget forkert osv.” Derfor er det svært, at lave de ting i bankerne og det er også derfor man har trukket Swipp ud af det. Swipp er jo et APS nu, de kører deres eget og så har de nogle afhængigheder til bankerne, hvor man siger ”der er nogle ledninger fra banken der skal pege over mod os, med det og det data, kan I levere det?” Så det tager tid.

Hans: Sådan lige umiddelbart, hvad ser du som Swipps styrker og svagheder i deres positionering lige nu?

Troels Nordea: Styrken er, at det er sikkert, trygt og at det er noget der er tillid til. Det har vi været ude og undersøge, folk har meget tillid til, at Swipp er trygt. Ulempen er, at vi ikke er særlig hippe, vi er ikke den fede løsning – det prøver man selvfølgelig at gøre noget ved og det håber jeg selvfølgelig lykkedes indenfor en overskuelig periode. Når det så er sagt, så skal man også være klart over, at det her game er et dyrt game at være med i. ”Startups” det er fedt nok – lige så snart de kan noget, så er de støttet af nogle folk omme bagved, som har usandsynligt mange penge. Det tror jeg tæller, samtlige af de interessante mobilbetalingssystemer der er i luften globalt set, hvis ikke det er en bank, så er det typisk en bank et sted langt bagude, eller så er der hvert fald nogle investors der smider om sig med nogle syge penge- det er den der Facebook drøm om, at det er dét her der bliver solgt – og lige præcis med Google og Softcard er en af de ting der er kommet frem, at salgsprisen har været godt under 100 millioner dollars og så tænker man ”nå, det var der godt nok spøjst, det er nok fordi det ikke har kostet særligt meget at udvikle, men det har godt nok kostet 400 millioner kroner at udvikle” – der er ikke ret mange penge i selve betalingen, hvor du

Page 151 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

kan tage sådan noget som WhatsApp og Snapchat mm, de værdiansættelser der er, det er jo fuldstændig sygt i forhold til, at der jo ikke jo ikke er nogen penge i Snapchat fx, men det kommer nok – det er der hvert fald nogen der kan se, siden de pumper penge i det og de ikke vil sælge sig selv til Facebook.

Hans: Nu er der jo også kommet Snapcash

Troels Nordea: Ja, og igen er det jo baseret på et debitkort, der sidder omme bag ved – og det er jo også sådan noget, som jeg ser som Swipps styrke, lad nu være med at tro, at vi kan lave det hele, bare for at lave nogle API’er, som nogle andre kan bruge – at man så kan betale med Swipp, det er fint – tænk hvis som Snapchat under Snapcash ”jeg sender lige 100 kroner til dig og pop-up så står der 100 kroner på telefonen til Troels, sådan, videre” Det samme gælder for Facebook, der kom jo også nogle screenshots frem for noget de testede, det var også debitkort, altså direkte debitering på kontoen – det er en af de ting som erhverv godt kan lide, altså når en handel er gennemført med en Swipp betaling, så er den gennemført – du kan ikke komme bagefter og sige til din bank ”Det var ikke mig, eller jeg skulle ikke have gjort det” ”Jo det var dig og du gjorde det meget bevist” Det er ikke lige som en kort transaktion, der kan du altid komme og hælde vand ud af ørerne og så trækker de penge tilbage og så skal forretningen bevise, at de leverede de røde sko og ikke de blå – på den måde er der direkte huld ned i kassen, vi ”cleare” pengene med det samme, 15 sekunder efter du har betalt, så har modtageren pengene. Det er også meget godt hvis man er en forretning (nu ved jeg godt renterne ikke er noget at skrive hjem om) men du vil gerne have dine penge. Det kan vi også se, når vi er ude og snakke med større erhverv – det der med, at pengene er afregnet med det samme, det betyder noget, så der har vi måske en fordel.

Hans: Hvis du skal nævne et par virksomheder på tværs af alle brancher som kommer til at præge udviklingen indenfor de næste 6 måneder?

Troels Nordea: Altså hvis vi skulle tage en, så tror jeg at Apples lancering af Applepay i Europa, kommer til at betyde noget, måske ikke så meget på kort sigt, men det betyder noget for de andre betalingsudbydere der er – de kommer til at ”uppe” deres game voldsomt, det gør de jo allerede – man sidder og siger ”vi skal kunne konkurrere med Applepay, hvad er det vi skal kunne her? Hvad er det for noget vi skal kunne svejse under vand for at slå dem?” Samtidig sidder man også og siger ”Ja ja, Applepay er rigtig fedt, men jeg har en Samsung telefon, what do I do?” Det er jo så der, hvor Google og for sin vis også Samsung skal ud, men der er ret mange tilladelser man skal have i EU, for at kunne lave mobilbetalingssystemer. Der kan man sige, at som bank, der har vi jo lov til alt, men til gengæld kan vi ikke finde ud af noget.

Hans: Så du ser en eller anden form for kommende samarbejde mellem de stor mobilgiganter og så bankerne? (som måske de væsentligste spillere)

Troels Nordea: Det bliver ikke teleselskaberne, hvis der er nogen der kommer til at tabe, så bliver det teleselskaberne. Det var jo sådan, at de havde det her sikre element, det lå jo på simkortet og så var alle teleselskaberne ude og sige ”kom kom kom, vi har det sikre element, det ligger jo på simkortet”

Page 152 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

”Ja, okay, det vil vi gerne” ”Ja, det bliver fem kroner hver gang, der er en transaktion” ”Hvad for noget?” Det der med, at bankerne og kreditkortfolkene, de sagde ” I forvejen skal bankerne/kreditkortfolkene have penge, nu skal der nogen i midten, som ikke laver en pind, som bare er et sikkert element, det er simpelthen for mærkeligt” Det var det ISIS gjorde ”det sikre element, det kan I bare ikke få på jeres Google Wallet” Det tvang jo Google til, at gå ud og kigge, hvad går man så? Nu har man lavet et andet system, der hedder HCE (Host Card Emulation) Det vil sige, at det sikre element, det ligger man op i en ”Cloud” Første gang jeg hørte om det, var til en konference, hvor der var nogle telefolk, hvor jeg tænke ”Ja ja, det der, er noget hokus pokus, hvis der er noget der siger hack mig her, så er det sådan noget – Cloud, uha, pas nu på” Det var nærmest i samme åndedrag, at alle andre sagde ”Okay, Cloud, og få ting op i skyen og få tingene globaliseret, der er Clouden bare smart – det her er bare ét element af hvad Clouden ligesom kan” Nu kan rigtig mange lave Cloud og så er det hej hej med teleselskaberne. Nu er teleselskaberne på en hel anden måde, når vi snakker med dem er det ”ja ja, det kan vi sagtens finde ud af” ”men skal I have penge pr transaktion?” ”Nej nej, det kunne være pr brugere, vi skal nok samarbejde med de andre teleselskaber” Det er en helt anden type kommunikation de har, i forhold til hvad de havde for 1,5-2 år siden – men jeg tror at teleselskaberne skal finde noget andet, at tjene deres penge på, altså hvis det ikke havde været for teleselskabernes lobbyisme, så havde der slet ikke været noget simkort. Apple var jo ude og sige, at man ikke behøvede noget simkort, det kunne bare være en app.

Martin: Jeg læste lige at Coop og Dansk supermarked ikke helt var så optimistiske omkring mobilbetalinger.

Troels Nordea: Man kan sige, Dansk Supermarked er storaktionærer i Danske Bank. Danske Bank havde brug for, at få noget presse på deres erhvervsløsning og Dansk supermarked har agenturet på Starbucks i Danmark. Man har så valgt, at ligge en Starbucks ved alle Bilkaer i landet (ligger der ikke en i Kolding? Jeg ved så ikke hvor mange jyder der er villige til at give 52 kroner for en kop kaffe, det er lidt et københavner fænomen) – men de var så ude og har lavet en fuldstændig almindelig MobilPay erhvervsløsning i de her syv Starbucks der var. Du kommer op, taster dit telefonnummer ind, skriver beløbet og så er der noget der bipper omme bag kasseapparatet, så man kan se du har betalt. Det var ikke noget teknisk lækkert, men det var der. Det gjorde man fordi i Starbucks i USA, har en mobilbetalingsapp der er sindssyg populær – over en tredjedel af deres omsætning kommer fra den app (på under et år) – så man vil gerne i Danmark kunne signalere ”vi kan også et eller andet” – så de fik lov, at lave den som en slags test og fik på en eller anden måde vredet armen om på Dansk Supermarkeds ledelse (måske også lidt for at drille COOP) som så gik ud i Børsen og sagde ”Ja, vi har et godt samarbejde, MobilPay er nu inde i Dansk supermarked” ”Nå kan jeg nu betale med MobilPay i Bilka” ”nej du kan gå ind i Starbucks og købe en kop kaffe” ”men der er et formelt samarbejde, hvor man snakker sammen” ”vås, MobilPay laver deres udvikling og hvis de har brug for noget viden omkring hvordan gør Retail kunder, så har man sikkert en telefon, så man kan ringe til Dansk Supermarked, lige som Swipp har et samarbejde med COOP og lancerer Swipp via COOP – men de vil have mere, de vil have mere end bare betaling ”sådan her, kontaktløst, under 200 kroner, så skal du ikke taste din pinkode, andet end hver 5. gang,” Det kan du ikke slå og du er vant til at tage dit kort op – du vil have rigtig mange situationer, selv med mobilbetaling, hvor du står op ved kassen og rent faktisk når, at tage din pung op ad lommen, inden du kommer i tanke om, at du skal bruge din mobil – og så skal du lige finde den app du skal bruge til at betale med og appen ligger ikke på forsiden – det kommer ikke til at gå hurtigere.

Page 153 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

ApplePay er nemt fordi, LFC delen i det KUN snakker med ApplePay, den er jo ikke ude til nogen andre og det kommer den ikke det næste lange stykke tid.

Martin: Tror du, at Swipp og MobilPay ligger lidt bagud, for det bliver jo et problem hvis COOP kun vil have Swipp.

Troels Nordea: Jeg ser meget (og det er jo sådan noget man skal sige, når man er nummer to i spillet) det bliver jo ikke enten/eller, men det tror jeg ikke det gør. Ligesom du kan betale med Dankort, Visa, Mastercard, du kan endda betale med sådan et JCB kort i de fleste danske butikker, fordi det er sådan en pakke man køber, af de her ”Payment Service Providers” ”vi har et tomt kort, de fire af dem koster ikke noget, så skulle der komme en japansk turist forbi, så kan man fyre det kort i” ”Chinapay” som er en kæmpestort kreditkortsystem i Kina og det er vitterligt næsten ukendt, men du kan godt bruge det hos Louis Vitton, du kan hæve med det tre steder i Danmark med Chinapay og det ene er Århus lufthavn. Man har dækket sig ind og det tror jeg også man kommer til, at gøre med mobilbetalinger, med én undtagelse: det må ikke være svært at integrere, det skal simpelthen være nemt at integrere. Det er sådan noget kasseapparats integration, Matas er et godt eksempel – de er i gang med en større nytænkning i, hvordan gør vi det her med service i vores butikker. Apple butikkerne er et godt eksempel, der har du en fyr eller en pige med en Apple telefon, der render rundt inde i butikken, hvor alt foregår via Apple telefonen. Så hvis Swipp eller MobilPay kommer med noget der kan fungerer i et kasseapparat, så skal det være noget hvor man mere eller mindre bare kan sige klik og så kommer der en knap hvor der står ”betal med Swipp” ligesom med en Dankorts knap. Sådan noget der, kommer til at betyde noget også.

Hans: Så udviklingen af terminaler kommer også til at betyde noget?

Troels Nordea: Ja og det følger man jo også tæt. Når man udvikler et API til kasseapparater, så er man nødt til, at gå ud og sige ”hvor mange kasseapparater er der i Danmark?” Jeg tror der er 16 eller 18 eller sådan noget og så er der et par nye spillere, nogen der hedder WallMops, som er blevet købt og er et eller andet Randers firma, som har lavet en tablet-kasseapparat-ting, ganske smart.

Martin: Er det ikke Me Wallet?

Troels Nordea: Me Wallet er ham fra Randers, Kim hedder han - hvis I i øvrigt har tid, så skal I prøve og interviewe ham, han er ret vild.

Martin: Vi har allerede prøvet og snakke med ham.

Troels Nordea: Han har ikke haft tid eller hvad?

Martin: Nej ikke endnu.

Troels Nordea: Jeg vil sige om ham, han er ligesom NETS bare fra Randers, han kan alt som NETS kan, bare meget billigere, bedre og mere åbent. Han har lavede det der æg, det er sådan et betalings æg og jeg har haft rigtig mange snakke med ham, for han vil rigtig gerne have, at Swipp var en del MeWallet, vi kan godt være partnere, men vi er der ikke endnu og vi har ikke et API vi kan give ham, i princippet går der nok ikke så lang tid, så vil han sikkert sagtens kunne – men jeg har faktisk rost ham for det her æg, for det er fuldstændigt anderledes og da han kom her og skulle demonstrere, var det som om han var en smule flov over det, hvor jeg sagde til ham ”hvor kommer det her æg fra? Hvad er det?” og så siger han så til mig ”ja,

Page 154 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

men han havde jo den her kusine eller faster” eller et eller andet, som gik på en eller anden designskole og så havde han bedt hende om designe det – han havde ikke sagt æg, men bare sagt, at hun skulle designe noget man kunne lave forbindelse med og så havde hun lavet et æg – man kunne næsten bare se hvordan skulderne faldt. Jeg sagde så til ham, du har intet som jeg synes er spændende og som ikke er lavet før, men det æg, er der ikke nogen der har set før – så kan det godt være det fylder lidt meget på kasseapparatet eller disken, men det tror jeg faktisk godt man kunne leve med, hvis det er nemt at integrere. Det er tilpas fjollet til at det er sejt på en eller anden måde.

Appendix 5 – Interview 3 Kim Vinding Larsen

Kim: Mit navn er Kim Larsen, jeg er opfinder af det vi kalder MeeWallet. MeeWallet er et økosystem, hvor vi har adgang til forbruger og butikker. Det kører vi på vores eget tokenisation og vores eget softwear, der giver adgang til at sende betalingsinstruktioner til banker.

Lilian: Jeg hedder Lilian Grossmann, jeg er forretningsudvikler på MeeWallet og arbejder med flere dele af løsningerne og en del af vores redigering og arbejdsplaner.

Martin: Jeres koncept, hvordan ser i det kan give mere værdig for butikkerne?

Kim: Den teknologi vi har, den erstatter sådan set adgangen til en konto. Hvis det er sådan, at du forstiller dig i dag at man kører et dankort, visa eller Mastercard, ikke har et kontonummer under sig. Hvor meget værdi giver det så, at have et betalingskort - nul. Fordi du kan ikke flytte nogle penge med et kort, det er kontoen nedenunder det drejer sig om. Da man i halvtredserne opfandt selve plastikkortet, så har man udviklet alle mulige forskellige ting og nødvendige ting for at forsætte med, at kortet var sikkert, for at sørger for at det kan indløses i en butik – lige pludselig opstod der noget der hed internettet så skulle man også kunne bruge et fysisk plastikkort på internettet. Det har man så kørt med i en halvtredsårs tid. Det et kort egentlig er, det er et ID der er knyttet til din bankkonto. Før det var det checks og der har været en masse andre løsninger forskellige steder i verden. Danmark havde på et tidspunkt noget der hed ”Mobilpenge” og ”E- Dankort” der har været en række ting som ikke har slået an. Hvis man skal kigge ud i fremtiden og man skal have mobiltelefonen til at være et bagermedie, som kan få adgang ned til en konto, så skal der være noget teknologi der håndtere det. Det vi har arbejdet med siden 2003, det er at bruge noget man kalder tokenisation. Det er en maskine, hvor du putter noget data ind i den ene ende, fx et kontonummer. Det pakker man så ind og gør anderledes, så bliver det til noget der kan erstatte et kontonummer. Det er lidt svært at sige, hvad det egentlig er, fordi man ikke burger betegnelsen kortnummer eller checknummer, vi kalder det Meetag – det er fordi det er vores eget. Det har vi så et økosystem, hvor det kører rundt, som man som forbruger kan gå ind i en butik, føle man betaler for en vare, få varen med der fra og så er handlen sådan set overstået. I det forløb, der bruger vi

Page 155 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

vores eget Meetag til at sende til forbrugerens bank og sige til vedkommende, at der skal flyttes nogle penge fra jer og det henvender vi os så til den anden bank, butikkens bank, og siger, at der kommer nogle penge ind her til den butik. Vi flytter ikke nogle penge, det er nogle ting der foregår imellem forbrugerens bank og butikkens bank, nøjagtigt som det er med kortinfrastrukturen i dag. Vi laver ikke noget om på det. Selve måden vi initiere betalingsinstruktioner på den er markant anderledes. Noget af det der gør os meget anderledes end alle andre, det er vi coeksistere vi ændre ikke på den måde, det foregår på i dag, men vi giver samtidig nogle nye tilbud til, at det kan lade sig gøre på en anden måde.

Lilian: Alt det omkring tokenisation , det er noget der er helt vildt fremme i tiden og det er noget vi har arbejdet på meget længe. Men Applepay og før Applepay havde vi allerede tokenisation kørend. Applepay kører på tokenisation, så kom Visa ud og Mastercard og alle de kommer ud med tokenisation. Det er simpelthen fordi, det vi har set med alle de eksisterende mobilbetalingsløsninger, det er at de er enorm sensible over for fraued. Derfor er det enormt vigtigt, at vi har de her meget sikre løsninger. Det er tokenisation og har du ikke det på en mobilbetalingsløsning i fremtiden så tror jeg du får svært ved det.

Martin: Så det skal overtage NFC eller hvad ?

Kim: Nej! Jeg vil give dig nogle eksempler på NFC, det er der hvor vi var for 4-5 år siden, fordi alle talte om NFC. NFC har nu arbejdet og nu prøver alle, at gå den retning fordi det er ligesom der folks bevidsthed er, vi kan godt arbejde med NFC, men for mange år siden fravalgte vi det og så valgte vi at bruge Bluetooth i stedet for. Lige nu, i hvert fald med vores analyse og hvad der ellers foregår er vi de eneste der kan gøre det via Bluetooth. En NFC løsning, det her er et NFC kort, det er næsten 20 år gammelt, det her er et NFC kort det er er lige nyudstedet det er det helt spritnye i Danmark. Det er mere til orientering. Det her der begyndte man at ligge covers ind på telefonerne og begyndte at sige nu laver vi NFC betalinger det her er NFC chips og på den måde det fungere på, dette er at der sidder en lille chip, den er ikke større end den sorte lille dims der. Resten det er en antenne, så når man holder sin mobiltelefon henover, så overfører den både strøm og signal. Det man så arbejder med i dag, det er secure element. Hvis du tager et plastikkort i dag, så i gammeldage var der ikke chip, der var heller ikke magnetstriben. Der var bare en identifikator foran på kortnummeret. Det var secure element. Det fandt man lynhurtigt ud af, at det ikke var godt nok. Man havde pinkode på, for at man kunne gøre det, så skulle man have noget elektronisk. Det var en magnetstribe. Så kom man over i chip. Men det er meget fysiskanlagt der er noget der skal være her til stede i det øjeblik du handler. Det kan ikke lade sig gøre på nettet. Du kan ikke sætte den her ind i din egen private computer også taste pinkoden ind. Derfor arbejder man med at telefonerne skal have en eller anden form for NFC chip, hvor man både lager det sikre element og på samme tid kan gøre den her kommunikation. Forstil dig med alle de betalingsløsninger der er der ude, hvor

Page 156 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

mange ting der skal lageres i en NFC chip. Hotelkort, hvordan løser man det aspekt på NFC chippen. Det har vi sagt, det kan ikke lade sig gøre inden for rimelighedens grænser. Det vi har gået med det er, hvis vi skal være kompatibel til NFC teknologi, så vil vi ikke burger den som kommunikationskanal. Det skaber udfordringer, og det er hvis du bruger NFC chippen som kommunikationskanal, så skal vi som underleverandør så skal vi være kompatibel, de skal være kompatibel med os, altså hardwear skal satificeres til hver enkle sted. Nu kan vi se med Nets de har lige lanceret, at de gør sig kompatibel med Samsung S 6 NFC chippen. Det er fordi der er så stor krav til fysikkens verden. Det vi valgte at gøre, det var at fokusere på hvordan vi undgår at være kompatibel til fysikkens verden, fordi at vores teknologi er secure element i skyen. Vi er ikke hardwear baseret.

Lilian: Problemet ligger også i det, når vi snakker NFC . Alle IPhones eller IOS devices, de nyeste fra 6 og op efter og frem efter. Har NFC integreret, men de eneste der må bruge det er ApplePay og de giver ikke adgang. Det gør at user experience , at alt efter hvilken pung du har, så skal næsten telefon være den samme ellers kan du ikke bruge din pung. Så der har vi allerede nogle store problemer, at den uafhængighed der er på NFC og så snakker vi om NETS det er Samsung 6, hvad med alle de andre ting?

Kim: Det er derfor man nu går fra mobilbetalinger som drømmesceneriet, også begynder man at tale om hvad pragmatisk kan lade sig gøre. Om ikke så lang tid, så vil de fleste begynde at, det ved vi også visa vil gøre, de er begyndt at sige nej til hardwear baseret løsninger og går over i rent digital softwear hvor man skal være en kanal. Det er det marked vi har været i længe. Det er en pragmatisk problemstilling, der skal løses før forbruger og andre kan komme på. Den anden del der er et kæmpe issue. Det er utroligt nemt at gå ud og tilbyde alt gratis. Det har man jo gjort før, og det har man åbenbart ikke lært af. Det har nogle omkostninger og drive sikkerhed, det har nogle omkostninger at drive infrastruktur. Hvis man gør det gratis så ødelægger man mulighederne for at fremtidssikre det. Fordi på sigt, er der jo ikke nogle til at betale for at sikkerheden bliver ved med at være god. At terminalerne derude forsat fungere, at fraud på internettet bliver løst eller dækket. Det vil sige, at de aktører der er på markedet der gerne vil i markedet, har bare sagt at det bare er gratis, så nu skal de så til at introducere nogle modeller for at det ikke længere er gratis. Det bliver jo spændende, at se om forbrugerne er villige til, at betale halvanden krone for en transaktion eller en femmer eller syv kroner. Det er i hvert fald ikke rentabelt som det er i dag, hvor de aktører der er i markedet har nogle interne omkostninger som deres eksisterende kunder betaler, men de ikke videre kan fakturer ud. Det er igen derfor vi snakker meget om, at mange af de løsninger som der lige nu er test app’s, fordi man har faktisk ikke gjort sig så mange overvejelser omkring det. Hvad kommer det til at koste det her, hvordan kan vi fremtidssikre det? Nogle andre ting som de aktører som også er på markedet i dag, har vi sådan, det kan godt være at det lyder arrogant, men de er meget early birdy, i forhold til os der har været på markedet i mange år omkring løsningen. Det kan godt være, at det virker fantastisk, at man kan få 1,8 mio. bruger eller 600.000 bruger på nogle simple services,

Page 157 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

for mig betyder det bare, at markedet er klart. Lad mig give dig en forestilling, hvordan vil du nogle sinde tage nogle af de nationale aktører og kunne anvende det hvis du er på rejse i Frankrig eller et andet sted? De har jo ikke haft konceptet omkring at blive et betalingsbrand der virker udenfor landes grænser eller udenfor deres markedsområde. Derfor bliver man så nødt til, at kigge ind i mobilbetalingsindustrien hvor placerer du dig henne. Vores rolle, vores konkurrent det koeksistere med Visa, men også på sammen tid være konkurrent til dem. Det er der hvor vi er, så vores konkurrent er så nogen som Visa, måske Mastercard med også Paypall. Vi har været nødsaget til at udvikle en masse komponenter, som nu er vores, vi eger det selv. Vi skal ikke spørger alle mulige om lov og hvad prisen skal være. Vi ved hvad det koster, et eksempel er: Vi bevæger os ind på terminalindustrien nu, fordi vi har vores egen terminal ude i butikkerne. Vi levere ikke mobiltelefoner og den slags ting ud. Der er vi kommet i konkurrence med Point. Vi har vores egen Wallet, vi har vore egen tokenisation , vi har vores egen integration maskine, sådan nogle komponenter er ikke nogle man bare lige river ned fra hylden. Man kan købe det fra andre firmaer, det giver man mio. af kroner for bare det du kalder en switch. Alle dankort og Mastercard osv. Der ryger ind på Nets, de skal igennem en lille hup, et lille internet hup. Så de kan håndtere store mængder data af gangen. Det koster bunker af penge, der er firmaer der har specialiseret sig i kortmarkedet i dag. Sådan noget har vi selv lavet. I dag kører alt vores på Microsofts platform, vi har et særdeles godt arbejde med dem. Det har været en af årsagerne til, at vi også sidder sådan nogle steder, fordi vi har ret meget data, måske ikke så meget som Goggle og lige om lidt ikke så meget som Apple, men vi har nok. Det betyder at det er nogle helt andre aktører der er inde omkring vores teknologi, end hvis du sidder på en server hjemme i Vejle og udvikler et eller andet smart nyt lige til biblioteket. Vi har en helt anden skala vi går og laver.

