Workshop 21.5.2025 - mdoujak/A2AP GitHub Wiki
Workshop May 21, 2025
Participants
- David Kauer, PostFinance
- Michael Doujak, Ergon
- Michal Jarmolkowicz, Swisssafe
- Roland Cortivo, HBL
- Thomas Zioerjen, PostFinance
- Tobias Christen, Migros
Excused:
- Markus Ruggiero, LUKB
Agenda
- Introduction
- Define joint approach for the workshop
- A2A Value Proposition
- Scope/Objectives for the PoC
- e-Commerce vs. PoS?
- Option: Invoice Payment?
- SIC Payment vs. Instant Payment
- What should the PoC deliver
- Technical feasibility
- Customer acceptance
- e-Commerce vs. PoS?
- Technical Architecture
- Wallet decision
- Security and Fraud
- Direct vs. Payment Service Provider
- Next Steps /
Next Steps
- We will have an hour during the OBP Workshop on June 4, 2025
- Mike will forward the invitation to all participant of A2A
- Mike will document the workshop and share the results with all participants
- All participants share their github account handle with Mike
- Michael and Mike will work on a proposal on how to achieve the PoC
Workshop Results
Goals
Goal | Description |
---|---|
Cost | The goal is to establish a payment channel that offers financial advantages to banks and merchants compared to today’s solutions. |
Fraud | Fraud is an accepted issue in certain payment channels. The new channel should exhibit a particularly high level of fraud resistance, making it especially trustworthy. |
One Touch | Create a user experience where the customer can pay an invoice with just one click. |
User Experience | The user experience for the customer must be at least as good as with other channels. |
One Touch Customer Profile | TODO: write a short summary what we want to achieve here. |
Benefits
Benefit | Description | Customer | Retailer | Bank |
---|---|---|---|---|
Customer trust in digital payments | The payment channel is highly resistant to fraud and especially phishing attacks. This will help build customer trust in this channel. | x | ||
Actor identification | The actors (retailer, bank) must be registered in the trust infrastructure. This makes all types of fraud more difficult. | x | x | x |
Transaction data insights | It is fundamentally conceivable to share transaction details in a further step and with customer consent, enabling new solutions and offers for customers. | x | x | |
Large retailer: cost savings in processing | The retailer can connect directly to this payment channel, avoiding costs for intermediaries. | x | ||
Retailers have a seat in the governance body | Retailers are involved from the beginning in designing and implementing the channel and can represent their interests in the governance body. | x | ||
Payment guarantee without PSP costs | The costs for payment service providers can be avoided. | x | ||
Acquirer cost savings | The costs for acquirers can be avoided. | x | x | |
Influence on E-ID / Swiyu | The findings from the PoC can be passed directly to the E-ID team to influence the further development of the trust infrastructure and the Swiyu wallet. | x | x | |
Brand exposure for banks | In the wallet, the bank account will be visible with logo and details for the customer. | x | ||
Bank can increase fees | The channel is inherently cost-effective because intermediaries are no longer needed. Retailers and banks can share the savings. | x |
Out of Scope
Topic | Description |
---|---|
Loyalty Programs | In a future version, it should be possible to have loyalty program VCs and to seamlessly include them in a one touch payment process. |
Tracking User Profile | Many payment channels are able to provide retailers and banks with user profiles. |
Zero Touch | Zero touch payment processes e.g. subscription renewal payments are not considered. |
PSP Integration | The focus is on larger retailers with direct integration. |