CASH ACCESS STRATEGY PART TWO
signature or PIN. DCCA is the less expensive of the two and generally initiated directly at a POS terminal, and at times on an ATM or SSK following a declined ATM transaction. VARs have developed software that conveniently pushes the patron to a DCCA from a declined ATM transaction. Generally, this process doesn’t require an additional swipe or dip of the card and, if accepted, routes the transaction to the card issuer seeking an approval on the cardholder’s daily POS debit “open to buy” or limit. This limit is usually three to four times higher than the cardholder’s ATM daily limit and available “for the purchase of quasi cash (chips).” If the cardholder has an overdraft provision, those funds can also be accessed through a DCCA. DCCA transactions are supported by most card-issuing banks for domestic transactions and often not supported when the DCCA is attempted internationally. CCCA transactions are the most dynamic,
most expensive, and most misunderstood of the transaction types. As discussed earlier, there are several MCCs associated with CCCA transactions and the most widely used and ineffective is 7995. Almost all CCCA transactions outside North America use MCC 7995. MCC 6051 and 4829 are utilized by VARs and highly effective in ensuring the cardholder has the greatest opportunity to access available funds or “open to buy” on their credit card. However, in order for CCCA transactions to qualify for MCC 6051 and 4829, specific procedures must be completed by the operator and/or VAR to provide the credit-issuing bank greater confidence in the transaction, which leads to more approvals and higher approval amounts. CCCA transactions can range from $20 to more than $100,000 per transaction and are facilitated by Visa, MasterCard, Discover and AMEX. It’s important to note patrons who enter a
casino with a valid bankcard with a credit facility already have an approved and active credit limit. Generally, a percentage of the approved limit is available for quasi-cash transactions or CCCA, generally 50-70% of the limit. I have had many discussions with gaming commissions and operators around the world regarding bankcards with a credit facility versus the issuance of credit within a casino. It’s a sensitive subject and extends to all forms of quasi cash transactions (ATM, DCCA and CCCA). I agree with the notion valid bankcards with an existing approved credit facility presented at a casino should not be interpreted as the casino extending credit. The cardholder has an existing agreement with their card issuing bank, the bank has enabled the card to perform quasi cash transactions and through their own due diligence and
34 FEBRUARY 2017
scoring, the bankcard issuer has applied and made available an acceptable credit facility and quasi-cash limit.
One of the most common questions from
GEs around the world is, “Can we process China Union Pay CCCA transactions?” I have met with China Union Pay (CUP) executives in Beijing, Hong Kong, and Las Vegas, and the answer is a collective and definitive, “No.” While CUP allows for PIN-based ATM transactions, CUP-endorsed cards may not be used for “quasi cash” transactions within a GE anywhere in the world. In many markets, small retail locations exist in and around GEs that allows customers to purchase merchandise with a CUP card, and then immediately issues a refund in cash— usually with a fee in the 6–12% range. The Chinese government and CUP have cracked down on these establishments in recent years.
DCCA and CCCA are regularly pushed from
the cashier to an ATM, SSK, or POS device to gain authorizations. This is done for two reasons: (1) minimize wait times and lines at the cashier as CA transactions can be lengthy (3–15 minutes) and (2) allow the cardholder privacy in case of a declined transaction. Many GEs will also waive or reduce CA fees for VIPs through proprietary software or manual processes. Some VARs like Passport Technology have introduced feature-rich back-office solutions whereby this process is automated through dynamic VIP alerts and player card/number recognition. The first VAR to introduce a real-time process to offer the cardholder the option to use player rewards to offset CA fees at the POI will have a compelling advantage. Important fact: many VARs have “opt-in” language printed on their CA receipts, which is rarely read by the cardholder and once signed, allows the VAR to sell the transaction details, including cardholder name and address, to any GE for direct marketing purposes. This presents a question for GEs: “Who owns the CA customer – the VAR providing the CA service or the GE?” I think the answer is clear. The operator has invested a huge amount of resources in developing the customer relationship over time and should be very wary of CA providers selling customers’ data and putting this valued relationship at risk.
Final thoughts…
We have barely scratched the surface on CA in this article and there is a deep well of related representations, warranties, and SLAs in CA agreements. Some GEs do a superb job of protecting their businesses while others simply don’t know what they don’t know.
Tips for negotiating CA and technology
agreements: • Ensure there is no “opt-in” language on DCCA or CCCA receipts unless you are comfortable with the associated risks • Negotiate a “technology clause” allowing you to source new and innovative technology if the incumbent cannot provide it within a specified time frame (Responsible Gambling, AML, PCI) • Require detailed monthly reporting on all CA transactions and specifically CA transactions not receiving a commission • Negotiate financial penalties for system downtime based on lost cash to the gaming floor, one-time fees for customer disablement, and SLAs for all service disruptions at the POI • Coordinate timing of your CA and Merchant Services agreements to leverage payment and technological synergies • Ensure your PCI accessor understands the complete Card Data Environment (CDE) and related contractual, hardware, and software dynamics with CA, Merchant Services, Software, Hardware, ERP, and hosting providers
New technology and schemes seem to come and go in the CA space with limited success due to an unproven value model, poor execution, or a breakdown in stakeholder cooperation. TITO at the gaming table, wireless POS, ticket vs. cash dispense at the SSK, cash recyclers, e-wallets, tokenless biometric cash access system and pre-paid debit cards all offer interesting value propositions…but none have caught on yet. The only material technological innovation making a real impact in CA over the past 10 years has been TITO, SSK and more recently EMV (Chip & Pin). The ongoing and costly migration to Euro
MasterCard Visa (EMV), Chip & PIN, and Chip & Signature (US markets) at the POI is likely to fail, and NFC will emerge as the “go-to” payment technology of the future. Payments within the GE and broader resort are convoluted, segmented, and simply not synergistic. There is a smarter way, and I look forward to seeing technology and payment leaders break the complacency that has governed this industry for too long. The real CA opportunity for operators lies in
improving cardholders’ access to cash, increasing their awareness of CA options, and minimizing the amount of physical cash required on the gaming floor. A disciplined CA strategy—combined with collaborative partnerships and a robust toolset—will increase CA revenue and operational efficiencies while elevating the patron experience and cultivating unprecedented levels of customer loyalty.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82