Martin: Hvordan fungerer det så, nu siger du at i er konkurrenter til Mastercard og Visa, i er vel også afhængig af dem?

Kim: Nej !

Lilian: I dag er det jo en digitalpung, og det er er meningen med denne digitalepung at du kan implementere alt.

Kim: Vi er jo ikke en Bank, det vil sige at det er svært for os, at få adgang til penge. Hvis det er sådan, at vi ikke har adgang til pengene, så er hele vores system ligegyldigt. For der er ikke nogen der vil udlevere vare til dig, hvis du ikke kan betale det. Det er den centrale pointe. Jeg har prøvet at sælge det her igennem de sidste 4-5 år, alle synes det er super smart, men vi har ikke fået løst gåden før for ganske nyligt - det var foråret sidste år, snart et år siden. Det betyder at nu kan vi vise, du kan jo tage til Randers og prøve det og snart her over også, eller vi er i gang med de første

Page 158 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

implementeringer her over. Det betyder, at vi har vist hvordan man integrere op i mod Vias og Mastercard. Vi har også vist hvordan vi går uden om Vias og Mastercard og direkte ned i pungen og i det flow, der behøver vi ikke Visa og Mastercard, det er fuldstændig overflødigt. I sådan et banksystem, der fungerer det sådan her: du har et kontonummer, nu skal jeg give dig adgang til dine egene penge som du kan bruge i butikken, så jeg udsteder et dankort til dig eller et Mastercard. Det registrer man så inde i systemet. Din hustru skal så have adgang til samme konto, så udsteder vi et kort mere i dit hustrus navn til samme kontonummer. Forstil dig, at du skærer kortnummeret væk, men udsteder et andet ID, et Meetag til dig og din hustru, som referer direkte til kontoen. Så kan du skærer alt det der hedder udstedelse af plastikkort og chip og hele balladen væk. Det er det bankerne godt kan lide at høre. Fordi det koster næsten 75 kroner at udstede sådan et. Derefter kan det drives med pin systemer og dem der taster tingene ind på nettet, som egentlig ikke er rigtige eller snyder på nettet, det kan man blive helt fri for, for nu er der en anden type service der kører der ude. Derfor er det kæmpe store interesser. Når man så går i markedet med sådan noget, nu må du have mig undskyld, med Swipp og Mobilpay og for den sags skyld også ApplePay med NCF løsninger, jeg ved godt at det ikke altid er den bedste teknologi der vinder, men det er simpelthen ikke særlig gennemtænkt. ApplePay løser et kæmpe stort problem i USA, men det skaber en række nye. Det er kun til Apples kunder. Prissætningen er, de har fortalt at de ene står for noget sikkerhed fordi de er mere sikre, så vi presser på og trykker kortselskaberne på maven og presser prisen ned så de selv kan tjene lidt, de ændre ikke noget. Hvis Steve Jobs havde levet i dag så havde han kørt det direkte i søen, for det er ikke innovativt eller noget som helst andet. Man går ind i et markedet med markedets betingelser. Man suboptimere et marked som i forvejen baseret….

Lilian: Det er et skridt i den rigtige retning, det gør at folk bliver meget mere vante. Som alle udviklinger, så skal vi komme et stykke hen ad vejen, før man er ved de rigtige løsninger. Det man siger som helt startløsning, det er de her P to P, altså vi sender penge til hinanden og bliver mere vant til det. Guldæget det er jo den dag man er integrerbar i butikken. Ligesom Kims pung, nu har han så en vanvittig pung med kort, men det er jo den dag din digitalpung kan implementere alle dine betalingsløsninger alle dine loyalitetsløsninger, alle dine ID-kort osv. Og har adgang til det med en PIN-kode. Fordi alle de andre punge, Mobilpunge, du ser i dag har jo meget begrænset antal løsninger i pungen. Hvorfor skal du være begrænset i hvilke betalingsmidler du bruger når du går i en butik. I dag bestemmer du jo selv og sådan skal det jo også være i fremtiden. Den der virkelig får lavet en ordentlig digitalpung hvor du kan integrere alle former for betalingsmidler og kan bruge det udenfor landets grænser og på samme må på infrastruktur, om du så er i Tyskland, USA eller Danmark det bliver fremtidens løsning.

Kim: Vi er blevet betegnet som en Wallet og vi har så lidt med Wallets at gøre, men det er det der er vores grafikflade. Så har vi et æg, det er vores terminal, men det er jo alt det teknologi der ligger nede i motoren, det er det der er vores value proposition, det er det ingen andre har.

Page 159 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Nu kunne jeg se, at i har et samarbejde med E- kvitteringer og du snakkede også om, at det var muligt at få loyalitetskort. Er det noget i tror, vil få folk til at gå fra sådan en pung der med alle de kort, til at betale med mobilen?

Kim: Det er der ingen tvivl om. Det at man skal lave en platform hvor andre kan integrer op i mod. Jeg ved ikke, den gang Appstore kom, der skulle alle have Appstore. Det er igen det der med, at man skal lave noget der er stærkt og robust nok til at andre kan interagere på det. Det er noget der hedder ”Value Apple service provider”. Der er noget folk har snakket om i 20 år. Det er noget vi har integreret fra starten af.

Lilian. Man kan jo sige om Appestore, at det jo først er nu, inden for sidste år, hvor Appstore faktisk rigtig er begyndt at tjene penge, fordi nu, i starten der downloaded man kun de gratis app’s og kun få betalte for det. Men nu betaler folk og det er blevet en del, af vores dagligdag. Nu køber vi bare App’s til alle mulige ting.

Kim: Vi har simpelthen linet op, af ideer og forretningsmuligheder som vi egentlig ikke selv har lyst til at fører. Også noget af det vi har lavet, det var egentlig ikke os der skulle gøre det. Jeg synes at innovationsløsningerne her hjemme er ekstremt ringe og den ligger lidt på ” bare lave en App” så kommer du til at tjene rigtig mange penge. Det er bare èn ud af en milliard der gør det. Det vi kan sikre er jo, at folk kommer med ind i en afsætningskanal og kan prøve nogle ting, fx åbne døre på et hotel, loyalitetskort der kan komme med ind – alt muligt, det kan være nogen der laver et stempelkort til Jensens Bøfhus som kan koble op i mod pungen. Hele det der marked er der ikke nogen og jeg har været ude i pressen mange gange og sige at vi gerne vil samarbejde og i kan bare komme her til. Det er ikke noget med, at vi hugger ideer eller noget som helst, det er et spørgsmål om at styrke vores eget produkt ved at vi kan få andre ind og brede det ud. Det her er ikke noget nogen kan lave lige nu. Fordi de kører med deres egene små NFC wallet løsninger, alle skal serviceres og alt muligt. Vi har valgt det secure element et helt andet sted.

Lilian: En ting er alt det her omkring sikkerhed og secure element, hvor man kan diskutere om den skal ligge på telefonen som den gør i NFC chippen eller i Bluetooth hvor den ligger i skyen. Bluetooth gør jo også at den 3. Verden kan bruge det og fordi Bluetooth teknologi har været meget længe i telefonen. Det er èn ting, den anden er hvordan din oplevelse er i butikker. Jeg sad i Orange Corped i nogle år, og da vi kom ud med det på pilot i Orange i 2011, der var Nice pilot by i Frankrig. Der havde man sådan noget med kuponer og rabattilbud, så skulle man gå hen med telefonen, ”uh der er tilbud på mælk” klik, også var der et andet tilbud, og så skulle du ind på de forskellige steder, så står der sådan en NFC chip også kan du få alle de rabat kuponer. Med Bluetooth, der kan du variere, for det første skal du bare have Bluetooth tændt også kan du få de her

Page 160 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

tilbud lige så snart du træder ind i butikken. Pling der er tilbud på det og det, eller du kan bruge dit loyalitetskort på det her. Fx Matas har mange samarbejdspartner som man som Matas kunde ikke tænker over. Hvis du får sådan en besked når du træder ind i butikken, hvor du kan bruge dine Matas point eller hvor du kan optjene Matas point, eller der er tilbud på mælk eller whatever. Så får du det direkte ind på telefonen og du har et helt andet indblik og oplevelse i forhold til hvis du skal gå og klikke rundt.

Kim: Jeg vil gerne give dig et helt konkret eksempel. Det er bare for, at vise hvor de forskellige produkter de er henne i DK. Vi gør alt hvad vi kan for at samarbejde med MobilPay og vi sidder i forskellige udvalg sammen og inspirerer hinanden osv. Indimellem er der lidt, MobilPay har det med at blive lidt for inspireret, seneste med Horsens, som er en af de byer vi også går med. Så ruller de ud og lover guld og grønne skove. Swipp, vi taler på to forskellige niveauer. De har lavet en udvidet bankservice, hvor man kan overføre penge og har slet ikke, og er langt væk fra der hvor vi er. Men sammen med Troels og et pr. andre, der prøver vi så vidt muligt at hjælpe. For alle er interesseret i, at det her bliver en fælles oplevelse for forbrugeren og butikken, da der er så stor fordel i det. Vi tror ikke på, at der er en der vinder, vi tror der er rigtig mange der vinder. Hvis du forstiller dig hvor mange kort der findes i markedet i dag, så er der nogle brands der går igen. Det er Mastercard, det er Visa, det er Dankort, fordi de har adgang til din konto. Så når folk siger, at der kun kommer èn løsning og det bliver ApplePay osv. Sådan fungere verden bare ikke. Der kommer rigtig mange der for adgang til din konto, fordi det er nødvendigt og fordi det skaber konkurrence i markedet osv. vi kan lige så godt være en af dem, som MobilePay kan være det.

Lilian: MolibPay kan også være en del af vores løsning.

Kim: Det er så noget andet. Teknisk kan MobilPay virke på vores, men ikke omvendt. Fordi MobilPay har ikke de features. Men jeg vil gerne vise dig en helt konkret ting, det er at vi meget tidligt i vores forløb, der meldte vi ud, at vi kunne bruge alle typer kort og beviste det så i markedet. Det var der så nogen der synes, at det skulle de da også kunne. Så det vil jeg gerne lige vise dig her. Hvis man skal overføre penge med MobilPay og man skal skifte kort, så går man ind i betalingskort, så skifter jeg, så vil jeg så bruge det andet Mastercard, så sætter jeg to flueben her, så forsvinder de her nede fra og tilbage igen. Så spørg jeg så bare, hvor er brugeroplevelsen henne, hvis jeg står inde i en butik og skal gøre det. Det er noget af det vi tænker ind ret tidligt, det er måden det er hos os. Jeg kan vise dig et køb lige om lidt, nu viser jeg lige hvordan det er om alle omstændigheder. Det er i selve køb situationen, der har man mulighed for at skifte kort, kan du se forskellen? Når man laver test App’s, så laver man det andet. Når man laver en rigtig App, som skal fungere der ude, så laver man sådan noget som det her.

Page 161 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Lilian: Vi har vores digitale Wallet løsning i dag, men det er jo kun starten. Der kommer jo mange flere funktioner ind med tiden. Vi er ikke kommet ud med alle tingene på en gang. Vi har 1% klar nu, så hvis du kigger og siger, hvorfor er der ikke det og hvorfor kan jeg ikke det, det er jo en proces.

Kim: Vi er stadig de eneste, selvom det burde være så nemt, så er vi stadig de eneste der sender vores kvitteringer på e-mail. Alle de andre der ligger det i App’en, hvis du så sletter App’en og skal på igen, så får du et problem. Hvorfor? Fordi man ikke lige havde tænkt sig om, og ikke tænkt brugeroplevelsen ind, hvad er vigtigt for brugeren. Selvom man siger, at man har fået et dyrt bureau til at kigge det igennem.

Lilian: Det vi har en løsning der dækker over alle building blocks i systemet, gør jo også det tage længere tid at rulle ud. Det tager længere tid at rulle ud i butikker. Det er en stor læreproces, hvor vi skal lære af butikkerne, hvad er kundernes reaktion og butik personalets reaktion og hvordan får vi alle de her forskellige betalingsmuligheder brugbar i butikkerne. Det fungere lidt som det gør i dag, og så alligevel er det nyt.

Kim: Vi er rigtig glade for, at vi er flere i markedet på en gang. Det havde været et problem for os for 4-5år siden, hvor vi også bevægede os rundt, der var der ikke andre i markedet. Der virkede markedet sådan her, at bankerne og dem der egentlig skulle lave det, de mente at forbrugerne og butikkerne ikke ville adoptere det. Så lavede MobilPay og Danske Bank de første installationer og så blev det bare adopteret langt hurtigere end man regnede med. Så kom resten af kravene, nu skulle de ind i butikkerne, nu skulle de kunne lave web og dit og dat. Men der lå ikke nogle overordnende strategi for hvordan man skulle gøre det. Men det var en overraskelse for alle på daværende tidspunkt, hvor hurtigt det gik med at konvertere et land. Men den tekniske udvikling kan man ikke følge med på. For der opstår en lang række ting det så skal kunne gøre.

Lilian: Der er jo flere fordele ved at være first mover, så åbner de jo også muligheden for alle indgange. Det er jo fantastisk, at de har været first mover, fordi så lærer butikkerne og forbrugeren lærer, det her det fungere jo ikke og de bliver meget mere modtagelige for at prøve noget nyt, som er bedre. Så derfor er vi jo fantastiske glade for, at de har fået så stor succes, fordi det driver hele branchen. Butikkerne siger, det er super, men det fungerer ikke helt i dagligdagen som det er lige nu.

Page 162 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Noget vi opdagede, vi har haft nogle fokusgrupper, de kan ikke helt komme ud over det der med, at vi kun bruger det til at sende til hinanden. Vi overfører når vi skylder penge. Når det så kommer ned i butikkerne, så virker et ikke helt som om de kan forholde sig til det.

Kim: Præcis, du skal få lov til at prøve, så du kan se hvorfor vi ikke har det problem. Vores løsning går efter det sværeste først, det var in shop. Det nemmeste er at lave konto til konto overførelser. Derefter kommer nogle af de andre som web – betalinger og sådan noget. Men det sværeste er at få styr på handel.

Martin: Hvad gør i for at få folk overtalt og få udannet personalet?

Kim: Jeg fortæller simpelthen hvordan vi sender det frem, hvordan det bliver installeret i butikken og hvordan det så kører efterfølgende. Ellers så dele butikkerne sådan nogle her ud. Vi kan nærmest ikke nå at trykke nok, fordi der bliver holdt forskellige arrangementer i Randers, det er så mere for at skabe den her kultur om en by.

Lilian: Det er jo heller ikke en kæmpe organisation fra starten af, hvor vi bare kan trække op resurser. Vi er en lille iværksætter virksomhed.

Kim: Det der har været afgørende for os, man har åbenbart ikke lært fra dankort tiden, hvilket undre mig ved de her større steder. Fordi det der har været det vigtigste for dankorts tiden, det var at man lavede en logbog, hvor man kunne sige hvor gik det bedst. De steder det gik bedst, det var de steder hvor man havde en geografisk høj koncentration af brugs steder for forbrugeren, altså steder med mange butikker. Derfor begyndte vi jo, at kigge på hvordan udruller vi det her. Vi valgte byer. Vi vælger simpelthen at gå efter en by ad gangen også pga. vores størrelse. Lige pludselig efter vi har fået Randers på osv. så vælter det til Randers med alle mulige andre løsninger og det samme med de andre byer bliver tæppebombet med løsninger. Den dag i dag, bliver de jo kaldt til møde med nogle af de større aktører for at fortælle om det. Det eneste vi kan sige, det er at klæde vores kunder, i vores byer, godt nok på til, at de kan stille de spørgsmål der er vigtige. Hvad sker der hvis en turist kommer ind, hvordan bliver prissætningen, hvad skal de investere i for, at få det sat op ved kassen osv. Jeg vil lige vise dig her hvordan det foregår. Hvor vi er på vej hen. Det vi gør nu, om ikke så lang tid, så bliver det den lille størrelse, den her størrelse, vi sender ud. Det er SIM- kort størrelse og det er meget det som Lilian går med. Det er noget vi kommer til patentere og alt den slags ting, så det går vi ikke mere ind på. Men det sidder i sådan en størrelse i dag og det er fordi vi stadig skruer låget af og samler ting og propper ting i, det er der hvor vi er. Men de får den her ud og i dag fungere det på den her måde, at vi sender en kasse ud, vi sender en strømforsyning ud, og

Page 163 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

vi sender et stik ud. Så kobler de det på deres netværk og så har de fået en e-mail eller en hjemmesideadresse med ud. Det virker sådan, at den her skal være på samme netværk som den her. Så trykker de scan og så får de connection ok, vi kan lige prøve at gøre det. Når connection er ok, så er de her to forbundet. Så trykker de videre, så angiver de beløbet i kr. eller øre, altså hvordan du skal taste ind og så er du klar. Nu er du butik og jeg er kunde eller du kan være begge dele for den sags skyld. Så taster du 1kr. ind og så trykker du enter og så trykker du køb. Nu aktivere den lige nettet op på vores platform, og så kan du trykke acceptere. Nu er vi ude og lave saldotjek, spærringer, whatever. Det var det, nu kommer der så en kvittering til kunden. Der er lang vej fra de andre endnu.

Lilian: En anden ting er med NFC. Når du betaler så skal du hen med den, hvor tit gør du det, normalt står du med din telefon her, du vil ikke have at andre ser din PIN-kode osv, så står du sådan her med den.

Kim: Hvem siger, at det er på telefonen du skal trykke PIN-koden ind? Det kan vi jo ikke vide, der er jo ikke nogen der har vist os løsningen endnu.

Lilian: Med ApplePay, der er det på den der.

Kim: Men de har også deres egne terminaler.

Lilian: Ja, men det er lidt unaturligt, at skulle gøre sådanne fordi det er jo din betaling det er jo din PIN-kode. Der er det da bedre bare at kunne stå og skjule din PIN.

Kim: Tror du det var en test. Du har lige hævet 1kr på mit Mastercard og sendt det til en butik der hedder M-Kupon. Fuldstændig live. Så hvis du synes det går langsomt eller noget andet. Her har du modtaget terminalen, puttet den ind i et stik, installeret den og så kan du modtage betaling. Prøv at fortælle mig om det var svært.

Martin: Nej det vil jeg ikke sige det var!

Page 164 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Lilian: Fremover så vil det jo være sådan, at det vil blive fuldstændig integreret i kasseapparatet, lige som du betaler med Dankortet fysisk.

Kim: Det gør de flere steder i Randers, der trykker de på en knap på tastaturet så aktivere de den her indtastningsfelt.

Martin: Hvad har responsen været fra butikkerne rundt omkring i Randers?

Kim: Det har været fint, det tager bare lang tid, at rulle ud for os fordi vi skal lave aftaler. Vi har de samme problemstillinger som alle mulige andre med, at det skal ind i butikken og have lavet den aftale.

Lilian: Det der måske også er forskellen er hvis du fx får MobilPay, så laver du kun aftale med MobilPay og Danske Bank. Med os, i og med at vi ikke sidder på pengene, så skal du jo lave aftaler med dem du modtager betalinger fra. Det vil sige, at revisor og Mastercard, der har vi en indløser og der skal de lave aftaler med Clearhaus, som tager sig af alt det med kommunikationen.

Kim: Det kunne lige så godt være Nets, Nets har ikke vendt tilbage, så dem har vi ikke fået nogle aftaler med. Så vi kører stadig med Clearhaus og forventer at gøre det. I Tyskland der vil det være Eurolines og Brasilien vil det være to andre partner vi taler med og i Letland der er det en helt tredje part. Vi er en komponent i markedet som andre kan agere med.

Lilian: Det er på samme måde i dag, hvis en butik i dag skal kunne modtage penge, så har de en aftale med Nets og så har de måske en aftale med de forskellige loyalitetskort de har. Matas eller Brugsen foreningen.

Kim: Nu ved jeg slet ikke hvad din forudsætning er for, at forstå den her informationsstrøm, men det må vi jo se, hvad det er for noget tekst du leverer tilbage.

Martin: Hvis i ser på den slutforbruger der bruger MeeWallet, hvem ser i så der gør det lige nu, hvilke forbruger er det?

Page 165 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Kim: Vi havde et ældre ægtepar der brugte det, på Hotel Randers, de betalte 47.000kr. for et guldbryllup. Så det har været nogen fra den højere klasse. Vi har jo hverken aldersbegrænsning eller beløbsbegrænsning på, vi kan også behandle et bankkort hvis de stadig eksistere. Så når du spørg direkte hvem det er, jamen det er jo en bred kam. Vi står ikke og laver de der målinger på, om det er den ene eller den anden. Vi skal kunne bruges af laveste fællesnævner, det vil sige alle skal kunne bruge os. I indland og i udland.

Lilian: Alle som går rundt med en pung.

Kim: Eller kontanter.

Martin: Jeg tænkte bare, om i havde oplevet at der var flere unge eller flere mænd eller kvinder der bruger det?

Lilian: Nu har vi jo ikke en kæmpe brugerskare endnu, så det er måske svært at lave statistikker på det.

Kim: Nej det er ultra nemt, at lave statistikker på det nu, det er jævn bredt. Man kan sige, at det der skubber, det er jo når vi kommer ind, hvis vi sidder til et møde med en Chiliforening, så ser vi lige pludseligt at der er mange ansatte i butikkerne der går ind, og de har en hvis aldersgruppe. Så har vi haft lidt med sportsforeningerne at gøre, det skubber bare balancen helt vildt, at der så kommer 25 unge mennesker ind, som skal i gang med at lave et eller andet. Samtidig er der en koncentration hvor de bruger det henne.

Lilian: Selvfølgelig vil der jo altid være, et yngre publikum der tager løsningen og jeg tror det er 25-34 år der er den største forbrugersgruppe af sådan nogle løsninger. Det er svært at sige, når vi stadig er forstadiet.

Kim: Det der er mere interessant det er, at der er nogle butikker der oplever, at de ikke kan få indløsningsaftaler til Mastercard eller at det tager alt for lang tid. Vi har en 1-2 dage så er de oppe og køre. Det betyder, at de butikker hvor der kommer mange kunder og yngre kunder ind, som har et Mastercard debet og de kan ikke få lov at betale. Det er et interessant eksempel, fordi der bliver

Page 166 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

vores produkt forslået og løser udfordringen. Som en butik ikke kan få en indløsningsaftale i dag, andet os, og der har vi en hurtig konverteringsret, fordi ellers kan man ikke betale for sin vare. Det er det der er hele issue, det er, at vi virker i butikken og vi virker på en anden måde. Men vi virker i butikken. Det der med at virke på en anden måde, det er også vigtigt det er noget af den investering vi gør i fremtiden. Hvis du både virker godt i butikken og du virker godt på web online, så kan du sikkert også lavet noget rigtigt smart med ”pay with your friends”. Hvis du virker alle 3 steder så vil folk bruge dig. Men hvis kun den en ene ting virker, så har du et problem. Vi virker alle stederne. Vi laver ikke konto til konto overførelser mellem forbruger endnu, fordi vi ikke er en bank. Det er en udvidet bankservice der gør det. Så hvem skal betale os, for at levere den service. Vi har ansatte, vi har sikkerhed og andet, så det er en ting. En anden ting, online, der har vi et kæmpe projekt i gang med Hosting i Danmark og det bliver en helt anden måde, at forstille sig webhandel på og prissætningen er selvfølgelig også derefter. Det kan jeg godt nævne for dig, det løser nogle voldsomme problemer ude i Hosting. Dette er noget vi forhåbentlig har ude inde sommerferien. Den sidste ting, så er der ikke nogen der kan rører os i butikkerne, fordi lige nu, der sidder man og Swipp det er sms kvitteringer og mobiltelefoner derude og Danske Bank, det er spændende og alle vil have MobilPay, men det fungere bare ikke intuitivt godt. Men det der er vigtigst det er nu, at de er begyndt at komme med deres prissætning. En anden ting, som ikke andre rører ved i markedet, det er måske også lidt kompliceret. Men hvis du logger på via NemId, så vil jeg bare spørger dig om en ting, hvordan hænger NemId og kort sammen? De hænger ikke sammen. NemId der logger du på din bank og der for du adgang til nogle ting. Men bare fordi du logger på med NemId, ved skat eller andet så godkender det jo ikke det her kort. Lad mig give dig et eksempel. Jeg har købt et Mastercard på nettet fra en eller anden hjemmeside der sælger fraud Mastercard. Det går jeg ind og putter i mit Wallet, og jeg har endda valideret mig via NemId, med CPR – nummer osv. der er en stor sandsynlighed for, at jeg bliver nappet. Men der er ikke noget der forhindre mig i at gøre det. Så hvis du nu har et taletidskort købt på Shell og du har et Mastercard du har købt på nettet. Så er det forholdsvis enkelt at lave fraud. Det her løser det ikke, det løser til gengæld, at man som bank er forpligtiget til, at oplyse hvem ens bruger er. Det skal man over for finanstilsynet.

Lilian: Jeg tror det, en af grundene til at det også har taget tid det er, at vi som vi sagde fra starten af, at vi fokusere på alt omkring sikkerhed. Vi snakker ikke kun om Wallet delen, vi snakker om, at vi er en leverandør til hele det her mobilbetalings infrastruktur.

Martin: Nu når i snakker om sikkerhed, der er den gængse opfattelse, at mit kort det er sikkert for det kender jeg, det har jeg altid gjort, hvor mobilen er lidt mere usikkert. Hvordan kan man vende det så de forstår, at det passer ikke? Hvad er jeres tanke?

Kim: Er den her usikker? Hvis man vurdere den her som usikker, så vil en wallet på en telefon være lidt mere sikker.

Page 167 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Hvad tror i der skal til for, at overbevise forbrugerne om at det er sikkert?

Kim: For det første, skal jeg overbevise dig om, at du sidder tog aler om kort. Jeg sidder og snakker om Wallet. Det her er en samling af informationer, med masser af informationer. Det her er en betalingsoplysning. De Wallets der er bygget op omkring et kort, de overlever ikke i markedet, det er sådan noget MobilPay er ude i nu, det er de få ting de kan. Dem der er bygget til, at kunne håndtere sygesikringskortet, kørekortet, betalingskort og loyalitetskort de har en anden type sikkerhed. Når du taler om, den helt basale sikkerhed, så skal man kigge på hvor ligger data. Jeg ved ikke om du kender til PCI, payment card industry, det der er vigtigt omkring det, det er certificeringselement, det der følger det er kortnummeret.

Lilian: De der terminaler der er i butikkerne, de er certificeret.

Kim: I det øjeblik, hvor du står ude og du skal lave betalinger med et plastikkort, så propper du det i og så overfører chippen nogle oplysninger fra det kort, helt sikkert kortnummeret. Hvis det bliver opsnappet så kan du bruge det kortnummer til mange forskellige ting. Det vil sige, kortet her det indeholder sin egen information. Så taler man om hostet cardinvolvation, HCI, det er det her kost der bliver digitaliseret og lagt her ind på en sikker måde. Så ligger det på telefonen, stadig væk under PCI. Men vi gør det helt anderledes. Hvis du har ESTC her, så har de et kontonummer eller et kortnummer til at ligge her, det beholder de, men de udsteder et Meetag til os, og det bruger vi, til at køre der ude. Så der for, forlader dine sikre oplysninger, de forlader aldrig datacentralen. Det her må du ikke skrive om, for det er vores. Men det er derfor vores sikkerhed, og det er derfor vi er her. For der ingen der kan lave det her i dag. Hvis du tager din mobiltelefon, og vil betale i Sydfrankrig eller i Mexico. Så kommer man ud, man kan lave sin betaling og man kan tage det tilbage igen. Du har aldrig kompromitteret din data, fordi de har aldrig nogensinde forladt DK. Prøv at forstille dig det scenarie, at du kan rejse rundt i verden og du kan lave betalinger osv. men du har ingen kinamands chance for, at miste dit pasnummer, dit creditkortnummer eller dit kontonummer. Virker det ikke sikker?

Martin: Jo det synes jeg, men det er bare hvordan man skal forklare det til forbrugerne.

Kim: Det er en rejse som vi også skal på.

Page 168 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Ok, så det er noget i tror der kommer løbende af sig selv eller tror i man kan skubbe det?

Kim: Vi er ude i et kompleks digitalt marked. Hvor tilliden om internettet skal være der eller ikke skal være der, det er den filosofi der er. Lige nu handler det om, historien, at du kan bruge det og du ikke mister noget ved det, det er det der driver markedet, det er at forbrugeren føler sig sikker.

Lilian: Jeg vil sige, at alle aldersgrupper i dag er fuldstændig connected til deres telefoner, hvis de ikke mener, at de kan have noget sikkert på deres telefoner hvor er vi så henne? Man kan så sige, at det ikke skal være lageret på telefonen, fordi den kan blive stjålet osv. fx, når man køber App’s osv. så tager man backup og så ligger det i skyen. Man kan sige, at du har lavet et password så du har en form for sikkerhed, det er det samme vi prøver at gøre med pungen. Vi prøver at digitalisere det. Hvis jeg nu skulle åbne min MeeWallet, vi gemmer ikke creditkortet, så hvis jeg skal gå ind og se mine kort og konti, så kan jeg ikke se mit kontonummer, jeg kan kun se de fire sidste cifre, og det kan jeg ikke bruge til noget. Så hvis nogen stjæler min mobil, og tænker ”ej jeg skal se hvad hun har i sin digitale pung”, så er der ingen måde de kan komme ind og se mit kortnummer – det er jo også en sikkerhed.

Martin: Så man kan sige, at det er de facts man skal forklare folk.

Lilian: Men det tror jeg kommer helt af sig selv, fordi jo mere folk bruger de forskellige sikkerhedsløsninger, så begynder de, og der kommer flere og flere historier i pressen, om fraud og dårlige forbruger erfaring. Så begynder folk at sige, uhh.. ha. Det er allerede kommet. Hvis man kigger på nogle af de international fx England. England har jo haft mange flere mobilbetalingsløsninger og meget tidligere end os, og USA er der rigtig meget boss om det, fordi der er Google, operatører som Goggle har købt og Samsung osv. så det der kommer frem, det er at kunderne vil have sikkerhed, for det er jo deres penge.

Kim: Jeg tror dit fokus er forkert på forbrugeren. Forbrugeren har stadig så meget tillid til bankindustrien, at det de udsteder, det er det man vil tage. Det bankerne kigger på, det er så butikkerne, hvad bliver accepteret. Nøglen til det her, det er ikke forbrugeren, det er ikke bankerne, det er at være til stede i butikkerne. Det er vores perspektiv på det, det er her vor udvekslingen i mellem vare og betaling skal være. Det har man så bare glemt, især da man laver ” Pay with your friends” løsninger. Fordi det er super godt, men hvordan skal du tjene penge på det? Der giver ikke mening, det kan afløses af så meget andet. Der hvor det er vigtigt, det er der hvor du overleverer en ydelse eller en vare og skal modtage noget, der skal være tryghed og sikkerhed og andet, fordi der

Page 169 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

er så mange andre elementer. Er varen ok, hvordan leverer jeg den tilbage, eller det ene eller andet. Men det er helt sikkert at du på den anden side skal kunne modtage din ting.

Martin: Hvad tror i der skal til, før Dansk Supermarkeder og Coop, selvom Coop har været lidt ind over det, før de arbejder videre med det og begynder at bruge mobilbetalinger ?

Kim: Ved du hvad, det er et spørgsmål om de træffer en beslutning. Den beslutning bliver typisk truffet, når de har et i incitament til det. Jeg ved at de bliver rendt på dørene af rigtig mange, jeg har også været der. Vi ser ikke nogle grund til det længere. Vores marked ligger et andet sted, så når Dansk Supermarked og Coop er klar, så træder vi selvfølgelig ombord i dem. Det der er vigtigt at forstå også, det er at Dansk Supermarked, i hvert fald i pressen, at de sidder i en eller anden form for samarbejde med MobilPay. Det glæder vi os så til at se hvordan det er, på den anden side har vi så Swipp. Coop er bundet meget sammen lige nu, med noget fælles bankværk. Det er er det interessante, ved de løsninger, det er at vi taler om at de binder sig op på nogle betalingsmidler som så nærmest skal bindes til deres brand. Det vil være det samme som, skulle forstille sig, at Coop skulle ud og konkurrer med Mastercard, på en eller anden måde. Eller siger nej til Mastercard fordi de har noget andet. Jeg tror det er en fejl strategi, i mit perspektiv, hvis det er det de vælger, i stedet for at åbne op og sige, vi er egentlig interesseret i, at jo flere der kan komme ind og betale for nogle vare de handler her hos os, jo bedre er det. I stedet for at sige, at de skal bruge Swipp eller man skal bruge mobilPay. Det tror jeg, der er meget lidt fremtid i. Men i stedet for at sige, at vi har Coopkortet og vi har Matas, vi har konto til konto overførelser og vi har andre typer Wallets, fx Meewallet. Hvis forbrugeren vælger at købe den her pung og bruger den her pung, så kan de stadig handle vare ved os. Og ikke omvendt. Hvis jeg lige pludselig køber en pung ved Nie , så kan jeg ikke handle ved Coop mere. Jeg ved ikke om det giver mening, det gør det i hvert fald ikke i min verden. Så jeg håber ikke det er det de gør, men vi får at se. Markedet er meget umodent lige der hvor vi taler nu.

Martin: Er det ikke også lidt stædighed af Danske Bank og Swipp, at det skal være enten os eller ingenting? Jeg tænker bare, at fordi Dansk supermarkedet har MobilPay, det er fordi Mærsk er inden over.

Kim: Nej, man kan sagtens spinde en masse historier på det, men jeg tror meget tidligt i vores forløb, gjorde vi det også og var påvirkelig omkring det. Men jeg tror i dag, det er industriborgeren i dag og så er der noget konkurrence i markedet, hvem kommer først ind de forskellige steder, men i sidste ende er det jo Dansk Supermarkedet der skal se en fordel i at gøre noget.

Page 170 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Lilian: Med tiden bliver det jo også forbrugeren der kommer til at bestemme.

Kim: Du kan se Dansk Supermarked, Coop de tog rigtig hurtigt imod Mastercard og Via og lavede hurtigt indløsningsaftaler med Nets. Men der var forholdsvis lang tid til at Dansk Supermarked tog der ind. Altså den gang jeg arbejde i Dansk Supermarked, selvom det er mange år siden, der tog man ikke Visa eller Mastercard. Der tog man kun Dankort og vi sad stadig med checks og stemplede. Det var først i slutningen af 90’erne, at Mastercard begyndt at blive anvendt, hvis ikke det var senere. Sådan vil det være lidt her, hvor moden man er. Altså hvis du ser hele købmandskab på det, hvad er det for nogle fordele det giver Dansk Supermarked at modtage mobilbetaling.

Lilian: Altså i England, jeg oprettede konti i England for ikke så lang tid siden. Det første jeg fik var to checks og jeg tænkte hvad skal jeg med dem?!

Kim: Min pointe den er, hvornår er er det tipping point, hvor det bliver interessant for fx Dansk Supermarked. Hvor mange bruger skal der til og hvor mange vil så handle med det? Det som Dansk Supermarked og Coop vil få med vores løsning det er, at vi kan samle en række af en masse forbrugers betalingsmidler i én løsning. Lige meget hvad kan de betale for varen i Netto og for varen i Fakta. Det argument skal ligesom brænde igennem og det ved vi, det er ikke brændt igennem endnu, der sidder man og taler om det kontantløse samfund, der er mit selskab slet ikke endnu. Det kontantløsesamfund det er en statsløsning det er ikke noget der er pragmatik i endnu.

Martin: Vi du ikke også se Swipp og MobilPay lidt mere som et kort ? Det er jo ikke en løsning i sig selv .

Kim: Præcis, du siger det så rigtigt!

Martin: Det er deres Dankort.

Kim: De har gjort det nemmere at bruge bankservices, til at overføre penge mellem hinanden.

Martin: Det positive er vel, at folk er begyndt at vende sig til at bruge telefonen.

Page 171 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Kim: Det er også flere i banksektoren der har forstået, at de to løsninger er klar til at blive anvendt af en professionel wallet.

Martin: Nu har Swipp jo opkøbt Pay og Samsung har købt Looppay, er det en tendens i generelt ser.

Kim: Ja folk de famler febrilsk i markedet og tror at de enten kan opkøbe for at få noget der gør deres egene løsninger bedre.

Lilian: Det er jo typisk, Google har jo Goolewallet, de var jo en af de første. De gik så ind og lavede kort. Men det er typisk, der sker jo nogle ændringer i markedet, måske ser vi også Danske Bank gøre det på et tidspunkt, hvor de indser at det her ikke er fremtidens løsning, findes der noget i markedet vi kan bruge og så går man ud og opkøber nogen.

Kim: Det her er jo ikke noget nyt, det sker jo hele tiden, nu er der bare så meget fokus på et område, så lægger man mere mærke til, at der er nogen der gør noget. Det svarer lidt til, at der kommer et nyt ord i markedet, så bruger alle det. Sådan er det bare. Det her med at Samsung de Køber Looppay, vi sidder alle sammen og tænker, hvorfor? Det er ikke kun os, det er generelt markedet. At købe noget der kan snakke sammen med en magnetbånd. Hvis de ikke har noget andet i støbeskeen, så er det i hvert fald en kortsigtet løsning til at komme hurtigt af markedet. Jeg tror mange af de her ting, det er strategiske ting. Hvis du tager, uden at vide det, hvis man tager Pay og Swipps samarbejde så var det meget naturligt. Man har ikke sådan en type ting, at køre med i Swipp, så har man købt noget som man mente virkede på en anden type forretningsplatform. Så må vi se om de får de synergier ud af det. Omvendt så Pay, de havde en levetid på 9 mdr. så det var frisk gået af teleselskaberne.

Lilian: Der var jo mange grunde til det ikke virker for teleselskaberne. Man kan se i England, de har frasolgt deres og USA har Google der lige har købt.

Kim: Det er derfor Lilian er hos os, fordi den her og den her, teleselskaberne ejer så meget af den her, så de burde have en interesse i det. De kommer aldrig til at kunne drive en bankforretning som jeg ser det, for vi har ikke sådan nogen kenyansk M-Pesa. Bankerne er dybt funderet i infrastruktur og lovgivninger og alt muligt andet, i sådan nogle samfund end dem vi lever i. Men kommer du til

Page 172 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Brasilien eller kommer du til Afrika, så er det en helt anden infrastruktur der skal til. Det andet hvor de virkelig burde tænke strategisk teleselskaberne, det var at sælge devices indenfor terminalindustrien. Det er noget af det, Lilian bruger meget af hendes tid på, det er at finde de teleselskaber som faktisk tænker sådan. I stedet for, at økonomisere og finde ud af, at nu skal vi igen fyrre 100 mennesker, så se hvor er det det går hen ad. Det arbejder vi strategisk på at finde. Det kalder man MNOs. Teleselskaberne skal være med til at det her lykkes. Hvis du tager sådan nogle NFC løsninger, som de alle sammen taler om ude i markedet, så har Apple en kæmpe stor fordel, fordi de ejer deres egen devises. De kan selvs ertificere deres NFC dit og dat. Det er derfor de ikke åbner op for alle mulige andre. Det kan Samsung ikke, fordi de er afhæng af, at der er nogle andre der kan levere varen til dem. Telenor har jo heller ikke nogen, de har ikke en device, de sælger bredt ud, det afhænger af SIM – kort. Apple er enorm unik på den måde og det er der ikke andre der kan.

Lilian: Apple er den eneste , der har formået, at gå ind og sætte krav til operatørne, hvor man har været vant til, at det var operatørne der har sat kravene for ellers har de ikke ville tage deres devices. Apple har været de eneste der har gået ind og sagt, det her er hvad i må sælge os for, det er vores margen og sådan og sådan skal det være. De er også de første der sådan rigtig introducerede, at lige pludselig var kundeforholdet ikke udelukket ved operatørne, men man har det med iTunes og Apple. Det har været kæmpe revolutionerende og har fået operatørne til at tisse i bukserne, fordi lige pludselig var der faren for at de, kun blev dem der byggede netværket. Tilbage i år 2000 der var der ikke 3G og det hele virkede så langt væk, de services, har operatørne jo slet ikke kunne magte på samme måde at levere, som Apple har, men det er jo heller ikke deres arbejdsområde, det er jo ikke mobilteknologi. Heller ikke hele bankverden er operatører, det er ikke deres speciale. Så derfor den måde, at udviklingen har ændret sig. At mobiltelefonen, det er ikke bare et spørgsmål om mobiloperatør, det er jo alle de andre aktører der har del i hele oplevelsen på din telefon.

Martin: Ser i, at mobilbetalinger overtager helt plastikmarkedet eller vil der altid være plastikkort?

Lilian: I fremtiden ja.

Kim: Ved du hvad, det er ikke mobilbetalingsindustrien der skal bevise det, det er kortindustrien der skal bevise, at de er berettiget til markedet. Du kan sige at checks det har vi mistet, i hvert fald her i Nordeuropa, det har vi ikke længere fordi det viste sig, at det ikke havde nogle berigtigelse længere. Alligevel er der nogen gange hvor du skal ud og købe en bil, så får du udstedet sådan en banknoteret check ting. Jeg tror ikke plastikkortet det forsvinder.

Page 173 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Er det ikke også kulturelt, et langt stykke hen ad vejen? Hvis man tager Nordamerika der bruger stadig checks til alting.

Kim: Det er fordi, at sikkerhed på kortene er så lav. Der bruger du magnetstriben eller nogle gange, har vi set, at de har kort der ikke engang har PIN-kode, det er bare ”show your card”, og så stikker du det i automaten, så betaler du alligevel. Der er masser af løsninger der ude, det er ikke til at vide hvor plastikkortet ender henne. Kan du lige nu forstille dig en mobiltelefon uden SIM-kort ?

Martin: Ja, det kunne man godt. Det kunne Apple godt, ved jeg. Jeg vil ikke kunne gøre det, men jeg tror godt man kan.

Kim: Måske, SIM-Kortet er det næst største udover plastikkortet i forhold til betalingsindustrien.

Martin: Har Apple ikke været ude og sige, at de gerne vil fjerne SIM-kortet hvis de havde muligheden for det ?

Lilian: Jo, så har man lavet det der hedder Softsim, som gør at man kan proportionere firskellige netværk på kortet. De overtager abonnementsforholdet, og bliver en service provider. I gamle telesprog, alt efter hvor det er så er det, roaming eller det nye netværk som Apple aftale med. Men der er vi ikke helt endnu.

Kim: Under Steve Jobs, der ville de en vej, alt det der med, det de ville var at alt blev wifi drevet. Det kan du se det ligger i deres strategi i dag også. Når de laver devices så ligger der næsten altid en uden SIM-kort i, det er fordi man regner med at internettet bliver globalt. Det er i hvert fald ikke gået så hurtigt som det skulle.

Lilian: Så længe man ikke har SIM handover til de forskellige netværk, så kan man ikke gøre det. For så forsvinder det, hvis man er i gang med et telefonopkald, så cutter den.

Kim: Jeg tror pointen må være, at ligesom med kontanter, de vinder inpass mere og mere. Især i Sydeuropa – Tyskland er faktisk det land i Europa der bruger flest kontanter og det er stigende. Det er fordi man ikke vil bruge plastikkort. Det er mere den slags perspektiver man skal se det. Er

Page 174 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

MobilPayment på vej et stadie hvor det er så sikkert og overbevisende, at man vil buge det. Der er et ja og et nej, og der er butikkerne det afgørende element, som jeg ser det. Plastikkortene, jeg tror da de vil leve fra nu af og lang tid frem. Kun der hvor det giver mening. Stille og roligt forsvinde, ud fra andre steder for der bliver det overtaget. Det er der jo en tusindårige historie på.

Lilian: Men jeg tror, at vi kommer til at eksistere et godt stykke tid endnu.

Kim: Måske, hvis man skal tænke økonomien ind i det. Du skal tænke på, at en ting er hvordan transaktionsprisen er og den slags ting. Men der er jo en helt anden økonomiskaspekt i det her, som formendelig vil være det afgørende for butikkerne. Det er hvem har risikoen på pengene. Hvis det er sådan, at de her nye typer mobilbetalinger er i stand til, at sørge for at de ikke kan brydes eller reducere tabet voldsomt meget. Så vil den økonomiske incitament til at gå ind i sådan nogle slags ting, være ekstremt mbeget højere. Det er b. la. også derfor vi er i Sydamerika. I Mexico, hvis man har brugt sit Mastercard i en terminal i en butik eller på nettet. Senest 14 dage efter, har du fået en nyt Mastercard udstedet. Fordi der er det sikkert allerede blevet misbrugt. Der er nogen der skal dække det og det gør Mastercard. Et land som DK, der har vi ekstreme lave priser på transaktioner. Jeg sidder mange gange og tænker, når folk sidder og drøfter de her priser, det er helt vanvittigt, på de marginaler vi er nede på, at vi stadig sidder og snakker om priserne. Når man så kommer til andre lande, så er det jo 7,9,13% du betaler af beløbet, fordi der er en høj risiko pga. fraud. Så der er rigtig mange der siger, hvorfor taler i så meget om priser og om svindel. Det er det der er det centrale.

Lilian: Men alle de her ting bliver reguleret af PET indenfor EU og noget der hedder PST2. Her bliver alle de her mobilbetalingsløsninger også reguleret.

Martin: Så her kommer der regulativer på hvad det skal koste?

Lilian: Ja, maksimal.

Appendix 6 – Detailed introductions of the experts John G Pedersen:

Har arbejdet med mobiler gennem de sidste 20 år. Han har gennem sin velansete hjemmeside meremobil.dk, som han startede i 2003, formidlet de nyeste tendenser inden for mobilområdet og derved også mobilbetaling.

Page 175 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

John G Pedersen holder foredrag of workshop omkring smartphones og hvordan man kan optimere sin brug både privat og i virksomhedssammenhæng.

John G Pedersen har flere gange optrådt i nyhederene og andre tv platforme som ekspert inden for mobile området.

Kim Vinding Larsen

Chief Executive officer of MEEdkk A/S. A Danish transaction provider for authorization of ex. mobile payments. MEEdkk A/S is based on license of MEE (Mobile Economic Ecosystem), which is a new platform for generations of payment services to come. The functionality and design define a new habitat and a new era within payment infrastructure. Today’s plastic card based and dependent payment infrastructure is coming to an end; only subject to further sub-optimization. No new revolutionary steps can be taken to develop card and related platform into major competitor advantages - similar to the cheque system a decade or more ago and more present the currently adoption of LED light technology in exchange for light bulbs. Successors will make their entrance in the market, establish new platforms - new habitats - that will fertilize evolution but still compatible to legacy and the present ecosystem and most important - having the ability to co-exist and embrace other similar solutions. MEE is such a solution.

Troels Asmussen

Company: Nordea

Job title: Senior business developer

Department: Mobile and emergent payments

Product owner on SWIPP

Former member of Bankgruppen. RBF/LP/

A counsel members of big banks

Appendix 7 – Interview guide

Interviewguide til John G.

Vil du præsentere dig? Uddannelsesbaggrund, profession?

Hvor lang tid har du beskæftiget dig med meremobil.dk?

Page 176 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvad tror du kendetegner den typiske bruger af mobilbetalinger?

- Alder - Køn - Demografi

Bruger du selv et mobilbetalingsprodukt?

- I så fald, hvilket? - I hvilke situationer finder du det smart/godt?

Hvad ville få dig til at skifte produkt?

Da markedet pt. ikke er direkte rentabelt, hvordan ser du mulighederne for profit eller former fordele for udbyderne af mobilbetaling – såsom relationer, brand value, kundedata eller lign.?

Ser du nogen synergi effekter? I så fald hvilke?

Tror du at markedet er i vækst eller mættet?

- Er den eksisterende mobilbetalingsform en langsigtet løsning eller en midlertidig overgang til en ny betalingsform? - Hvilke alternativer tror du vil kunne true mobilbetalings position?

Hvordan ser du fremtidens løsninger for mobilbetalinger?

Hvad ser du som den væsentligste faktor for udviklingen af mobilbetalingsmarkedet?

- De 3 væsentlige faktorer?

Hvad tror du at SWIPP’s opkøb af PAII har af konsekvenser for konkurrencen på markedet?

Hvad er din holdning til den tilgang SWIPP har haft for at hverve nye kunder og deres brugerplatform.

- Hvordan ser du SWIPP’s styrker og svagheder på markedet

Hvis du skulle give en strategisk anbefaling til SWIPP, hvad skulle den være?

Interviewguide til Troels

Vil du præsentere dig selv? Uddannelsesbaggrund, jobtitel og jobansvar?

Hvad har og er din rolle i SWIPP?

Hvad har SWIPP største udfordringer været i og efter lanceringen af SWIPP?

Page 177 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvordan ser du SWIPPs position på markedet?

Hvem ser du som de største konkurrenter?

Hvilken værdi og/eller merværdi skaber SWIPP for ejerne og forbrugerne?

Hvilke begrænsninger ser du på eksisterende løsninger? (NETS)

Hvad tror du kendetegner den typiske bruger af mobilbetalinger i dag?

Hvordan tror du potentielle forbrugere bliver overbevist om at bruge SWIPP, fremfor konkurrenter på markedet og andre betalingsformer?

Hvilke fremtidige initiativer eller tiltag ser du som vigtige i at integrere SWIPP som en fremtrædende spiller i mobilbetalingsmarkedet? Især med tanke på detailbranchen?

Ser du SWIPPs opkøb af PAII som en tendens i markedet? (Markedet har mange alternativer og innovative løsninger)

Hvordan skal SWIPP konkurrere imod nye store spillere på markedet så som Apple pay, Google wallet og Powatag?

Hvilke styrker og svagheder ser du i SWIPPs nuværende positionering i markedet?

Interviewguide til Kim

Vil du præsentere dig selv? Uddannelsesbaggrund, jobtitel og jobansvar?

Hvem ser du som de største konkurrenter?

Hvilken værdi og/eller merværdi skaber MEEWALLET for forbrugerne og butikkerne?

I har et samarbejde med Ekvitteringen, er det samarbejdspartner som dette der kan være med til at skabe mer værdi?

Hvad tror du der skal til før de store forretningskæder, såsom COOP og Dansk Supermarked vil være med?

Ser du mobilbetaling som en afløser til Dankort, VISA og etc. Eller et alternativ?

Hvilke fordele ser du for kunde, ved at bruge mobilbetalingsløsninger, såsom jeres MEWALLET

Hvad tror du kendetegner den typiske bruger af MEWALLET?

Page 178 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Vi fik opfattelsen af vores fokusgruppe at folk ikke har opdaget potentialet i mobilbetaling men kun ser det som en bekvemmelig måde at overføre penge til hinanden på, ser du også det? Og hvad gør i for at folk kommer væk fra den opfattelse?

Hvad gør I for at udbrede MEWALLET blandt forbrugerne, markedsføring , mund-til-mund, uddannelse af personale??

Hvordan tror du potentielle forbrugere bliver overbevist om at bruge SWIPP, fremfor konkurrenter på markedet og andre betalingsformer?

Hvilke fremtidige initiativer eller tiltag ser du som vigtige i at integrere MEWALLET som en fremtrædende spiller i mobilbetalingsmarkedet? Især med tanke på detailbranchen?

Hvor stor rolle spiller det at have et samarbejde med, eksempelvis banker, VISA og mobilselskaber, hvis det har btydning?

Ser du SWIPPs opkøb af PAII og Samsung opkøb af Loop Pay som en tendens i markedet?

Hvordan skal MEWALLET konkurrere imod nye store spillere på markedet så som Apple pay, Google wallet og Powatag?

Hvilke styrker og svagheder ser du i SWIPPs nuværende positionering i markedet?

Appendix 8 – Interview guide focus group Introduktion – Introduktion af os.

Emne – Emne introduktion. Formål, begrundelse og årsag for valget

Guidelines:

Vi optager hvad der bliver sagt. Vi stiller nogle holdningsspørgsmål og derefter må der bydes ind:

 Åben diskussion  Holdninger er vigtige og derfor er der ingen forkerte svar

1. Del

Hvad er mobilbetalinger for jer?

Hvilke situationer bruger i mobilbetalinger?

- Hvad er fordelene? - Hvad er ulemperne? - Hvor ofte bruger i mobilen til betalinger?

Har i haft nogen positive eller negative oplevelser med mobilbetalinger?

Når I bruger mobilbetaling, hvorfor foretrækker i så at bruge mobilbetaling fremfor andre betalingsformer?

Page 179 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvad kunne have indvirkning på jeres beslutning om at bruge mobilen til betalinger i butikker?

VIS VIDEO - http://www.meewallet.com/how_to_video.php https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8U0CNyLHX0

2. Del Har jeres holdning til brugen af mobilbetalinger ændret sig?

- Hvorfor, hvorfor ikke?

(Kan denne form for løsning erstatte jeres valg af andre betalingsformer)

Vil i udfylde dette vedlagte skema?

Page 180 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Appendix 9 – Products and prices of MobilePay

Appendix 10 – Products and prices of Swipp Swipp Erhverv er en betalingsløsning, der sikrer, at din forretning kan modtage betaling fra dine kunder med en smartphone. Betaling med Swipp er et supplement til de eksisterende betalingsmetoder som kort og kontanter. Med Swipp Erhverv kan du reducere mængden af kontanter, og du slipper for at håndtere byttepenge. Du har pengene på din konto senest bankdagen efter kunden har god kendt betalingen på sin smartphone.

Hvem kan bruge Swipp Erhverv

• I første omgang er det primært mindre erhvervskunder som fx frisører, fysioterapeuter, foreninger, cafeer, kiosker o lign.

Page 181 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

• Det vil typisk være erhvervskunder med en eller få kasseterminaler. Hvem kan betale med SwippAlle kunder der har oprettet en Swipp aftale hos deres eget pengeinstitut i mobilbank eller NetbankHvordan fungerer Swipp?

• Kunden skal have oprettet en Swipp aftale og forretningen skal være tilmeldt Swipp Erhverv med et mobiltelefonnummer.

• Kunden indtaster forretningens mobiltelefonnummer og det beløb, som skal betales til forretningen.

• Herefter godkender kunden beløbet via sin smartphone som betaling for ydelsen.

• Forretningen modtager straks en kvittering via SMS, som bekræfter at betalingen er gennemført af kunden.

• Pengene bliver overført til det kontonummer, som er tilmeldt Swipp Erhverv - og betalingen kan efterfølgende ses som en postering i forretningens Netbank.

• Prisen for Swipp Erhverv er indtil videre 0 kr.

• Kunden kan overføre op til 10.000 kr. om dagen.

• Der er ingen øvre grænse for, hvor mange penge forretningen kan modtage om dagen.

Mobile enheder

• Du behøver ikke anvende en smartphone til Swipp Erhverv. Det eneste krav til telefonen er, at den kan modtage

SMS’er.

• Der kan tilknyttes et eller flere mobilnumre til dit kontonummer.

• Du kan ikke anvende et mobilnummer, hvis det allerede er tilmeldt Swipp.

Tilmeld dig Swipp Erhverv på nordea.dk/swipperhverv eller ring til 70 33 44 44, hvis der er yderligere spørgsmål

Appendix 11 – Price examples Swipp:

Hej Hans,

Som nævnt har vi et retail API der understøtter instant capture. Transaktionsprisen er mellem 60 og 90 øre.

Kim Albertsen, Swipp ApS, BDM

Vermundsgade 38A

Page 182 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

2100 København Ø

+45 22 555 119

[email protected] www.swipp.dk

Hej Kim.

Nu har jeg været i kontakt med jeres konkurrenter og her er der en månedlig omkostning forbundet med størstedelen af deres løsninger. Har I også det?

Men for lige at følge op på vores telefonsamtale, er det så rigtigt forstået at der ikke er oprettelsesgebyr for hverken telefonnummer - eller PoS-løsning?

Og transaktionsomkostningerne har en minimumgrænse på 60 øre, selvom volumen er lille?

Og er det rigtigt forstået at online betalingsmuligheder kun omfatter telefonnummer-løsningen?

Hej Hans,

Tak for din mail.

Det kan jeg bekræfte. Vi har ikke andre omkostninger end dem jeg har beskrevet for dig. Dog vil det kræve en integration til kassen samt fx en 2D scanner i den forbindelse.

Bh, Kim

MobilePay:

(Se bilag 9)

Page 183 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

MeeWallet:

Page 184 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Page 185 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Appendix 12 – Spss Data Crosstabs

[DataSet1] C:\Users\martin\Desktop\SWIPP.sav Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Alder * Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere 979 86,4% 154 13,6% 1133 100,0% usikker end andre betalingsformer

Alder * Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer Crosstabulation Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre Total betalingsformer Meget Lidt Hverken Lidt Meget enig enig eller uenig uenig Count 5 17 19 8 26 75 Expected 6,4 12,6 21,9 8,8 25,2 75,0 Under Count 25 % of Total 0,5% 1,7% 1,9% 0,8% 2,7% 7,7% Residual -1,4 4,4 -2,9 -,8 ,8 Count 5 35 36 26 77 179 Expected 15,4 30,2 52,3 21,0 60,2 179,0 26-35 Count % of Total 0,5% 3,6% 3,7% 2,7% 7,9% 18,3% Alder Residual -10,4 4,8 -16,3 5,0 16,8 Count 14 39 65 35 88 241 Expected 20,7 40,6 70,4 28,3 81,0 241,0 36-45 Count % of Total 1,4% 4,0% 6,6% 3,6% 9,0% 24,6% Residual -6,7 -1,6 -5,4 6,7 7,0 Count 28 44 88 19 99 278 Expected 23,9 46,9 81,2 32,7 93,4 278,0 46-55 Count % of Total 2,9% 4,5% 9,0% 1,9% 10,1% 28,4%

Page 186 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Residual 4,1 -2,9 6,8 -13,7 5,6 Count 25 25 64 24 34 172 Expected 14,8 29,0 50,2 20,2 57,8 172,0 56-65 Count % of Total 2,6% 2,6% 6,5% 2,5% 3,5% 17,6% Residual 10,2 -4,0 13,8 3,8 -23,8 Count 7 5 14 3 5 34 Expected 2,9 5,7 9,9 4,0 11,4 34,0 over 66 Count % of Total 0,7% 0,5% 1,4% 0,3% 0,5% 3,5% Residual 4,1 -,7 4,1 -1,0 -6,4 Count 84 165 286 115 329 979 Expected 84,0 165,0 286,0 115,0 329,0 979,0 Total Count % of Total 8,6% 16,9% 29,2% 11,7% 33,6% 100,0%

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 66,638a 20 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 69,642 20 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 21,359 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 979 a. 2 cells (6,7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2,92.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,261 ,000 Nominal by Cramer's ,130 ,000 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 979

Page 187 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * 979 86,4% 154 13,6% 1133 100,0% Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer

Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer Crosstabulation Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere Total usikker end andre betalingsformer Meget Lidt Hverken Lidt Meget enig enig eller uenig uenig Count 65 59 104 23 21 272 Expected 23,3 45,8 79,5 32,0 91,4 272,0 bruger ikke Count mobilbetaling % of 6,6% 6,0% 10,6% 2,3% 2,1% 27,8% Total Bruger du en Residual 41,7 13,2 24,5 -9,0 -70,4 mobilbetalingsapp? Count 19 106 182 92 308 707 - Ja Expected 60,7 119,2 206,5 83,0 237,6 707,0 bruger Count mobilbetaling % of 1,9% 10,8% 18,6% 9,4% 31,5% 72,2% Total Residual -41,7 -13,2 -24,5 9,0 70,4 Count 84 165 286 115 329 979 Expected 84,0 165,0 286,0 115,0 329,0 979,0 Total Count % of 8,6% 16,9% 29,2% 11,7% 33,6% 100,0% Total

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 197,277a 4 ,000

Page 188 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Likelihood Ratio 205,771 4 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 174,086 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 979 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 23,34.

Statistics Min Jeg Jeg Jeg Jeg Jeg Jeg Jeg D Jeg Jeg Det nuvær forven vil forv er synt synt De kan e vil Mob Mob kan giv ende ter at brug ente ikke es es t stol t kun ilbet ilbet bruge er mobil skifte e r at bek mob mobi gå e e ne alin alin min mi betali mobil mob brug ymr ilbet lbeta r på r inte g er g mobilb g ngsap betali ilbet e et alin ling hu sik n grer enkl kan etalings fler p ngsap alin mob for g er gør rti ker y e ere give løsning e lever p i g ilbet at sim mine ge hed t min mig når jeg mu op til fremti ofter alin min pelt købs re en o e en er i lig mine den e, g e at ople en g kort bedr udlande hed behov hvis ofter pers brug velse d s (eks e t er og min e i ond e r be m emp købe og forven e frem ata bedr tal a elvi ople stør tninge ven tide bliv e in r s vels re r ner n er g t med e fle brug mis m lem ksi er brug ed skor bili det t når da t og tet jeg nk bon brug ort u er ell mob er ilbet ko alin nt g an ter 845 757 963 993 101 865 832 91 975 1 864 937 850 738 931 V 7 6 0 Nal 0 id 9

Page 189 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

M 288 376 170 140 116 268 301 21 158 1 269 196 283 395 202 is 7 2 si 4 n g Mo 1 5 3 1 2 5 3 5 5 1 5 5 3 5 5 de

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling ,806 Adequacy. Approx. Chi-Square 1830,065 Bartlett's Test of df 78 Sphericity Sig. ,000

Communalities Initial Extractio n Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever 1,000 ,612 op til mine behov og forventninger Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis 1,000 ,667 mine venner bruger det

Page 190 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere 1,000 ,659 i fremtiden Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge 1,000 ,689 Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser 1,000 ,594 bedre Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort 1,000 ,535 eller kontanter Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden 1,000 ,698 Det er nyt og smart 1,000 ,674 Mobilbetaling er enklere 1,000 ,641 Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre 1,000 ,687 købeoplevelse Det giver mig flere muligheder og større 1,000 ,611 fleksibilitet Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre 1,000 ,590 betalingsformer Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort 1,000 ,505 (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort) Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained Componen Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums of Squared t Squared Loadings Loadings Tota % of Cumulativ Tota % of Cumulativ Tota % of Cumulativ l Varianc e % l Varianc e % l Varianc e % e e e 3,87 29,831 29,831 3,87 29,831 29,831 2,77 21,321 21,321 1 8 8 2 1,96 15,109 44,941 1,96 15,109 44,941 2,01 15,460 36,781 2 4 4 0 1,23 9,493 54,433 1,23 9,493 54,433 1,78 13,739 50,520 3 4 4 6 1,08 8,351 62,785 1,08 8,351 62,785 1,59 12,264 62,785 4 6 6 4 5 ,787 6,053 68,838 6 ,727 5,590 74,428 7 ,632 4,862 79,290 8 ,550 4,233 83,523 9 ,531 4,088 87,611 10 ,476 3,661 91,272

Page 191 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

11 ,418 3,218 94,490 12 ,383 2,947 97,437 13 ,333 2,563 100,000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Component Matrixa Component 1 2 3 4 Mobilbetaling er enklere ,724 -,330 ,079 -,037 Det giver mig flere muligheder og større ,688 -,361 ,056 -,066 fleksibilitet Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre ,617 -,252 -,478 -,119 købeoplevelse Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser ,604 ,318 -,321 -,159 bedre

Page 192 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort ,599 -,407 ,030 -,100 eller kontanter Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere ,582 ,493 ,137 -,242 i fremtiden Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort ,524 -,368 ,142 ,273 (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort) Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge ,565 ,572 ,142 ,149 Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever ,470 ,530 ,122 ,310 op til mine behov og forventninger Det er nyt og smart ,368 -,113 -,666 ,287 Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden ,381 -,464 ,581 -,026 Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre ,382 ,234 ,167 ,601 betalingsformer Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis ,443 ,356 ,098 -,578 mine venner bruger det Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 4 components extracted.

Rotated Component Matrixa Component 1 2 3 4 Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden ,754 -,022 ,025 -,358 Mobilbetaling er enklere ,735 ,204 ,109 ,215 Det giver mig flere muligheder og større ,724 ,190 ,053 ,221 fleksibilitet Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort ,685 ,143 -,036 ,211 eller kontanter Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort ,642 -,123 ,246 ,133 (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort) Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis ,107 ,808 -,026 -,039 mine venner bruger det Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere ,121 ,722 ,351 ,015 i fremtiden Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser ,098 ,562 ,222 ,468 bedre Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre ,157 -,091 ,744 ,057 betalingsformer Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever ,011 ,308 ,716 ,065 op til mine behov og forventninger Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge ,056 ,489 ,666 ,055

Page 193 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Det er nyt og smart ,102 -,105 ,140 ,796 Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre ,429 ,228 -,079 ,667 købeoplevelse Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.a a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

Component Transformation Matrix Componen 1 2 3 4 t 1 ,681 ,489 ,402 ,368 2 -,654 ,540 ,524 -,079 3 ,329 ,041 ,230 -,915 4 -,009 -,684 ,715 ,146 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

Scale: Service and safety

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Cronbach's N of Alpha Alpha Based Items on Standardized Items ,794 ,794 5

Item Statistics Mean Std. N Deviation Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden 1,83 1,153 719 Mobilbetaling er enklere 2,16 1,197 719 Det giver mig flere muligheder og større 2,17 1,191 719 fleksibilitet Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort 2,31 1,288 719 eller kontanter

Page 194 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort 2,26 1,280 719 (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort)

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Jeg kan stole Mobilbetaling Det giver mig Det går Jeg vil kunne på er enklere flere hurtigere integrere mine sikkerheden muligheder end betaling kort og større med dankort (eksempelvis fleksibilitet eller medlemskort og kontanter bonuskort) Jeg kan stole på 1,000 ,383 ,371 ,365 ,370 sikkerheden Mobilbetaling er ,383 1,000 ,610 ,526 ,448 enklere Det giver mig ,371 ,610 1,000 ,469 ,459 flere muligheder og større fleksibilitet Det går hurtigere ,365 ,526 ,469 1,000 ,356 end betaling med dankort eller kontanter Jeg vil kunne ,370 ,448 ,459 ,356 1,000 integrere mine kort (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuskort)

Page 195 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Scale Statistics Mean Variance Std. N of Deviation Items 10,74 20,484 4,526 5

Scale: Motivation

Case Processing Summary N % Valid 927 81,8 Cases Excludeda 206 18,2 Total 1133 100,0 a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Cronbach's N of Alpha Alpha Based Items on Standardized Items ,770 ,771 2

Item Statistics Mean Std. N Deviation Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis 2,88 1,362 927 mine venner bruger det Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere 2,17 1,282 927 i fremtiden

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix

Page 196 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Jeg vil bruge Jeg forventer mobilbetalin at bruge g oftere, hvis mobilbetalin mine venner g oftere i bruger det fremtiden Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis 1,000 ,627 mine venner bruger det Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere ,627 1,000 i fremtiden

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Squared Cronbach's Mean if Variance if Item-Total Multiple Alpha if Item Item Item Correlation Correlation Deleted Deleted Deleted Jeg vil bruge 2,17 1,644 ,627 ,394 . mobilbetaling oftere, hvis mine venner bruger det Jeg forventer at bruge 2,88 1,854 ,627 ,394 . mobilbetaling oftere i fremtiden

Scale Statistics Mean Variance Std. N of Deviation Items 5,05 5,688 2,385 2

Scale: Convenience

Case Processing Summary N % Valid 771 68,0 Cases Excludeda 362 32,0 Total 1133 100,0

Page 197 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Cronbach's N of Alpha Alpha Based Items on Standardized Items ,595 ,633 3

Item Statistics Mean Std. N Deviation Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre 2,29 1,258 771 betalingsformer Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever 1,60 ,954 771 op til mine behov og forventninger Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge 1,44 ,837 771

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Mobilbetalin Min Mobilbetalin ger er mere nuværende g er simpelt usikker end mobilbetalin at bruge andre gsapp lever betalingsfor op til mine mer behov og forventninger Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre 1,000 ,253 ,293 betalingsformer Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever ,253 1,000 ,550 op til mine behov og forventninger Mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge ,293 ,550 1,000

Item-Total Statistics

Page 198 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Scale Scale Corrected Squared Cronbach's Mean if Variance if Item-Total Multiple Alpha if Item Item Item Correlation Correlation Deleted Deleted Deleted Mobilbetalinger er mere 3,04 2,490 ,308 ,098 ,706 usikker end andre betalingsformer Min nuværende 3,73 2,903 ,457 ,312 ,426 mobilbetalingsapp lever op til mine behov og forventninger Mobilbetaling er simpelt 3,89 3,100 ,507 ,328 ,391 at bruge

Scale Statistics Mean Variance Std. N of Deviation Items 5,33 5,298 2,302 3

Scale: Increasing buying experience

Case Processing Summary N % Valid 716 63,2 Cases Excludeda 417 36,8 Total 1133 100,0 a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Cronbach's N of Alpha Alpha Based Items on Standardized Items

Page 199 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

,594 ,602 3

Item Statistics Mean Std. N Deviation Det er nyt og smart 3,15 1,412 716 Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser 2,68 1,106 716 bedre Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre 3,10 1,298 716 købeoplevelse

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Det er nyt og Mobilbetalin Mobilbetalin smart g gør mine g kan give købsoplevels mig en bedre er bedre købeoplevels e Det er nyt og smart 1,000 ,193 ,356 Mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser ,193 1,000 ,456 bedre Mobilbetaling kan give mig en bedre ,356 ,456 1,000 købeoplevelse

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Squared Cronbach's Mean if Variance if Item-Total Multiple Alpha if Item Item Item Correlation Correlation Deleted Deleted Deleted Det er nyt og smart 5,79 4,219 ,329 ,128 ,621 Mobilbetaling gør 6,25 4,987 ,387 ,209 ,524 mine købsoplevelser bedre Mobilbetaling kan 5,84 3,821 ,515 ,282 ,315 give mig en bedre købeoplevelse

Page 200 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Scale Statistics Mean Variance Std. N of Deviation Items 8,94 8,122 2,850 3 Appendix 12.4

Regression

Variables Entered/Removeda Mode Variables Variables Method l Entered Removed Motivation, . Enter Service_and 1 _safety, Convenience b a. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summaryb Model R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics Durbin- Square R Square of the R Square F df1 df2 Sig. F Watson Estimate Change Change Change 1 ,469a ,220 ,215 ,82040 ,220 47,912 3 511 ,000 1,899 a. Predictors: (Constant), Motivation, Service_and_safety, Convenience b. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience

ANOVAa Model Sum of df Mean F Sig. Squares Square Regression 96,743 3 32,248 47,912 ,000b 1 Residual 343,935 511 ,673 Total 440,678 514 a. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience b. Predictors: (Constant), Motivation, Service_and_safety, Convenience

Page 201 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig. Collinearity Coefficients Coefficients Statistics B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF (Constant) 1,484 ,123 12,030 ,000 Service_and_safety ,370 ,044 ,342 8,395 ,000 ,920 1,086 1 Convenience ,182 ,051 ,153 3,589 ,000 ,838 1,194 Motivation ,128 ,041 ,134 3,131 ,002 ,837 1,195 a. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience

Collinearity Diagnosticsa Model Dimension Eigenvalu Condition Variance Proportions e Index (Constant) Service_and_ Convenience Motivatio safety n 1 3,711 1,000 ,01 ,01 ,01 ,01 2 ,124 5,480 ,02 ,56 ,27 ,21 1 3 ,102 6,020 ,00 ,00 ,64 ,69 4 ,063 7,688 ,97 ,43 ,08 ,09 a. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience

Residuals Statisticsa Minimu Maximu Mean Std. N m m Deviation Predicted Value 2,1630 4,6357 2,8712 ,43384 515 Residual -1,94985 2,42722 ,00000 ,81801 515 Std. Predicted -1,632 4,067 ,000 1,000 515 Value Std. Residual -2,377 2,959 ,000 ,997 515 a. Dependent Variable: Increasing_buying_experience Appendix 12.5

Case Processing Summarya,b Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent 1133 100,0 0 ,0 1133 100,0 a. Squared Euclidean Distance used

Page 202 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

b. Ward Linkage

Agglomeration Schedule Stage Cluster Combined Coefficient Stage Cluster First Next s Appears Stage Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 1 Cluster 2 1061 1 10 ,000 1012 1042 1088 1062 8 9 ,000 1053 1054 1108 1063 35 736 ,500 0 0 1070 1064 497 644 1,000 0 0 1071 1065 313 480 1,500 0 0 1070 1066 327 804 2,250 796 0 1076 1067 83 278 3,000 0 667 1078 1068 80 505 3,833 973 0 1082 1069 6 1057 4,690 1057 0 1085 1070 35 313 5,690 1063 1065 1079 1071 377 497 6,940 365 1064 1077 1072 110 209 8,369 925 809 1083 1073 96 230 9,869 955 786 1079 1074 7 22 11,583 774 1027 1081 1075 2 286 13,458 186 783 1087 1076 60 327 15,583 1008 1066 1084 1077 105 377 18,268 874 1071 1107 1078 59 83 21,210 1015 1067 1090 1079 35 96 24,210 1070 1073 1081 1080 308 367 27,287 693 666 1094 1081 7 35 30,602 1074 1079 1109 1082 80 189 33,923 1068 924 1098 1083 40 110 37,961 1000 1072 1103 1084 58 60 42,024 1016 1076 1104 1085 6 17 46,785 1069 1011 1099 1086 11 165 51,585 1056 836 1102 1087 2 173 56,777 1075 702 1091 1088 1 39 62,095 1061 813 1106 1089 142 179 67,929 518 929 1094 1090 19 59 73,836 1048 1078 1112 1091 2 76 80,865 1087 997 1107 1092 77 101 88,332 940 917 1098 1093 18 102 96,574 1051 849 1112 1094 142 308 105,015 1089 1080 1119

Page 203 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1095 3 27 113,758 1037 1041 1103 1096 4 5 122,501 1032 1060 1104 1097 12 23 131,390 1055 1046 1115 1098 77 80 140,513 1092 1082 1118 1099 6 14 150,669 1085 1059 1114 1100 192 439 160,851 864 598 1109 1101 132 172 171,316 972 914 1117 1102 11 141 181,976 1086 961 1106 1103 3 40 192,666 1095 1083 1122 1104 4 58 204,398 1096 1084 1114 1105 106 126 217,435 978 976 1118 1106 1 11 232,250 1088 1102 1122 1107 2 105 247,443 1091 1077 1128 1108 8 37 263,096 1062 1045 1115 1109 7 192 279,614 1081 1100 1119 1110 81 186 296,331 1009 873 1117 1111 107 139 315,578 921 932 1124 1112 18 19 335,149 1093 1090 1120 1113 31 91 357,649 1031 996 1120 1114 4 6 380,638 1104 1099 1129 1115 8 12 405,013 1108 1097 1126 1116 109 123 430,702 982 970 1123 1117 81 132 456,984 1110 1101 1127 1118 77 106 484,317 1098 1105 1125 1119 7 142 512,001 1109 1094 1123 1120 18 31 540,635 1112 1113 1130 1121 78 90 571,942 975 995 1124 1122 1 3 604,549 1106 1103 1125 1123 7 109 637,744 1119 1116 1131 1124 78 107 685,813 1121 1111 1126 1125 1 77 746,103 1122 1118 1127 1126 8 78 817,558 1115 1124 1128 1127 1 81 915,383 1125 1117 1129 1128 2 8 1086,614 1107 1126 1130 1129 1 4 1289,356 1127 1114 1131 1130 2 18 1680,298 1128 1120 1132 1131 1 7 2464,540 1129 1123 1132 1132 1 2 4533,640 1131 1130 0

ANOVA

Page 204 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Sum of df Mean F Sig. Squares Square Between 642,159 3 214,053 870,686 ,000 Groups Motivation Within Groups 160,290 652 ,246 Total 802,450 655 Between 251,849 3 83,950 201,007 ,000 Service_and_safet Groups y Within Groups 272,305 652 ,418 Total 524,154 655

Appendix 12.6

Crosstab Køn Total Mand Kvinde Count 190 256 446 1 Expected 197,2 248,8 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 100 110 210 2 Expected 92,8 117,2 210,0 Count Count 290 366 656 Total Expected 290,0 366,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 1,458a 1 ,227 Continuity Correctionb 1,261 1 ,261 Likelihood Ratio 1,454 1 ,228 Fisher's Exact Test ,239 ,131 Linear-by-Linear 1,455 1 ,228 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 92,84. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Page 205 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Crosstab Alder Total Under 25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 over 66 Count 29 82 122 129 73 11 446 1 Expected 42,2 98,6 121,7 114,9 59,1 9,5 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 33 63 57 40 14 3 210 2 Expected 19,8 46,4 57,3 54,1 27,9 4,5 210,0 Count Count 62 145 179 169 87 14 656 Total Expected 62,0 145,0 179,0 169,0 87,0 14,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 37,793a 5 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 38,091 5 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 35,893 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 1 cells (8,3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4,48.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,240 ,000 Nominal by Cramer's ,240 ,000 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvor bor du? Total

Page 206 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Storby Mellem stor 4 by Count 156 87 203 446 1 Expected 176,8 80,2 189,0 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 104 31 75 210 2 Expected 83,2 37,8 89,0 210,0 Count Count 260 118 278 656 Total Expected 260,0 118,0 278,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 12,646a 2 ,002 Likelihood Ratio 12,528 2 ,002 Linear-by-Linear 8,806 1 ,003 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 37,77.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,139 ,002 Nominal by Cramer's ,139 ,002 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvad er din årlige bruttoindkomst? Total 0-100.000 100.001- 200.001- 300.001- 400.001- 500.001 og Ønsker ikke at 200.000 300.000 400.000 500.000 derover oplyse Ward Method 1 Count 21 50 113 156 47 17 42 446

Page 207 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Expected Count 27,9 51,0 108,1 152,3 48,3 24,5 34,0 446,0 Count 20 25 46 68 24 19 8 210 2 Expected Count 13,1 24,0 50,9 71,7 22,7 11,5 16,0 210,0 Count 41 75 159 224 71 36 50 656 Total Expected Count 41,0 75,0 159,0 224,0 71,0 36,0 50,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 19,460a 6 ,003 Likelihood Ratio 19,384 6 ,004 Linear-by-Linear 2,039 1 ,153 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 11,52.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,172 ,003 Nominal by Cramer's ,172 ,003 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Bruger du en Total mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja bruger ikke bruger mobilbetalin mobilbetalin g g Count 103 343 446 Ward 1 Expected 78,9 367,1 446,0 Method Count 2 Count 13 197 210

Page 208 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Expected 37,1 172,9 210,0 Count Count 116 540 656 Total Expected 116,0 540,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 28,027a 1 ,000 Continuity Correctionb 26,877 1 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 32,554 1 ,000 Fisher's Exact Test ,000 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 27,984 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 37,13. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,207 ,000 Nominal by Cramer's ,207 ,000 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvilken app eller service Total bruger du til at betale med? (gerne flere krydser) - MobilePay 0 1 Count 117 329 446 Ward 1 Expected 91,1 354,9 446,0 Method Count

Page 209 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Count 17 193 210 2 Expected 42,9 167,1 210,0 Count Count 134 522 656 Total Expected 134,0 522,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 28,897a 1 ,000 Continuity Correctionb 27,792 1 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 32,830 1 ,000 Fisher's Exact Test ,000 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 28,853 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 42,90. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,210 ,000 Nominal by Cramer's ,210 ,000 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvilken app eller service Total bruger du til at betale med? (gerne flere krydser) - SWIPP 0 1 1 Count 343 103 446

Page 210 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Expected 333,8 112,2 446,0 Count Ward Count 148 62 210 Method 2 Expected 157,2 52,8 210,0 Count Count 491 165 656 Total Expected 491,0 165,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 3,135a 1 ,077 Continuity Correctionb 2,803 1 ,094 Likelihood Ratio 3,080 1 ,079 Fisher's Exact Test ,083 ,048 Linear-by-Linear 3,130 1 ,077 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 52,82. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,069 ,077 Nominal by Cramer's ,069 ,077 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Pengeoverførsler 0 1

Page 211 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Count 114 332 446 1 Expected 89,7 356,3 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 18 192 210 2 Expected 42,3 167,7 210,0 Count Count 132 524 656 Total Expected 132,0 524,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 25,639a 1 ,000 Continuity Correctionb 24,592 1 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 28,865 1 ,000 Fisher's Exact Test ,000 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 25,599 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 42,26. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 3,114a 1 ,078 Continuity Correctionb 2,662 1 ,103 Likelihood Ratio 3,002 1 ,083 Fisher's Exact Test ,084 ,053 Linear-by-Linear 3,109 1 ,078 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 23,37. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures

Page 212 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,069 ,078 Nominal by Cramer's ,069 ,078 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Onlinehandel (WUPTI, DBA.) 0 1 Count 352 94 446 1 Expected 341,3 104,7 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 150 60 210 2 Expected 160,7 49,3 210,0 Count Count 502 154 656 Total Expected 502,0 154,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4,465a 1 ,035 Continuity Correctionb 4,057 1 ,044 Likelihood Ratio 4,365 1 ,037 Fisher's Exact Test ,038 ,023 Linear-by-Linear 4,458 1 ,035 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 49,30. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Crosstab

Page 213 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Gadehandel (Loppemarkedet, pølsevogn. etc) 0 1 Count 312 134 446 1 Expected 286,2 159,8 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 109 101 210 2 Expected 134,8 75,2 210,0 Count Count 421 235 656 Total Expected 421,0 235,0 656,0 Count

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,082 ,035 Nominal by Cramer's ,082 ,035 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 20,234a 1 ,000 Continuity Correctionb 19,456 1 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 19,894 1 ,000 Fisher's Exact Test ,000 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 20,203 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 75,23. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Page 214 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,176 ,000 Nominal by Cramer's ,176 ,000 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Transport (billetter) 0 1 Count 351 95 446 1 Expected 334,5 111,5 446,0 Ward Count Method Count 141 69 210 2 Expected 157,5 52,5 210,0 Count Count 492 164 656 Total Expected 492,0 164,0 656,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig. (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10,170a 1 ,001 Continuity Correctionb 9,563 1 ,002 Likelihood Ratio 9,880 1 ,002 Fisher's Exact Test ,002 ,001 Linear-by-Linear 10,154 1 ,001 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 52,50.

Page 215 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,125 ,001 Nominal by Cramer's ,125 ,001 Nominal V N of Valid Cases 656

Crosstab Hvor ofte bruger du din mobiltelefon til at betale med - Jeg bruger Tota min mobilbetaling til at overførepenge? l Dagli 3-4 1-2 1-3 1-5 ca. Sjældner Aldri gt gange gange gange gange 1 e g ungentli ungentli månedli halvårli gan gt gt gt gt g årlig t Count 5 26 92 165 49 2 1 2 342 1 Expecte 7,6 31,7 100,3 158,0 40,6 1,9 ,6 1,3 342, Ward d Count 0 Metho Count 7 24 66 84 15 1 0 0 197 d 2 Expecte 4,4 18,3 57,7 91,0 23,4 1,1 ,4 ,7 197, d Count 0 Count 12 50 158 249 64 3 1 2 539 Total Expecte 12,0 50,0 158,0 249,0 64,0 3,0 1,0 2,0 539, d Count 0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 14,477a 7 ,043 Likelihood Ratio 15,580 7 ,029 Linear-by-Linear 13,916 1 ,000 Association

Page 216 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

N of Valid Cases 539 a. 7 cells (43,8%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is ,37.

Crosstab Hvor ofte bruger du din mobiltelefon til at betale med - Jeg bruger Tota min mobilbetaling til at betale i butikker? (ikke på internettet) l Dagli 3-4 1-2 1-3 1-5 ca. Sjældner Aldri gt gange gange gange gange 1 e g ungentli ungentli månedli halvårli gan gt gt gt gt g årlig t Count 1 5 13 43 54 23 157 46 342 1 Expecte 1,3 5,7 10,2 52,7 63,5 22,8 143,4 42,5 342, Ward d Count 0 Metho Count 1 4 3 40 46 13 69 21 197 d 2 Expecte ,7 3,3 5,8 30,3 36,5 13,2 82,6 24,5 197, d Count 0 Count 2 9 16 83 100 36 226 67 539 Total Expecte 2,0 9,0 16,0 83,0 100,0 36,0 226,0 67,0 539, d Count 0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 15,603a 7 ,029 Likelihood Ratio 15,668 7 ,028 Linear-by-Linear Association 7,835 1 ,005 N of Valid Cases 539 a. 3 cells (18,8%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is ,73.

Crosstab

Page 217 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvor ofte bruger du din mobiltelefon til at betale med - Jeg bruger Tota min mobilbetaling til at betale på internettet l Dagli 3-4 1-2 1-3 1-5 ca. Sjældner Aldri gt gange gange gange gange 1 e g ungentli ungentli månedli halvårli gan gt gt gt gt g årlig t Count 3 2 26 54 67 16 134 40 342 1 Expecte 2,5 1,9 22,2 62,2 70,4 14,6 129,4 38,7 342, Ward d Count 0 Metho Count 1 1 9 44 44 7 70 21 197 d 2 Expecte 1,5 1,1 12,8 35,8 40,6 8,4 74,6 22,3 197, d Count 0 Count 4 3 35 98 111 23 204 61 539 Total Expecte 4,0 3,0 35,0 98,0 111,0 23,0 204,0 61,0 539, d Count 0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 6,347a 7 ,500 Likelihood Ratio 6,391 7 ,495 Linear-by-Linear Association ,659 1 ,417 N of Valid Cases 539 a. 4 cells (25,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1,10.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,109 ,500 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,109 ,500 N of Valid Cases 539

Crosstab

Page 218 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Frimærker 0 1 Count 342 104 446 1 Expected Count 333,8 112,2 446,0 Ward Method Count 149 61 210 2 Expected Count 157,2 52,8 210,0 Count 491 165 656 Total Expected Count 491,0 165,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 2,489a 1 ,115 Continuity Correctionb 2,194 1 ,139 Likelihood Ratio 2,450 1 ,118 Fisher's Exact Test ,123 ,070 Linear-by-Linear 2,486 1 ,115 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 52,82. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,062 ,115 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,062 ,115 N of Valid Cases 656

Ward Method * Hvilke former for betalinger bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - SMS-afstemninger (X-faktor, Melodi grand prix, Voice etc)

Page 219 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - SMS- afstemninger (X-faktor, Melodi grand prix, Voice etc) 0 1 Count 354 92 446 1 Expected Count 348,1 97,9 446,0 Ward Method Count 158 52 210 2 Expected Count 163,9 46,1 210,0 Count 512 144 656 Total Expected Count 512,0 144,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 1,424a 1 ,233 Continuity Correctionb 1,193 1 ,275 Likelihood Ratio 1,403 1 ,236 Fisher's Exact Test ,266 ,138 Linear-by-Linear 1,422 1 ,233 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 46,10. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,047 ,233 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,047 ,233 N of Valid Cases 656

Ward Method * Hvilke former for betalinger bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Parkering

Page 220 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Parkering 0 1 Count 378 68 446 1 Expected Count 369,2 76,8 446,0 Ward Method Count 165 45 210 2 Expected Count 173,8 36,2 210,0 Count 543 113 656 Total Expected Count 543,0 113,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 3,827a 1 ,050 Continuity Correctionb 3,405 1 ,065 Likelihood Ratio 3,718 1 ,054 Fisher's Exact Test ,059 ,034 Linear-by-Linear 3,821 1 ,051 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 36,17. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,076 ,050 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,076 ,050 N of Valid Cases 656

Ward Method * Hvilke former for betalinger bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Velgørenhed

Page 221 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Velgørenhed 0 1 Count 380 66 446 1 Expected Count 361,7 84,3 446,0 Ward Method Count 152 58 210 2 Expected Count 170,3 39,7 210,0 Count 532 124 656 Total Expected Count 532,0 124,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 15,309a 1 ,000 Continuity Correctionb 14,484 1 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 14,630 1 ,000 Fisher's Exact Test ,000 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 15,286 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 39,70. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,153 ,000 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,153 ,000 N of Valid Cases 656

Page 222 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Ward Method * Hvilke former for betalinger bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Partistøtte

Crosstab Hvilke former for betalinger Total bruger du din mobil til? (Sæt gerne flere krydser) - Partistøtte 0 1 Count 441 5 446 1 Expected Count 438,5 7,5 446,0 Ward Method Count 204 6 210 2 Expected Count 206,5 3,5 210,0 Count 645 11 656 Total Expected Count 645,0 11,0 656,0

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1- (2-sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi-Square 2,610a 1 ,106 Continuity Correctionb 1,663 1 ,197 Likelihood Ratio 2,413 1 ,120 Fisher's Exact Test ,115 ,101 Linear-by-Linear 2,606 1 ,106 Association N of Valid Cases 656 a. 1 cells (25,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3,52. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,063 ,106 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,063 ,106 N of Valid Cases 656

Page 223 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Ward Method * Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitligt for i butikker med mobilbetaling?

Crosstab Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitligt for i butikker med Total mobilbetaling? 100 kr og 101- 201- 301- 401- 501- 601 og under 200 kr 300 kr 400 kr 500 kr 600 kr derover Count 71 48 25 2 20 3 6 175 1 Expected 71,9 51,3 26,2 2,8 16,2 2,2 4,5 175,0 Ward Count Method Count 58 44 22 3 9 1 2 139 2 Expected 57,1 40,7 20,8 2,2 12,8 1,8 3,5 139,0 Count Count 129 92 47 5 29 4 8 314 Total Expected 129,0 92,0 47,0 5,0 29,0 4,0 8,0 314,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4,986a 6 ,546 Likelihood Ratio 5,161 6 ,523 Linear-by-Linear 2,392 1 ,122 Association N of Valid Cases 314 a. 6 cells (42,9%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1,77.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,126 ,546 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,126 ,546 N of Valid Cases 314

Page 224 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Ward Method * Hvor stort et beløb overfører du i gennemsnittet med mobilen?

Crosstab Hvor stort et beløb overfører du i gennemsnittet med mobilen? Total 100 kr 101- 201- 301- 401- 501- 601 og og under 200 kr 300 kr 400 kr 500 kr 600 kr derover Count 86 86 54 12 51 5 43 337 1 Expected 94,9 82,8 52,9 13,4 46,5 3,8 42,7 337,0 Ward Count Method Count 63 44 29 9 22 1 24 192 2 Expected 54,1 47,2 30,1 7,6 26,5 2,2 24,3 192,0 Count Count 149 130 83 21 73 6 67 529 Total Expected 149,0 130,0 83,0 21,0 73,0 6,0 67,0 529,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 5,307a 6 ,505 Likelihood Ratio 5,419 6 ,491 Linear-by-Linear 1,462 1 ,227 Association N of Valid Cases 529 a. 2 cells (14,3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2,18.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,100 ,505 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,100 ,505 N of Valid Cases 529

Page 225 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Ward Method * Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitligt for på internettet med mobilbetaling?

Crosstab Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitligt for på internettet Total med mobilbetaling? 100 kr og 101- 201- 301- 401- 501- 601 og under 200 kr 300 kr 400 kr 500 kr 600 kr derover Count 29 42 27 11 46 4 18 177 1 Expected 24,8 42,9 31,7 9,3 42,9 3,7 21,7 177,0 Ward Count Method Count 11 27 24 4 23 2 17 108 2 Expected 15,2 26,1 19,3 5,7 26,1 2,3 13,3 108,0 Count Count 40 69 51 15 69 6 35 285 Total Expected 40,0 69,0 51,0 15,0 69,0 6,0 35,0 285,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 6,863a 6 ,334 Likelihood Ratio 6,910 6 ,329 Linear-by-Linear ,753 1 ,386 Association N of Valid Cases 285 a. 2 cells (14,3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2,27.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,155 ,334 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,155 ,334

Page 226 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

N of Valid Cases 285

CROSSTABS /TABLES=s_5_1 BY s_34 /FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES /STATISTICS=CHISQ PHI /CELLS=COUNT EXPECTED /COUNT ROUND CELL.

Crosstabs

Notes Output Created 21-OCT-2015 18:06:27 Comments C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\ Martin\SPSS- Data SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustert est.sav Active Dataset DataSet1 Input Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data 1133 File User-defined missing values are Definition of Missing treated as missing. Statistics for each table are based on Missing Value Handling all the cases with valid data in the Cases Used specified range(s) for all variables in each table. CROSSTABS /TABLES=s_5_1 BY s_34 /FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES Syntax /STATISTICS=CHISQ PHI /CELLS=COUNT EXPECTED /COUNT ROUND CELL. Processor Time 00:00:00,03 Resources Elapsed Time 00:00:00,07

Page 227 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Dimensions Requested 2 Cells Available 131029

[DataSet1] C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\Martin\SPSS- SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustertest.sav

Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * 979 86,4% 154 13,6% 1133 100,0% Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer

Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer Crosstabulation Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end Total andre betalingsformer Meget Lidt Hverken Lidt Meget enig enig eller uenig uenig Count 21 23 104 59 65 272 bruger ikke Expected 91,4 32,0 79,5 45,8 23,3 272,0 Bruger du en mobilbetaling Count mobilbetalingsapp? Count 308 92 182 106 19 707 - Ja bruger Expected 237,6 83,0 206,5 119,2 60,7 707,0 mobilbetaling Count Count 329 115 286 165 84 979 Total Expected 329,0 115,0 286,0 165,0 84,0 979,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 197,277a 4 ,000

Page 228 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Likelihood Ratio 205,771 4 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 174,086 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 979 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 23,34.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,449 ,000 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,449 ,000 N of Valid Cases 979

CROSSTABS /TABLES=s_5_1 BY s_34 /FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES /STATISTICS=CHISQ PHI /CELLS=COUNT EXPECTED /COUNT ROUND CELL.

Crosstabs

Notes Output Created 21-OCT-2015 18:07:52 Comments C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\ Martin\SPSS- Data SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustert est.sav Active Dataset DataSet1 Input Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data 1133 File

Page 229 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

User-defined missing values are Definition of Missing treated as missing. Statistics for each table are based on Missing Value Handling all the cases with valid data in the Cases Used specified range(s) for all variables in each table. CROSSTABS /TABLES=s_5_1 BY s_34 /FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES Syntax /STATISTICS=CHISQ PHI /CELLS=COUNT EXPECTED /COUNT ROUND CELL. Processor Time 00:00:00,03 Elapsed Time 00:00:00,03 Resources Dimensions Requested 2 Cells Available 131029

[DataSet1] C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\Martin\SPSS- SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustertest.sav

Case Processing Summary Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * 979 86,4% 154 13,6% 1133 100,0% Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer

Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp? - Ja * Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer Crosstabulation Mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end Total andre betalingsformer Meget Lidt Hverken Lidt Meget enig enig eller uenig uenig Count 21 23 104 59 65 272

Page 230 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

bruger Expected 91,4 32,0 79,5 45,8 23,3 272,0 Bruger du en mobilbetaling Count mobilbetalingsapp? Count 308 92 182 106 19 707 bruger ikke - Ja Expected 237,6 83,0 206,5 119,2 60,7 707,0 mobilbetaling Count Count 329 115 286 165 84 979 Total Expected 329,0 115,0 286,0 165,0 84,0 979,0 Count

Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 197,277a 4 ,000 Likelihood Ratio 205,771 4 ,000 Linear-by-Linear 174,086 1 ,000 Association N of Valid Cases 979 a. 0 cells (,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 23,34.

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig. Phi ,449 ,000 Nominal by Nominal Cramer's V ,449 ,000 N of Valid Cases 979

MEANS TABLES=CLU2_1 BY Service_and_safety Motivation /CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV.

Means

Notes Output Created 21-OCT-2015 18:20:02 Comments

Page 231 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\ Martin\SPSS- Data SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustert est.sav Active Dataset DataSet1 Input Filter Weight Split File N of Rows in Working Data 1133 File For each dependent variable in a table, user-defined missing values Definition of Missing for the dependent and all grouping variables are treated as missing. Missing Value Handling Cases used for each table have no missing values in any independent Cases Used variable, and not all dependent variables have missing values. MEANS TABLES=CLU2_1 BY Service_and_safety Motivation Syntax /CELLS MEAN COUNT STDDEV. Processor Time 00:00:00,03 Resources Elapsed Time 00:00:00,04

[DataSet1] C:\Users\martin\Dropbox\Speciale\Martin\SPSS- SWIPP\SWIPP_2908_4fact_clustertest.sav

Case Processing Summary Cases Included Excluded Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Ward Method * 656 57,9% 477 42,1% 1133 100,0% Service_and_safety Ward Method * Motivation 656 57,9% 477 42,1% 1133 100,0%

Appendix 12.7

Page 232 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Case Processing Summary Cases Included Excluded Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Service_and_safety * Ward 656 57,9% 477 42,1% 1133 100,0% Method Motivation * Ward Method 656 57,9% 477 42,1% 1133 100,0%

Report Ward Method Service_and_ Motivati safety on Mean 2,3135 2,8744 N 446 446 1 Std. ,95713 ,94865 Deviation Mean 1,7714 1,2238 N 210 210 2 Std. ,59724 ,24922 Deviation Mean 2,1399 2,3460 N 656 656 Total Std. ,89456 1,10685 Deviation

Appendix 13 – interview 4 Focus group I Fokusgruppe 1

1: Det er ikke så meget, at bruge det som betalingsløsning i butikker

2: Danske Banks reklame var jo også lidt den der romantiske forestilling, at man gik på et loppemarked også betalte for ting der, privat i mellem.

3: Men det er godt nok, at der er flere forretninger der får det, så man ikke behøver at betale med kontanter eller kreditkort.

Page 233 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

4: Der er mange små forretninger der har det allerede, som ikke vil investere i et dyrt dankortsystem, som måske også handler med ting der ikke er så kostbare – en blomsterforretning eller hvad ved jeg.

4: Men der er også begrænsning på, hvor meget man må betale er der ikke? Er det ikke 2000 kr. ?

4: Jeg ved ikke om den er højre

3: Nu tænker jeg MobilPay og Danske Bank det er det jeg selv bruger

4: Det er 2000kr. om dagen.

1: Det er begrænset hvor meget man som virksomhed kan tage imod, hvis de kun kan få overført 2000 kr. om dagen.

5: Man kan også bruge det online, har jeg læst et eller andet om, at man også kunne bruge det online, til nethandel. Jeg har ikke prøvet det.

4: Det er ligesom PayPal.

5: Jeg er sådan lidt, jeg bruger det kun privat, fordi man udlevere jo sit nummer hver gang man bruger det. Jeg kan ikke lide at alle mulige skal have mit nr. Ikke fordi jeg tror, at alle mulige har tænkt sig at bruge det, men jeg synes det er ubehagelig at en eller anden vildt fremmede kan få det. Så jeg bruger det kun til folk jeg kender, fx MobilPay. Måske jeg vil gøre det som nødløsning, hvis det var jeg stod i en eller anden forretning og jeg havde glemt min pung.

2: Men det er selvfølgelig en begrænsning for virksomhederne også.

5: Hvis man kunne gøre det anonymt, så den ikke kunne se ens nr. eller hvis man var linket til et kundenummer så de altid kunne identificere en, men ikke kunne se ens privatnummer.

1: Så tror jeg også, at jeg ville være mere villig til at bruge det.

Hans: I hvilke situationer bruger i mobilbetalinger? Nu har i været lidt inde på det.

1: Jeg sad faktisk lige og tænkte på det. Jeg synes det er rigtig smart når vi har, mig og mine kammerater, vi skal købe et eller andet ind og der så bare er en der ligger ud. MobilPay har den der split funktion, så taster du dem ind der skal være med og så deler den selv ud. Det synes jeg er rigtig smart.

3: Det vidste jeg ikke man kunne

2: Nej det gjorde jeg heller ikke. Det er nemlig også på den måde jeg bruge det mest fx hvis man skal ud og handle noget mad sammen

1: Før i tiden så var det sådan lidt, så tager du to ting og så tager jeg de her to og så kører vi på kort, eller så bankoverførelser. Det har det helt sikkert gjort lettere. Det er prim ært der jeg bruger det.

3: Der er også nogle restauranter, hvis man går ud som et stort selskab og spiser, så kan du jo ikke få hver sin regning, så er det meget smart man lige kan samle det et sted og så sende pengene.

Page 234 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

5: Jeg bruger det også meget når jeg er ude og spise med nogen. Så kan man bare lige hurtig ordne det. Eller hvis det er sådan noget med, nogen får studenterrabat eller et eller andet, så betaler de hele regningen også ordner man det bagefter. Jeg synes det er så nemt og det er så hurtigt, at det bare er lige med det samme, man skal ikke sidde foran en computer.

1: Hvad er dit reg.nr.

5: Ja præcis.

Hans: Der kommer i meget godt rundt om hvad fordelene er, hvad er ulemperne ved at bruge mobilbetalinger?

5: Jeg glemmer at bede om at få de penge som folk skylder mig.

4: Men det er jo det samme, det vil jo ikke ændre sig hvis man så lagde ud, om det så er MobilPay eller hvad det er.

5: Jo, fordi folk siger bare nå sender du ikke bare en request og så glemmer man det.

3: Jeg tænker det er en ulempe, at vores samfund er på vej til at blive pengeløst, det synes jeg er en ulempe. Det virker også som om at MobilPay, at det er den måde de kører det på.

Hans: Ser i andre også det som en ulempe?

3: Det gør jeg i hvert fald

2: Bankerne får lidt mere magt ved det eller får lidt mere indflydelse, det ser jeg lidt som en ulempe.

3: Især det med registreringerne man bliver registeret lidt over det hele.

Hans: Hvad med dig Thomas ser du nogle ulemper:

1: Kun i den form at det, vi sidder lige nu alle sammen og snakker MobilPay, fordi det er dem alle bruger og den er bundet op på Danske Bank. Det synes jeg et eller andet sted er ubehageligt, at lige meget hvilken bank du har, så binder du dig fast til dem. Fordi det er dem alle bruger, i stedet for det er en eller anden ekstern, fuldstændig fri for alle de der banker.

2: Kan MobilPay ikke fungere sammen med andre ?

1: Jo jo.

3: Det kan de sagtens.

1: Man kan godt bruge Swipp men det er er bare hvis dem man vil sende penge til ikke har Swipp. Så er det lidt nytteløst, at man gerne vil bruge Swipp, hvis den anden ikke har. Så bliver man jo nødt til at bruge MobilPay.

4: Det tror jeg ændre sig.

1: Det håber jeg

Page 235 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

4: Det tror jeg det gør. Det tror jeg, for når folk først kan se, at det her fungere og det måske ikke varer så længe før vi kan betale med det i supermarkederne, på den måde så er jeg ret sikker på, at der er flere. Swipp det er flere banker, jo. Så tænker jeg, at der er andre banker der også, eller man laver en fælles eller hvad ved jeg. Det tror jeg ændre sig.

5: Skulle den der Swipp ikke havde været den der fælles?

4: Jo men så kom Danske Bank lige indenom, tror jeg.

3: Men det er jo blevet et stort hit, altså det der MobilPay. Så det kan jo kun udvikle sig mere og mere.

2: Ja det tror jeg også, så jeg tror også at Swipp bliver udbredt mere og mere. Fordi det er ikke nogle banker der har lavet det vel?

4: Jo det er det. Det er Nykredit Bank b. la. Der kan du også hæve mere, der kan du faktisk hæve op til 10.000kr. om dagen. Det kunne man godt forstille sig, at den blev mere populær. Hvis MobilPay bliver ved, det kan så være ulempen ved MobilPay, at der er et begrænset beløb.

2: Lige så snart der er nogle der har en præference over for Danske Bank, så fravælger de jo det.

1: Jeg synes måske også det kan være farligt, nu snakker vi ulemper, at vi lige pludseligt har en betalingsløsning på din telefon. Hvis der er nogen der stjæler din telefon, jamen så kan de også bare overfører op til 2000kr. til dem selv.

2: Men man kan jo altid se hvem de har overført dem til.

1: Det er selvfølgelig rigtigt nok, men det er stadigvæk, hvis du har en eller anden, jeg tænker man godt kunne fuske med det på en eller anden måde.

3: Ja, men jeg synes heller ikke det virker så sikkert, det er kun en firecifret kode man skal trykke ind, det virker sådan lidt, du har alligevel adgang til en konto.

4: Jeg tror ikke jeg synes, det er mindre usikkert når jeg bruger dankort, det er ligeså nemt for folk. Når man står nede og skal betale, man ser bare folk de står og taster, der er ingen der gør, jeg gør så for jeg er meget noia, jeg tænker bare, at folk kan lige så let se ens pinkode til ens dankort som de kan se det på ens telefon.

3: Jo mere elektronisk det er, jo lettere er det også for folk som har forstand på elektronik, at lave et eller andet.

1: Der er sikkert også mange der bruger deres pinkode som den kode man bruger til MobilPay.

4: Det er lidt dumt!

Hans: Hvor ofte bruger i Mobilbetalinger Sådan ca. ?

3: Til betalinger, altså i forretninger, der har jeg aldrig brugt det. Jeg har kun brugt det hvis man har været ude og spise.

2: Ja det har jeg også er det et pr. gange om ugen.

Page 236 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

3: Ja det passer meget godt.

1: Ja..

4: Jeg er ikke ude og spise et pr. gange om ugen. Så det er nok en gang om måneden eller sådan noget.

Martin: Hvad vil fordele og ulemper være ved at betale med mobilen i butikker?

2: Det der med at de får ens nummer som du siger.

5: Det synes jeg i hvert fald er ubehageligt.

4: Altså bliver nummeret der, kan de gemme det? Ja det kan de selvfølgelig.

5: Men en eller anden opdateringen, der kan man hente i butikkerne, kontakterne direkte. Det kommer an på vor usikker man er og hvor meget man ikke bryder sig om, at folk har ens nummer. Men jeg passer meget på det.

4: Jeg vil tænke på det som man kan blive spammet med markedsføring og alt muligt.

2: Ja det sidder jeg også og tænker på

4: Det kunne være smadre irriterende, hvis man ikke lige kunne styre det.

3: Ja, at de vil kunne se et mønster over hvor man handler osv.

2: Så det bliver en del af det der Big data, hvor de nærmest bare kan se det hele.

3: Men dette er svært over en sms, medmindre de kan komme med reklamerne over sms, når de kun har dit telefonnummer.

4: Det gør man jo allerede nu.

2: Jo men jeg tror man skal have krydset et eller andet af før de må kontakte en. De får selvfølgelig flere informationer omkring en.

3: Ellers kan de jo bare slå dig op og finde de informationer de skal bruge.

4: Ja ja, de skal jo nok få fat i en, hvis det er det de vil. Det er jo nogle af de skridt man ikke lige kunne forudse da man startede med mobiltelefoner og kommunikation på den måde. Sådan kan det jo gribe om sig.

1: Hvis man vil vide hvor vi alle sammen er på alle tidspunkter, så kan man jo godt med lidt snilde finde ud af det. Vi går jo alle sammen rundt med en GPS i lommen.

5: Hvis man har tændt den.

3: Den er da helle tiden tændt sådan en GPS, er den ikke?

2: Jeg har aldrig tændt min GPS

Page 237 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

5: Nej det har jeg godt nok heller ikke

2: På android der gemmer Google rent faktisk hvor du er henne, selvom du ikke bruger GPS’en.

Hans: I fremtiden hvordan vil i så fortrække at bruge mobilbetaling i stedet for andre betalingsformer, b. la. Kreditkort. Hvad kunne få jer til at skifte kreditkortet ud med en mobilbetalingsløsning?

5: Hvis det var anonymt, så ville det være nemt for man har alligevel næsten altid sin telefon med sig. Så bare have en ting der bare ordner det hele. Hvis man også kunne bruge det ligesom PayPal, ja igen man skal indtaste sin kortoplysninger hele tiden også håber man at det er sikkert.

3: Jeg vil blive ved med at bruge det. Jo flere forretninger der vil få det, så tror jeg også bare jeg vil følge med.

5: Det er jo færre ting man så skal holde styr på.

1: Der tror jeg, at jeg er helt omvendt. Jeg vil helst have det skilt ad, ligesom en nøglering, hvis du mister det, så mister du det hele, alle dine nøgler. Jeg vil gerne have tingene adskilt, så jeg ikke har betaling på min telefon. Jeg kan godt lide at man kan bruge det til at overføre mellem venner og lave den i stedet for, at man skal have kontanter frem eller en bankoverførelser. Jeg tror ikke jeg vil udskifte mit kort og min pung og kontanter med 100% mobil.

4: Du vil jo have det som et supplement, altså vil du ikke være glad for at have muligheden, hvis du stod.

1: Jo selvfølgelig! Jeg bruger det også og har brugt det i butikkerne til at betale. Men jeg tror ikke jeg vil gå helt væk fra at have et dankort.

5: Det vil jeg helle ikke. Så løber man tør for strøm og så er det, det eneste man har med.

2: Det er selvfølgelig et ret konkret problem.

Hans: Hensyn til betalinger i butikker, kun detailhandel, hvad kunne så overbevise jer om at bruge mobilbetalinger, udover de ikke skal kunne gemme telefonnummer. Er der en ting der vil kunne overbevise jer om, at det er nemmere?

3: Jeg er overbevist om at det er nemmere. Jeg vi forsætte, som jeg også sagde før.

2: Det hele handler vel bare om, hvor udbredt det bliver.

Hans: Nu kan jeg høre at alle bruger MobilPay her, er det korrekt?

1,2,3,4,5: Ja!

Hans: Hvorfor bruger i MobilPay og ikke Swipp eller andre løsninger?

2: Kom MobilPay ikke før Swipp?

4: Jo!

1: Jeg tror bare det var fordi, det var det folk omkring mig begyndte at bruge.

Page 238 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

3: Jeg havde Danske Bank og det var dem der havde lavet app’en, så det var meget nærliggende.

2: De var også meget gode til at kommunikere ud, at nu var der det her. Også kom Swipp bagefter med de der reklamer. Så skifter man jo ikke bare eller det kan man jo bare gøre.

5: Også fordi man ikke skal betale for at bruge det, selvom man ikke er kunde i Danske Bank. Så hvis man skulle det, så havde jeg nok måske valgt min egen banks løsning, hvis jeg så ikke skulle betale for det.

1: Det der man bliver introduceret for det, det var der og det var gratis. Fint det er nemt, så er det det man gør.

4: Og det virker.

5: Jeg har heller ikke prøvet, at der har været problemer. Jeg kender ikke nogle der har haft problemer med det.

1: Nej overhovedet ikke, det har bare virket hele tiden.

Hans: Er der nogen der har prøvet Swipp?

4: Jeg overvejer at få det. Fordi det der er højere beløbsgrænse og det er min bank.

2: Man kunne godt forstille sig, at Swipp overhaler MobilPay, hvis det er flere banker der er gået sammen om det.

5: De udvikler sig da og opdaterer da rimelig ofte. Jeg tænker så længe det er gratis, så ser jeg ikke nogle grund til, at man skulle skifte til noget andet.

1: Jeg tror også meget det er meget med virksomheder, de vil ikke binde sig på nogen måde til en anden bank og hvis der så er flere og flere der får det.

3: Swipp, koster det penge?

5: Det ved jeg ikke jeg har aldrig prøvet det.

4: Det tror jeg ikke, jeg tror det er det samme koncept.

Hans: Hvad skulle få jer til at skifte fra MobilPay, hvad skulle der være ekstra i forhold til, nu snakker vi om at det koster penge, men noget ud over det skulle det kunne noget andet, hvis i skulle skifte til et andet produkt?

4: Der er flere der skal bruge det.

Hans: Så tilgængeligheden?

4: Ja, der er rigtig mange der har Mobilpay, så det giver mening at have det.

2: Og hvis de lavede en funktion, så man kunne være anonym.

Page 239 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1: Jeg tror også helt sikkert, det vil være en klar vinder. Så handler det om det socialnetværk, hvem bruger hvad, hvis alle omkring dig bruger en løsning så er det vel den man bruger.

5: Så længe den løsning jeg har, gør det jeg har brug for, så kan jeg ikke se hvorfor jeg skulle skifte?

Hans: Man kunne jo have nogle rabataftaler indover, hver eneste gang man betaler.

2: Det vil helt klart, være et plus hvis de havde sådan noget.

1: Ja, hvis det bliver billigere at bruge penge. Hvis det er billigere end gratis, så er det jo der man går hen, det kan jeg bare ikke se hvordan, det skulle kunne lade sig gøre.

3: Det kan være at forretningerne ville gøre det.

2: Ja vil give rabat hvis du bruger det.

5: Ja! 20%, det er i orden, så vil jeg gerne bruge det.

Hans: I må gerne forsætte lidt i den tanke. Er der nogle helt specifikke ting i tænker, hvis det bliver integreret i den her løsning så vil det blive endnu bedre?

1: Jeg tror lidt problemet er, at det er så simpelt et problem at løse og de løsninger der er, løser det allerede, så godt som man kan. Der mangler ikke rigtig noget i, jeg vil gerne sende sig penge. Hvor få klik skal jeg igennem for at gøre det, tre klik så er vi kørende. Så det er svært at forbedre på den måde.

3: Det er også svært at finde på noget.

4: Altså beløbsgrænsen, kunne da klart blive en begrænsning i sig selv. Især fordi der er andre løsninger der har en højere beløbsgrænse pr. dag. Det tror jeg vil kunne få mange til, at skifte. Hvis det bliver mere udbredt og man bruger det mere og mere. Så kunne jeg godt forstille mig, at folk skiftede. Jeg har også et indtryk af, nu ved jeg ikke hvordan aldersfordelingen er af brug af MobilPay og Swipp. Men jeg kunne forstille mig, at det er mest udbredt i blandt yngre, det kan man måske også se her. Der kunne jeg godt forstille mig, hvis det blev mere udbredt blandt folk, på min aldre, hvor man også køber lidt større ind, så kunne det godt være, at der kom nogle andre krav. Det er måske også derfor jeg overvejer, som den eneste, at skifte til Swipp, fordi jeg kan se at nogle gange ville det kunne være rart, at kunne betale lidt mere end 2000kr. i nogle sammenhænge.

5: Men det kunne man måske godt forstille sig, hvis en butik, sagde okay, man kan betale med MobilPay her, så kunne de se hvor ofte man handlede med den butik, at man så måtte betale med et større beløb. Det er et eller andet med, at hvis man har godkendt sin betaling, så hæfter man selv for det. Der er ikke nogen fortrydelsesret, eller sådan noget. Måske er det derfor, de ved at det er meget mellem private, så det er derfor at grænsen er der. Men hvis nu de ved, at det er en butik der står inden for det.

2: Ja så er det noget andet.

3: De har lige hævet grænsen fra 1.500kr. til 2.000kr.

Page 240 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1: Men hvis de propper andre produkter ind i det, så vil det også bare virke som om, at de rykker sig længere over mod sådan noget som mobilbank. Så det skulle være noget som der ikke havde noget direkte med finansielt at gøre.

Hans: Jeg har lige en video i skal se.

Video bliver afspillet..

Hans: Har jeres holdning til brug af mobilbetalingsløsninger ændret sig efter i har set den?

3: Nej!

5: Jeg forstår ikke, hvad er forskellen?

1: At de har en eller anden dims stående og så skal man være i nærheden af den, for at kunne betale til den butik.

5: Hvordan, du havde prøvet at betale med MobilPay i en butik?

1: Ja, der sender du bare til et telefonnummer.

3: Det er måske meget godt, at man skal gå lidt væk og trykke koden, i stedet for man skal stå op ad den der.

5: Men det var det der jeg snakkede om med kortet, at folk..

4: Det der er jo lidt lige som, at bruge et dankort i virkeligheden. På et eller andet tidspunkt så bliver det jo løsningen, at man kan begge dele.

2: Ja, så bliver det bare spørgsmålet om sikkerhed, vel, til sidst. Begge ting er vel lige bekvemt.

5: Undtagen det med strømmen.

2: Jo selvfølgelig.

1: Nej, et dankort skal ikke have strøm.

5: Men hvis de nu har sådan en multi dimmer, så man lille kan oplade i mens man betaler.

4:Nu når jeg ser det der, så tænker jeg også en af de ting der kunne gøre, nu ved jeg ikke hvor udbredt MobilPay er, men til udlandet fx Nu ved jeg ikke det er jo Danske Banks løsning, så jeg ved ikke hvor udbredt det er. Men hvis nu det bliver sådan at man også kan vælge det i udlandet. Eller hvis der var nogle af de andre banker der gik sammen med nogle internationale banker, så man kan bruge det i udlandet. Så tror jeg også, jeg tror man skal begynde at fokusere på udlandet og en løsning.

Page 241 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

2: Det har jo også været diskussionen med dankortet og Mastercard. Mastercard kan bruges flere steder i udlandet. Så jo det kunne være en klar fordel, tror jeg.

Hans: Er i bekendt med ApplePay?

1:Nej !

3: Nej !

5: Er det ikke kun hvis man har IPhone?

3: Er det også sådan en betalings en?

5: Men er det ikke noget nyt de er ved at udvikle?

Hans: Jo markedet, altså på det danske marked er der jo kun to spillere sådan rigtigt, Swipp og MobilPay. De er i gang med at finde ud af om der er andre løsninger der også kan blive en del af markedet. Men i kender det så ikke, kan man sige.

5: Jeg har læst noget om det, for jeg får sådan et nyhedsbrev fra Mobilsiden.dk. Jeg sad faktisk og tænkte før, at grunden til, at man har MobilPay, er også fordi det går til alle telefoner, man er ikke afhængig af styresystemer eller producent eller noget.

2: Det kan godt være, at jeg er lidt paranoid, men jeg synes også det er skræmmende hvis Apple, at de har så meget viden omkring det man laver, altså hvad man bruger sin penge på, i forhold til sin bank.

Hans: Så banker har du større tillid til en Apple?

2: De kan se hvor mange transaktioner jeg i forvejen har. Hvor Apple er en privat virksomhed som ikke arbejder med finansielle instrumenter, så virker det lidt underligt.

Martin: Hvis vi lige går tilbage til videoen. Jeg ved ikke om i lagde mærke til, at da han havde betalt, så kom kvitteringen også på mobilen. Så det vil sige, at der er mulighed for at du kan få andre ting på mobilen efter du har købt. Vil det være noget der vil være interessant, når man bruger mobilbetalinger? At der kommer sådan nogle features efter ? I videoen der kommer kvitteringen lige efter de har betalt, man kunne forstille sig, at man kunne lave andre ting, før og efter du betaler. Hvis det være noget der kunne være interessant også?

5: At kvitteringen kommer det er smart, i stedet for alle de der løse kvitteringer der bare ligger.

Martin: Lige præcis, det kunne også være loyalitetsprogram der kunne poppe op, fx jeg vil kunne bruge mine Matas point ved at købe det her.

5: Helt klart det vil give mening

3: Hvis man får sin kvittering også. Kvitteringer får du jo hele tiden, det er vel lige meget om man får det i butikkerne eller privat.

Page 242 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

1: Jeg vil synes det vil være mærkeligt, hvis man lavede en digital betaling og du så fik en papir kvittering i hånden.

2: Det gør du jo med dankortet.

5: Det er jo det samme princip egentlig.

1: Det er netop en fin ide at få kvitteringen.

3: Du havde jo prøvet at betale med det i en forretning, der fik du vel også en kvittering?

1: Nej ikke nødvendigvis.

5: Det er vel fordi du siger nej tak til kvitteringen.

1: Altså det jeg har prøvet det er, at ude på vores arbejde der kommer der sådan en oste vogn. Der har jeg betalt med det, og der er der ikke nogle kvittering. Der blev skrevet i hånden. Så har jeg prøvet i en butik fornyeligt. Der skulle hun bare se kvitteringen på min telefon, og se at betalingen var gennemført. Så der skulle hun nok også have skrevet den i hånden eller et eller andet.

3. Man skal jo også have tastet på en apparat for at man kan få en kvittering.

1: Men med dit spørgsmål, jeg ved ikke om jeg synes det vil være fedt, at det bare poppede noget op på min telefon, at den bare åbner app’s på min telefon efter jeg har betalt. Det synes jeg er en indgriben, jeg ikke har lyst til. Hvis man lige har købt et eller andet, så åbner den bare app’s på min telefon.

4: Der er nogle forretninger der tilbyder, at man kan få kvitteringen elektronisk, jeg tror det er Sportsmaster.

2: Det synes jeg er meget smart.

5: Det er smart, at have dem, for man har prøvet, at man måske skulle bytte et eller andet, så skal man finde den der kvittering. Så hvis det var et eller andet der var uspecificeret så man kunne bruge det, netop som garanti. Det ville være nemt hvis der vil være et kartotek der var nemt at finde rundt i.

2: Ja så der bare var inde i app’en.

5: Ja, for lige nu der får man bare, at man har betalt, medmindre man har skrevet et eller andet. Men det gør man vel ikke i en butik.

3: Jeg tænker, at en kvittering forsvinder jo også fra MobilPay. Det står selvfølgelig på din bankkonto. Kan man bruge det som en kvittering?

4: Ja det er dokumentation.

5: Ja, men du kan ikke dokumenter hvad du har overført. Du kan ikke dokumenterer at du har købt den her vare.

2: Altså det vil være meget smart, hvis den gemte kvitteringen.

Page 243 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Hans: Hvad nu hvis den samlede medlemsrabatter i en service? Altså hvis du går ind og betaler en flybillet, med en mobilbetalingsløsning, så automatisk siger den ”hov du får lige point på din konto, fordi vi kan se, at det er SAS”. Hvor den automatisk kan se det og du er fri for, at taste en kode ind osv. Vil det være noget der vil have interesse?

5: Er det ikke lidt det der er nu, hvis du logger ind? Jeg har et eller andet, når jeg logger ind som mig når jeg bestiller, så får jeg point – det er fint nok for mig. Sådan noget stort noget vil jeg ikke gøre på min mobil alligevel.

2: Jeg synes det er meget rart, at det er sådan et helt clean produkt, at du betaler og det er det, i stedet for at man skal tage stilling til alle mulige ting rundt omkring – sådan har jeg det i hvert fald. Så man bare ved hvad der sker, der ikke foregår alle mulige processer bagved.

3: Så man ikke bliver fristet til noget.

Hans: På trods af, at der måske er en besparelse hver eneste gang?

4: Det er ligesom benzinkort og alt sådan noget og brugsforeninger. Det er jo det samme der får du jo også procenter.

2: Det er så også udbredt i Brugsforeningen. Der kunne man godt forstille sig, hvis Dansk Supermarked Coop fx, lavede en rabatordning med deres abonnement, at man ville gøre brug af det. Men hvis det er sådan noget med at flyve eller sådan noget, altså nogle ting man ikke køber så ofte, så vil jeg ikke bryde mig om det i hvert fald.

5: Man tænker også, det er meget med den der anonymitet, at hvis nu et eller andet var knyttet til det, så var der en eller anden tredjepart der skulle have adgang til mine oplysninger. Så får man alle mulige mails.

Martin: Hvad kunne i forestille jer at købe i butikker med mobilbetalinger, hvor i ville anvende det, i stedet for kort?

2: Min frisør har ikke dankortautomat, så der kunne jeg forestille mig at bruge det. Ellers ved jeg det ikke? Små ting.

5: Ja små ting!

3: Også det, at det er så nemt at gøre, så man vil man helst ikke købe store ting, så bliver man lidt tilbageholdt på en måde, for puha det er mange penge og det er så nemt lige at betale.

Hans: Er i alle sammen enige?

4: Ja jeg er ! Handle blomster ved min blomsterhandler. Der hvor jeg bor, der har er heller ikke dankortautomat. Fordi det koster mange penge, jeg tror det koster omkring 20.000 kr.

2: Nej og det er ikke alle der betaler skat.

4: Nej det er Græske tilstande, nej, så det er sådan nogle steder, ej jeg tror i virkeligheden, at der er mange små erhvervsdrivende der ville læne sig mere og mere op ad det der MobilPay og Swipp måske også. Det vil

Page 244 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

spare dem for nogle udgifter og en masse administration. Man skal godkendes i alle mulige ender og kanter for at kunne handle med dankort.

2: Det kunne være en feature. Hvis erhvervsdrivende bare kunne koble det op til et eller andet regnskabsprogram, så kom alle informationerne ind, som så vil beregne moms mm.

Hans: Vil det gøre noget for dig som forbruger?

2: Nej! Men det vi udbrede det mere, så vil jeg selv bruge det mere.

5: Jo men det er rigtig nok, det er meget styret af, hvad man kan bruge det til. Hvis man er den eneste i hele verden der har det og det er skide smart og du får alt ting gratis. Hvis man ikke kan bruge det, til det man kan bruge MobilPay til, som vi alle åbenbart bruger det til, så hjælper det lige som ikke rigtig synes jeg. Fordi man netop har dankortet som er nemt, det er jo nemt. Så skulle det være sådan noget med, ligesom man har i nogle supermarkeder, at man har en quik kø, så skulle man kunne komme hurtigere igennem. Et eller andet der gør det til en stor fordel.

1: Hvis du går rundt med din mobiltelefon og scanner dine varer, så putter den det ned i din kurve og betaler automatisk når du går ud.

4: Det kan man faktisk i IKO. Der har de sådan en scanner. Så scanner du selv dine vare også aflevere du bare scanneren ved kassen.

5: Hvis det kunne gå hurtigere af det, så vil det være optimalt.

4: Det har jeg da også læst om, et eller andet sted, at det nok er fremtiden.

2: I USA har de jo køleskabe, hvor de bestiller varen lige så snart den registrere at man tager det ud af køleskabet.

1: Det handler jo om, at overbevise forbrugeren om, at det er meget smartere.

2: Men der er jo allerede skabt en kultur indenfor MobilPay.

5: Man kunne sagtens forstille sig, at de siger fra nu af skal du være kunde i Danske Bank for at få det gratis.

3: Ja, det kunne godt tænkes.

1: Så er spørgsmålet om der er nogle der vil skifte bank pga. det?

4: Man vil jo ikke skifte hvis der ikke kommer gebyr på.

Page 245 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

5: Det skal bare være sådan, at hvis man er en hel vennekreds der tit bruger det her med at sende småbeløb til hinanden, som de fleste gør. Så er der måske halvdelen der er kunder i Danske Bank og resten er ikke. SÅ skifter halvdelen nok ikke.

1: Systemet overlever kun fordi folk bruger det. Der er jo andre løsninger, der er kontanter, der er dankort. Hvis halvdelen bruger det ene og den anden halvdel bruger det andet, så vil det meget hurtigt holde op med at blive brugt, tror jeg. Så er det ikke nemt mere.

5: Hvad så hvis det kan snakke sammen ?

1: Ja ja, så er det igen, så er det nemt. Men grundet til vi begyndte at bruge det, det er fordi det lige pludseligt blev nemt at overføre.

Hans: Det er også noget vi har fundet ud af i vores undersøgelser. Der er mange afhængigheder til. Alle mulige andre brancher. Så når du bare har en mobiloverførelse, så skal du i gang med at snakke med Nets, du skal have gang i kreditkort, Mastercard og Visa, ved nogle af mobilbetalingerne skal du have nogle mobil producenter ind over, fordi det styre. Vi kom ind på 5/8 vigtige spillere indenfor mobilbetalingsløsningernes fremtid.

1: Nu ved jeg ikke, har i fundet ud af om det er på vej med NFC betalinger? At man bare kan ligge en mobil på en scanner og så er der overført, er det noget der er på vej?

Martin: Samsung har lige købt noget, som princippet er det. Du har det også i det Google tilbyder. Det vi så der, det er noget der er i Randers, MeeWallet, det er princippet noget de laver for at udkonkurrere Nets. Hele deres princip det er, at de skal være billigere end Nets og så få folk til, at bruge det i stedet for.

4: Det lyder da også uholdbart. Hvis det koster Danske Bank et tocifret millionbeløb om året. At folk kvit og frit overfører penge.

Hans: Sidste år var det mening det skulle koste penge, men så har de fået opbygget så stor kundekreds, at de simpelthen ikke tuer at sige, at nu koster det.

4: Men det kommer de til tror jeg, de kan ikke blive ved, de må finde på noget hvis det skal kunne forsætte.

Martin: Spørgsmålet er hvad de får for de 2-3 mio. de får jo også meget omtale.

Hans: Det er sjovt at vi alle sammen kender Danske Bank, fordi i Swipp der er det 81 pengeinstitutter der er i samarbejde, hvor Nordea er den fremtrædende spiller.

Martin: Swipp har været der i halvandet år.

1: Men det er den måde at MobilPay er markedsført på. Den gang tænker jeg, at Danske Bank var i en form for modvind, jeg tænker bare, at der er mange der har en holdning til Danske Bank, hvor der er færre der har en holdning til Nordea og nogle af de 80 andre pengeinstitutter.

4: 81 pengeinstitutter i Swipp, hold da op det er mange. Der er selvfølgelig også mange af de små.

1: Hvad med i udlandet er det også noget der er ved, at komme frem der?

Page 246 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: I USA har de ApplePay og Google har deres GoogleWallet og Samsung har lige købt en man også kan bruge. Men ApplePay er ret udbredt. Starbucks har deres egen også. Størstedelen af Starbucks omsætning, det bliver deres egen MobilPay løsning.

3: Det er sjovt at det er virksomhederne i USA der gør det.

5: Ja, at det ikke er pengeinstitutterne.

Martin: Teleselskaberne har jo også lavet det i DK, de har lavet HEY, som ingen ved hvad er. USA har lavet et ligeså godt navn, ISIS, det har de så ændret navnet på. Problemet med fx MeeWallet, de har ikke noget samarbejde med Swipp eller MobilPay, de har kun med Mastercard. Det gør det også besværligt. Hvis du gerne vil bruge det, jeg kan ikke bruge det jeg har ikke Mastercard, jeg skal til Randers i morgen og gad godt at prøve det, men det kan jeg ikke.

Hans: De er jo også konkurrenter Mastercard og Visa. Der er mange spillere og der er mange små innovative løsninger. Men der er ikke nogle af de store der vil købe det.

Martin: NETS kommer også med en løsning her til sommer, som har lidt det med, at man kan scanne.

1: Jeg ved at NETS vil lave en lille chip til dankortautomaterne så du bare kan ligge dankortet på automaten.

Martin: Ja det er til plastikkortet. Hver 5. Gang skal man så indtaste en kode ved beløb under 200kr.

Hans: NETS, har fordelen ved at de leverer hardware til butikkerne.

4: Det har de jo monopol på. Eller i hvert fald mange steder der skal du bruge de der terminaler, der må du ikke bruge andre. Fx det er jo en kæmpe udskrivning for de mindre klinikker. Der vil man jo nok vælge MobilPay løsningen.

Martin: Dansk Volleyforbund bruger Swipp.

Appendix 14 – Interview 5 Focus group II

Martin: Vi er ved at skrive vores speciale om mobilbetalinger. Det er derfor vi har bedt jer om at komme ind. Vi vil egentlig bruge jer til, at finde ud af hvad jeres holdning er til mobilbetaling og hvornår i bruger det. I kommer til at skulle diskutere nogle forskellige emner som vi har. Det er en åben diskussion, der er ingen svar der er forkerte og det er højt sandsygeligt kun holdninger der kommer frem. Det er bare hvad i synes, omkring de spørgsmål vi har. Vi skal starte med en præsentation.

Michael: Jeg er Michael Ølgaard. Jeg arbejder i Nordea og arbejder med IT.

Christian: Jeg hedder Christian og jeg er fodboldspiller og studerende.

Page 247 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Mie: Jeg hedder Mie og jeg arbejder med regnskab

Zakia: Jeg hedder oh arbejder i Sab som konsulent

Christina: Jeg hedder Christina og jeg er studerende

Stine: Jeg hedder Stine og jeg er psykolog

Martin: Første spørgsmål er hvad er mobilbetaling for jer?

Mie: Det er et redskab til at betale eller overføre penge.

Michael: Der vil jeg nok mest sige det sidste, overføre penge. Der er ikke ret mange steder du kan betale med mobilbetaling.

Mie: Der er kommet en scanning funktion, så du kan scanne dine girokort

Michael: Med MobilePay?

Mie: Det er jo et spørgsmål om, hvordan man definere mobilbetaling. For dig er mobilbetaling også, at du scanner et girokort ind i app’en.

Michael: Det er netbank delen er det ikke?

Mie: Det er en app til mobilen hvor man gør det i, så hvis det for dig er mobilbetaling, at du bare kan gøre det med mobilen. Det er vel bare et spørgsmål, om at definere hvad mobilbetaling er.

Mie: Jeg har ikke prøvet at scanne det ind, vil jeg lige sige, men det skulle være rimelig smart.

Christian: Jeg tænker også, at det mest er til overførelser.

Stine: MobilePay, at overføre penge på en nem måde, hvis man fx skal splitte en regning.

Zakia: Det har i hvert fald gjort, at man er fri for at prikke folk på skulderen, hvis de skylder en penge. Man kan meget hurtigt lige få fixet det. Man bruger det meget til hverdag, når man er social og sådan.

Martin: Så har i næsten svaret på næste spørgsmål. I hvilke situationer bruger i mobilbetalinger og hvad ser i som fordele og ulemper?

Page 248 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Christian: Som du sagde før, så er det når man er ude, så kan let overføre, på fx restauranter så en bare betale og så kan man nemt overføre bagefter. Det synes jeg er smart og det er primært der jeg bruger det.

Christina: Jeg bruger det tit hvis jeg har glemt mit dankort i kantinen, så bruger jeg lige MobilPay til en der har husket dankortet – det er fantastisk for en der glemmer sit dankort.

Zakia: Jeg bruger det også hvis man skal samle penge ind, fx på arbejdet eller hvis der skal købes nogle gaver. Jeg har lige været til polterabend , der samlede vi pengene ind på den måde. Det er en nem måde lige at få pengene fra folk.

Stine: Det er ret smart med gaver faktisk, så er der en der lægger ud og de andre så bare overfører.

Mie: Man kan også lave en anmodning, så man anmoder dem om det beløb de skal betale.

Zakia: Jeg bruger det også på loppemarkeder.

Michael: Min kæreste har også brugt det, hvis der var nogle ting der skulle sælges. Så er der kommet nogen og kigget, så har de kun haft en 1000kr. med, men tingen kostede kun 200kr. Så er det bare nemmere bare at mobilPay.

Mie: Jeg har brugt det begge veje, både når jeg selv har solgt og når jeg har købt.

Stine: Jeg har også fået noget fra den Blå Avis for eksempel og så betalte jeg via MobilPay.

Mie: Folk gør det også mere og mere over fx Trendsales, i stedet for at bruge de muligheder der er på siderne. Folk er bare begyndt at bruge MobilPay i stedet for, så slipper man også for gebyrer.

Christina: Du spurgte også om ulemper?

Mie: At man aldrig har kontanter.

Christina: Ja det pengeløsesamfund!

Stine: Jeg kan være lidt nervøs nogle gange omkring sikkerheden. Hvor nemt er det, at få adgang til min MobilPay, hvis min mobil bliver stjålet. Det er sådan nogle ting, jeg godt kan tænke lidt over.

Michael: Hvis den bliver hugget, så må man jo bare spærre dankortet, hvis det er det der er forbundet til MobilPay.

Stine: Ja ja, men det er stadig noget jeg tænker over.

Michael: Hvis din pung blev stjålet, ville du jo også spærre det. Jeg tænker mere, hvis jeg overfører pengene og jeg ikke modtager min vare, om banken så vil gå ind og hjælpe, ligesom når jeg betaler med mit Mastercard. Det er jeg faktisk ikke sikker på, at de vil gøre, når det er med MobilPay. Fx jeg kan overføre pengene også kan varen allerede være udsolgt, det ved jeg ikke om Danske Bank vil gå ind og hjælpe.

Christian: Du har ikke læst slut betingelserne?

Michael: Nej det har jeg godt nok ikke.

Page 249 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Christina: Vi prøver bare og accepterer.

Michael: Nu ved jeg jo som sagt ikke om banken hjælper en når man bliver snydt.

Mie: Jeg tænker man ikke er lige så godt stillet fordi man selv har valgt det. Fx med Trendsales, så er man forsikret hvis man vælger den betalingsmåde de stiller til rådighed og hvis man så vælger, at lave en kontooverførelse i stedet for og ikke får sin vare, så er det jo bare ærgerligt. Det tænker jeg er det samme med MobilPay, det kan selvfølgelig godt være, at bankerne vil hjælpe.

Michael: De gør det hvis det er dit dankort du gør det med. Hvis man køber ved et firma og taster dit kontonr. mm ind og det så er snyd, så sørger de for at trække pengene tilbage. Hvis de ikke kan det, så får du alligevel pegene igen. Jeg tror ikke banken dækker med Mobilpay.

Stine: Man bruger det til meget små beløb, men der er jo også de her grænser for hvor meget man kan overføre. Man kan ikke købe nogle større ting, hvis det endelig var. Jeg har ikke selv løbet ind i udfordringen, men jeg kan godt se, hvis det udvikler sig, med MobilPay og mobilbetalingsløsninger. Jo mere man bruger det, så er der jo en limet. Jeg kan ikke engang huske hvad den er på 3000kr eller sådan noget.

Michael: 1500 kr.

Christian: Den er lige blevet sat op.

Michael: Den er lige blevet sat op, altså max beløbet på et år, altså max loftet – 150.000kr. kan du max på et år.

Mie: Men der er jo også en daglig.

Zakia: Jeg har prøvet, at blive ramt af det loft pr. dag.

Micahel: Jo jeg kan se, at det er sat op til 2000kr. pr. dag

Mie: 2000kr. synes jeg stadig ikke er særlig meget.

Michael: Ikke i forhold til du må overføre 150.000 kr. på et år, så er 2000kr. ikke særlig meget.

Mie: Jeg synes godt, at den måtte være højere. Nogle gange har man bare en stor transaktion.

Michael: Hvis de gerne vil have, at man kun skal bruge MobilPay og har en sjov lørdag i byen, så vil man hurtig kunne bruge de 2000kr. Hvis man både skal købe taxa, indgang, mad og drikke. Så når man hurtigt loftet og så skal man alligevel have dankortet frem, så kan det jo næsten være lige meget.

Martin: Har i haft nogle positive og negative oplevelser med mobilbetaling, udover dem i har nævnt?

Michael: Det virker !

Christian: Det er let !

Page 250 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Michael: Hvis man tænker MobilPay og Swipp, så er fordelen ved MobilPay, at du kan oprette det her og nu. Du behøver ikke NemId som man skal med Swipp. Fx hvis jeg lige pludselig ser en pølsevogn og er sulen, så kan jeg lige hurtig oprette MobilPay og betale. Skal jeg bruge den anden, så skal jeg bruge mit NemId. Det er et minus man skal det første gang.

Stine: Jeg har faktisk både Swipp og MobilPay på min. Men jeg bruger aldrig Swipp. Det er som at jeg føler, at jeg skal igennem flere tast før jeg kommer derind. Jeg bruger altid mobilPay.

Michael: Den ligger jo også, i hvert fald når man har Nordea, under netbank. Hvor MobilPay bare er en app du klikker på. Så den ser du med det samme og så er der nok også flere der har den.

Mie: Alle kan bruge MobilPay men ikke alle kan bruge Swipp

Michael: Jeg mener også at Danske Banks kunder kan, men jeg vil ikke synes, det var mærkeligt hvis de prøvede, at udelukke andre.

Mie: Nå, så er jeg bare blevet påvirket så meget, at jeg kun tror at jeg kan bruge MobilPay. Jeg troede bare, at Swipp var en række banker der sammen havde lavet Swipp og så kunne andre ikke bruge det.

Michael: Danske Bank har lavet en og så næsten alle andre hører under Swipp. Jeg vil bare synes det vil være mærkeligt, hvis de ikke også gerne ville have Danske Banks kunder. Selvom, at det vil koste penge hver gang du vil lave en overførelse, men så kunne det jo også være, at de kunne få dig ind som kunde – det ved jeg ikke. Du kan prøve og se om du kan oprette dig.

Martin: Det kan du ikke, du kan kun modtage penge, hvis du er Danske Bank kunde, du kan ikke betale.

Michael: Nå okay..

Martin: Når i bruger mobilbetaling, hvorfor bruger i så det i stedet for andre betalingsformer?

Zakia: Det er hurtigt og det er nemmere

Mie: man kan gøre det med det samme. Fx hvis der er en der har lagt ud, så kan du betale lige med det samme, bare lige lave en MobilPay betaling og så er det gjort. Så glemmer man det ikke.

Michael: Så er det også lidt igen, det er overførelser det er ikke betalinger. Altså det er ikke fordi du skal betale en regning i kiosken, det er fordi du skal overføre til dine venner.

Mie: Jeg har faktisk prøvet, at stå i en butik og med det samme betalt med MobilPay, fordi deres dankortmaskine ikke virkede, så kunne man betale med dankort.

Christian: Der er nogle steder ude på Papirøen, som er sådan nogle madboder, hvor man kunne betale med MobilPay, det var faktisk rigtig fint, at man ikke skulle have noget med, man havde bare sin telefon og så kunne man gå ind og købe i bar og i boder med MobilPay – det var en meget fin oplevelse i forhold til, at man ikke skulle have kortet op, man kunne bare lige trykke beløbet ind. Ulempen der var bare, at der også var et max beløb ved modtagelse af pengene, tror jeg nok. Så på et eller andet tidspunkt gik der kage i det, da boderne havde modtaget for mange indbetalinger. Det blev noget rod, så skulle vi så have gang i dankortene og dankortmaskinerne igen.

Page 251 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Michael: Men man tasker jo flere tal ind end med dit dankort.

Christian: Ja det er rigtigt.

Mie: Det er bare, at en mobil den har du hele tiden på dig.

Christian: Jeg tænker også, at det er noget psykisk, du skal ikke aflevere noget, du skal ikke tage noget op. Du står bare med din telefon, som man gør med så mange andre ting

Stine: Ja ligesom sms’er.

Mie: Ja den er jo bare klisteret fast til hånden.

Stine: Men det er nok noget psykologisk i det, fordi man netop er vant til at sidde med den, når man tjekker sms’er, når man tager billeder og når man er på Facebook. Så det der med, at have den fremme og taste ind det er på en eller anden måde snedigere, sådan psykologisk, end at man skal hive sin pung frem og finde dankortet og modtage det og aflevere det igen. På en eller anden måde bliver det bare noget man er mere vant til at have telefonen.

Zakia: Det er jo også bare det, at det er super nemt. Nu ved jeg ikke hvordan den anden app virker. Men MobilPay er super nemt at forstå. Selv min mor og ældre mennesker kan jo finde ud af at bruge det. Hvis man bare lige hurtigt viser dem hvordan man gør én gang, så er de egentlig selvkørende. Det synes jeg også er meget positivt. Om de er lidt mere skeptiske over for sikkerheden end man måske er når man er lidt yngre. Det tror jeg de er, men min oplevelse er, at de også kan se det positive i det.

Stine: Mine forældre havde fået MobilPay og de ringede til mig om de ikke skulle overføre nogle penge. De var sådan helt spændte på, om hvordan fungerer det her, så det var sådan en teknologisksuccesoplevelse for sådan et lidt ældre par.

Mie: Også det der med, at man kan gå ind på bankkontoen bagefter og se at pengene er trukket, det var lynhurtigt og med det samme kunne de se hvor de kom fra, det er meget imponerende.

Christian: Mine forældre, der er helt det samme. Førhen har jeg altid skulle hjælpe dem, når de har siddet med deres mobiltelefoner. Men tror virkelig, at det er en succesoplevelse fordi det simpelthen er så nemt, du kan næsten ikke gøre det forkert. Bare det de kan lykkes med det her, uden at der er problemer med alt muligt. Så er det altså så stor en succes, at det næsten bliver sjovt at overføre penge.

Mie: Det der så godt kan gå galt, det er den der funktion hvor man kan anmode. Jeg har prøvet, at der var nogen der skulle anmode mig, og så fik de lige sendt pengene til mig i stedet for, så skulle de anmode dobbelt op, fordi jeg så havde modtaget det, de skulle have haft fra mig. Men altså, det opdager man jo, fordi tallene er røde i stedet for grønne.

Martin: Vi kan lige se en video.

2 Videoer bliver afspillet..

Page 252 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Martin: Vi kan lige snakke om de muligheder vi ser her, med mobilbetalinger, jeres tanker?

Christina: Det er super smart, men lige nu er det et alternativ til alle de her ting. Men hvis det bliver sådan, at du mister din telefon, så mister du dine nøgler, din pung osv. så jeg ved slet ikke hvad man skal gøre, af sig selv. Som Alternativ er det jo super smart.

Zakia: Det kan ikke erstattes fuldstændigt.

Mie: Hvis du er i udlandet, så skal du have noget net –forbindelse, det kunne godt blive lidt dyrt i længden. Hvis der ikke findes en anden alternativ vej.

Michael: Jeg tror ikke den brugte net på noget tidspunkt. Den sidste var NFC. Det kræver bare et godt batteri på din telefon.

Stine: Ja, hvis batteriet gå ud, så har man bare mistet alt. Du kan ikke engang komme ind på dit hotelværelse.

Zakia: Det er super smart, som du siger, man kan gøre alt. Man behøver ikke at finde dankortet op af sin pung og man forlader jo ikke sit hjem uden sin mobil – det gør jeg i hvert fald ikke. Man har den altid på sig, det har de fleste. Det er bare smart, at man bare kan nøjes med at bruge den også ude i butikkerne. Jeg ville helt sikkert bruge det, hvis jeg havde mulighed for det, i stedet for, at betale med dankort.

Christian: Nu er så meget samlet på telefonerne allerede, så hvorfor skulle man ikke kunne samle endnu mere. Vi er vant til, at alle funktionerne er samlet, så tænker det bliver meget naturligt. Man bruger det også mere og mere også der hjemme, i forhold til lydsystemer og alt mulig andet. Tænker det bare er en normal udvikling. Men det er rigtig, hvis man mister den, så er alt væk. Men altså det er lidt lige som hvis man mister sine nøgler, så kan man jo heller ikke komme ind. Det sker jo også, men man finder jo ud af det. Men det er rigtig nok, det er mange ting i én.

Mie: Det er bare ærgerligt, hvis den løber tør for strøm.

Michael: Jeg vil hellere miste min telefon end mine nøgler. Selvfølgelig kan det være dyrt. Men du kan bare købe en ny telefon, og få alt installeret på den igen. Med nøgler, skal du til at have fat i en låsesmed til at kunne låse op og en ny nøgle. Du er hurtigere oppe og køre igen, ved bare at hente din backup på din telefon.

Mie: Jeg vil hellere miste mine nøgler end min telefon – helt klart! Der er alligevel ekstranøgler ved folk rundt omkring. Så jeg skal nok komme hjem og ind. Min telefon det er simpelthen for besværligt at miste den. Den har jeg alt på, selvom jeg har backup, så vil jeg ikke miste den.

Michael: Ved at man, skal have det hele på telefonen, så glæder jeg mig til den dag, hvor man også kan have sit kørekort på telefonen. Så ville jeg overhovedet ikke behøve plastikkort. Det eneste jeg skal have, er min telefon og bilnøgle, jeg kan jo ikke starte bilen endnu med telefonen. Jeg låser mit hus op med min telefon, så jeg har kun kørekort og dankort. Det ville jeg ikke behøve, hvis det kom på telefonen. Det vil være det fede ved at kunne have det hele samlet. Hvis vi skal kigge på de to produkter i videoen, så er det

Page 253 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

første nej. Det andet er bygget op til, at Apple skal købe det. Det var kun Appleprodukter de viste, de ting de viste, er det ApplePay og AppleHome. Det virkede som om, at de håbede på at Apple vil købe det, så de ikke selv skulle videreudvikle det. Den første har jeg prøvet, men sikkerhedsmæssigt synes jeg ikke at den er god nok. Jeg har ikke prøvet at købe, kun oprettet mig. Der skriver du dit kontonummer ind og du laver en pinkode. Men hvis jeg nu hugger, dit mastercard. Så kortnummer ind og de tre cifre bagpå og alt det der og så taster jeg en pinkode. Hvis det kun er det der skal til, før jeg kan købe noget i en butik. Så kan jeg have dit kort, gå op og købe noget på dit kort, jeg kan ikke din kode, men fordi jeg opretter det, så kan jeg selv vælge pinkoden. Jeg ved godt jeg har oprettet mig på min telefon, men man kan jo godt lave en fake profil, hvis det skulle være. Der synes jeg, den mangler noget sikkerhed.

Zakia: Jeg tænker i forhold til, at miste sin telefon, så mister man alt. Hvis jeg mister mit dankort, så går der ret lang tid før, jeg opdager jeg har mistet det. Men hvis jeg mister min telefon, så vil jeg opdage det med det samme, i forhold til, at spærrer og sikkerhed og alt det der.

Michael: Du kan bare ikke spærre den, du kan jo ikke ringe til nogen.

Zakia: Nej, jeg kan gå ind og låse den. Det kan jeg jo godt gøre, fra en browser.

Stine: Nu ved jeg ikke nok om telefoner. Men det jeg bliver bekymret om er fx, at man kan åben ens hus med mobiltelefonen. Kan man godt bare blokere den ?

Michael: Jeg kan gå ind på computeren og sige, at den bruger ikke kan låse op. Men igen, de skal have en kode til min telefon til at låse den op, de skal have en kode for, at låse app’en op, som låser min dør op.

Stine: Der tror jeg bare, at der er en del hacker der er gode til at knække de firecifrede koder.

Michael: Den er så seks.

Stine: Jeg tænkte bare med MobilPay, det er firecifre. Det er bare min personlige fornemmelse, at det ikke er særlig sikkert. Det føles ikke sikkert, det kan godt være, at det er det.

Michael: Men igen, alt hvad der bliver overført fra konto til konto, er rimelig nemt.

Stine: Stadig den følelse jeg som forbruger sidder med, det er, at det er utrygt at have det hele på mobilen.

Christian: Det er også mange oplysninger man har i sin telefon. Det er da sådan lidt følsomt. Der er mange informationer man kan få bare på min telefon nu. Så hvis man tænker, at ens nøgler mm. også vil være på.

Mie: Men igen, i forhold til, hvis du får stjålet din pung, hvor der ligger sygesikring, der ligger dankort. De får alt serveret, hvor man bor.

Michael: Nej og der er ikke kode på pungen.

Christian: Det er bare mere, at alt bare er samlet på mobilen, mails, noter, billeder og sådan noget, der gør det endnu mere privat. Jeg ved godt, at man kan have meget i sin pung.

Mie: Jeg tænkte mere, de personfølsomme ting. Der tænkte jeg ikke lige personlige noter eller mails.

Page 254 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Stine: Nu når du siger mails, så tænker jeg også, hvis der er nogen der går ind på min telefon. Så er min mail bare fremme uden en kode, som jeg normalt vil have, på min computer. Der ligger da også nogle oplysninger. Ja jeg har kode på min telefon, men igen den føler jeg ikke er sikker.

Michael: Nu siger du, at du har en kode på fire, du kan gå ind og sige, at du vil have en på seks- eller ottecifre.

Stine: Jeg ved så lidt, at jeg ikke engang viste, at jeg selv kunne bestemme hvor lang den skulle være.

Michael: Så er der jo også alle de nye telefoner, som kan læse ens fingeraftryk. Så kan man vælge en kode på otte og så kan man ellers også bare bruge fingeraftryk. Man har jo valgt den på fire, fordi man ikke gider, at trykke en milliard taster hver gang.

Martin: Har det ændret jeres tankegang her efter vi har set videoen?

Christian: Ikke umiddelbart. Jeg tænker bare, at det er sådan jeg forstiller mig, det kommer til at blive. Det er også sådan jeg har tænkt inden, at der kommer til at være endnu flere funktioner. Det sker jo også bare fra hver gang, man får en ny telefon, så kan den endnu mere. Lige præcis, i forhold til betaling, så tænker jeg også, at det er vejen frem. Det kommer til at blive sådan. Jeg vil absolut bruge det, hvis det var muligt nu. Nu har jeg jo kun gjort det, de få steder det er muligt med MobilPay- nu har jeg kun MobilPay. Hvis jeg kunne, ville jeg tit have gjort det. Jeg ville gøre det oftere end, at betale med kort.

Michael: Hvor mere vi kan få det samlet, ja jo mere mister man hvis det bliver hugget, men det gør det også nemmere for os selv, at holde styr på.

Zakia: Det kan også gøre, at man bliver bedre til, at passe på sine ting, når man ved, at man har det hele på en ting.

Michael: Det er ikke bare en telefon mere.

Mie: Det er ikke bare en telefon mere, det er jo alt. Når det er sådan for os. Så tænker jeg bare på de børn der vokser op med det her. De kommer nærmest ikke til at se, hvad kontanter er. Det hele kommer til at foregå diverse steder på mobilen. Det går vist kun den vej.

Michael: Ideerne i filmen er fine, men ikke noget nyt. Det eneste var, at jeg ikke vidste, at man kunne bruge Passbook i Danmark.

Mie: Jeg synes, det var den første video der var den fineste. Jeg tænkte det vil jeg da også kunne gøre. Bare lige kunne scanne telefonen.

Michael: Jeg synes, måske video nr. to var meget forvirrende. De skulle vise meget uden at vise noget. Hvis man skulle sige noget godt op video nr. et, så er det, at den er bygget sammen med e- kvitteringer. Det synes jeg alle butikker skulle være tilknyttet. I stedet for, at de printer kvitteringen og du siger nej tak og de så smider den ud – det er der jo ingen grund til.

Mie: Ja helt klart, hvis man køber på den måde, altså elektronisk og ikke med kontanter. Det giver kun mening, at man så får kvitteringen på den måde.

Page 255 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Michael: Fx i Bilka, hvis man køber med dankort, så får du kvitteringen på mail. Det fede er, hvis du har købt noget elektronik, så er der jo garanti. Så får du et stykke papir, så skal du huske det eller du kan få det på mail, så ved du hvor det er. Det er noget nemmere at finde, hvis der skulle gå noget galt.

Stine: Det er smart og jeg tænker også bare sådan rent miljømæssigt, med alt det papir man kan sparre.

Martin: Er der andre muligheder i ser i det. Ikke kun kvitteringer, men hvis man nu skulle se det som en pung. Med loyalitetskort, bonuskort mm. Er det en fordel eller ulempe, hvis man puttede det ind over?

Michael: Hvis man kan sige nej tak til det, så er det fint, så kan man vælge.

Zakia: Det kunne være en fordel, for jeg glemmer det nogle gange, fx i Imerco der er der det kort jeg skal vise, det er kun i Matas de spørg.

Mie: Eller de der steder hvor du har købt et eller andet og fået to stempler, så skal du huske det til næste gang. Så du ikke ender op med 10 kort, med et eller to stempler på.

Michael: Statoli er begyndt at gøre det, at der hæfter du dit betalingskort til. Så husker den det for dig. Så ja det synes jeg. Jeg har da også alle de kort, men de ligger der hjemme et eller andet sted. For hvis du skal have det hele i sin pung, så er det lidt voldsomt.

Stine: Det er jo det, der er så mange kort man kan få hvis man siger ja til det hele. Jeg siger bare konsekvent nej til det hele. Ellers har man bare lige pludseligt tusinde kort liggende.

Michael: Jeg har taget billeder af dem. Fx i Silvan, der skal de bruge stregkoden, så har jeg taget billede af det og viser det. Men hvis man bare kunne få det ind i en app, hvor det hele var samlet. For jeg skal stadig til, at finde billedet.

Christian: Det er lidt som det du sagde før, hvis man kunne få kørekortet ind på mobilen. Det er lidt det samme hvis man kunne få alle de her kort ind. Det ville jo gøre det hele meget nemmere.

Michael: Så ja, hvis man bare kunne få det hele ind på. Der er jo lavet en app der hedder cashapp eller sådan noget. Som man kan bruge hvis fx Imerco er med i det. Så kan du gemme dine point der inde. Men igen det er også en app, så har du MobilPay og E- kvitteringer. Så hvis man kunne få det hele samlet i en.

Stine: Ja hvis man kunne få det hele samlet, så kan var fri for en masse kort i pungen, men så har du så tusinde app’s du skal kigge igennem.

Christian: Det vigtigste for mig og for mange andre tror jeg. Er at det skal være lige så enkelt som med MobilPay, der skal ikke være for mange steps. Det skal være let, at bruge den her app. Det synes jeg næsten er det bedste ved MobilPay, den er så let at bruge.

Martin: Kunne i se disse løsninger overtage den funktion jeres pung har i dag og kort?

Christina: Ja !

Mie: Ja, det kunne jeg helt sikkert godt !

Zakia: Ja !

Page 256 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Christian: Det kunne jeg også.

Christian: Der spørg de stort set alle steder efterhånden.

Michael: Der er faktisk næsten ingen steder de må spøger om det.

Mie: Det er bare tit, eller sådan var det i hvert fald, da jeg sad i et callcenter. Der var det lettere og hurtigere, at slå kunden op på deres CPR-numme, end alle mulige latterlige oplysninger. Der er selvfølgelig nogen der overhovedet ikke vil udlevere deres CPR – nummer.

Shekria: Jeg sætter ikke engang spørgsmålstegn ved at give mit CPR-nummer, hvis jeg ved det skal bruges i en sammenhæng.

Christian: Jeg tror vores generation er sådan lidt mere afslappet omkring det.

Mie: Ja og der er rigtig mange kundesystemer, hvor du bliver registeret under dit CPR – nummer. Det er jo unikt og derfor kan de let slå dig op. Jeg vil synes, det er mere sikkert, at jeg skal taste mit CPR-nummer ind på telefonen, inden jeg kom i kontakt med en medarbejder. Så kan medarbejderne ikke se det frem for jeg skulle sige det i telefonen. Men selvfølgelig, de kan altid finde dit CPR- nummer frem.

Stine: Men det er egentlig ret voldsomt, hvor mange oplysninger der ligger på vores CPR-nummer. Jeg kan huske der var en dokumentar der hed ” Overvågningssamfund”, fordi man kan finde ud af så mange ting ved bare at have CPR-nummeret. Hvor du har boet førhen, nærmest hele din historik, din sundhedsoplysninger.

Mie: Man skal jo også lige kunne logge ind, for at kunne se alle de ting der.

Stine: Jeg kan bare huske, da vi boede i Canada, der kunne man intet se om os. I Canada kunne de ikke engang finde ud af hvor vi boede henne. Når du skiftede adresse, så sagde du det ingen steder. Det var så nemt, at forsvinde på en eller anden måde.

Appendix 15 – Questionnaire Spørgeskema

Køn

Mand kvinde

Alder /Hvad er din alder?

Hvilken region bor du i?

Region Hovedstaden, Region Sjælland, Region Syddanmark, Region Midtjylland, Region Nordjylland

Hvad er din årlige brutto indkomst? Brutto Indkomst årligt

0-100.000, 100.001-200.000, 200.001-300.000, 300.001-400.000, 400.001 og over , vil ikke oplyse

Page 257 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Bruger du en mobilbetalingsapp?

Ja, nej (afslut spørgeskema)

Hvilken app bruger du til mobilbetaling

MobilePay, SWIPP, MeeWallet, Paii, ApplePay, SMS, Andet (hvilken?)

Hvilke former for betalinger bruger du din mobil til? Gadehandel

Pengeoverførsler, butikshandel, onlinehandel (WUPTI, DBA, osv.), privathandel( loppemarkeder, pølsevogne, eller lign.), transport (billetter), Post Danmark (frimærker), Sms-afstemning (X-Factor, Melodi grand prix, osv.), parkering, Andet (hvilke?), velgørenhed og politiks støtte

Hvor ofte bruger du mobilbetaling til at overføre penge

Dagligt, 4-5 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange månedligt, 1-5 gange halvårligt, ca. 1 gang årligt, sjældnere, aldrig

Hvor ofte bruger du mobilbetaling til at betale i butikker (ikke online)

Dagligt, 4-5 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange månedligt, 1-5 gange halvårligt, ca. 1 gang årligt, sjældnere, aldrig

Hvor ofte bruger du mobilbetaling til at betale på internettet

Dagligt, 4-5 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange ugentligt, 1-3 gange månedligt, 1-5 gange halvårligt, ca. 1 gang årligt, sjældnere, aldrig

Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitlig for med mobilbetaling i butikker (ikke pengeoverførsel) (Beløb i Danske Kroner)

Hvor stort et beløb køber du gennemsnitlig for med mobilbetaling ved køb på internettet (ikke pengeoverførsel) (Beløb i Danske Kroner)

Hvor stort et beløb overfører du i gennemsnit (Beløb i Danske Kroner)

Jeg syntes at mobilbetalinger er mere usikker end andre betalingsformer

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Min nuværende mobilbetalingsapp lever op til mine behov og forventninger

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Page 258 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Jeg forventer at skifte mobilbetalingsapp i fremtiden

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Jeg vil bruge mobilbetaling oftere, hvis mine venner bruger det

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Jeg forventer at bruge mobilbetaling oftere i fremtiden

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Jeg er ikke bekymret for at mine persondata bliver misbrugt når jeg bruger mobilbetaling

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Jeg syntes mobilbetaling er simpelt at bruge

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Jeg syntes mobilbetaling gør mine købsoplevelser bedre

Meget enig Enig lidt enig hverken eller lidt uenig uenig meget uenig ved ikke

Hvis du skulle vælge en mobilbetalingsløsning frem for andre betalingsformer hvor vigtigt er nedenstående udsagn for dig (på en skala fra 1-7 hvor 1 er meget lidt vigtigt og 7 er meget vigtigt).

 Det går hurtigere end betaling med dankort eller kontakter  Jeg kan stole på sikkerheden  Det er nyt og smart  Jeg vil kunne integrere mine kort (eksempelvis medlemskort og bonuspointkort)  Det er enkelt  Det kan giver mig en bedre købeoplevelse  Jeg kan bruge min mobilbetalingsløsning når jeg er i udlandet  Det giver mig flere muligheder og større fleksibilitet

Appendix 16 – Lo Plus newsletter

Page 259 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Appendix 17 – Focus group profiles Focus group profile:

Name: Christina Stenvig Jensen Age: 27 Education: pedagogue Marital status: in a relationship Current job: pedagogue Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Christian Traoré Age: 32 Education: HF Marital status: Single Current job: Fodboldspiller/student Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Michael Øllgård Education: Age: 42 Marital status: in relationship Current job: IT Supervisor Nordea Which mobile payment application do you use: Paii, IZettle, MobilePay, Swipp, MeeWallet

Name: Zakia Chahboun Education: cand.IT Age: 29 Marital status: single Current job: SAP konsulent

Page 260 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Stine Bleeg Education: Cand.Psych Age: 29 Marital status: Married Current job: Psykolog Halsnæs Kommune Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Frederik Reindorf Education: 10 klasse Age: 32 Marital status: In a relationship Current job: Portør Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Thomas T. Højbæk Education: B.Sc. Software Udvikling Age: 28 Marital status: single Current job: Programmer analyst Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Julie Lee Education: Ph.D biomedicin Age: 33 Marital status: Single Current job: Postdoc Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Britt Petersen Education: Fysioterapeut Age: 53 Marital status: single Current job: Fysioterapeut Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Simon Haulrig Education: Cand.mer (fil) Age: 25 Marital status: single Current job: Unemployed Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Name: Mi Louise Hansen Education: BA I ernæring og sundhed

Page 261 of 262

Hans Mathiesen & Martin Stenderup Master thesis

Age: 32 Marital status: single Current job: finalcial cotroller Which mobile payment application do you use: MobilePay

Page 262 of 262