Home > Credit Cards > Does Google Have Access to Your Offline Purchases?

Comments 0 Comments

Over the course of the last year, some Google advertisers were granted access to a new and very effective tool for tracking the conversion rates of adverts. Instead of measuring conversion in terms of clicks, conversions were measured in terms of sales at physical stores across the country. This was made possible when the tech giant bought transaction data from Mastercard.

Ordinarily, this arrangement would not raise any alarms except for the fact that this transaction was not publicly disclosed to the majority of the two billion Mastercard holders.

The Deal Between Google and Mastercard

According to reports, four people with knowledge of the deal told Bloomberg that Google and Mastercard Inc. were able to reach an arrangement after four years of negotiating. This partnership would provide Google with an asset which could be used when measuring retail spending. This is a part of Google’s strategy to solidify itself against competition like Amazon.

And while this deal may be good for both parties involved, the secrecy shrouding the entire affair can lead to larger privacy – like how giant companies absorb consumer data.

According to Christine Bannan, the counsel to the advocacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC):

“People don’t expect what they buy physically in a store to be linked to what they are buying online. There’s just far too much burden that companies place on consumers and not enough responsibility being taken by companies to inform users what they’re doing and what rights they have.”

Another spokesperson who also spoke with Bloomberg claimed that the deal went through because Google needed the data. Both companies discussed the possibility of sharing the advert revenue with each other.

A spokeswoman talked about the ads tool saying:

“Before we launched this beta product last year, we built a new, double-blind encryption technology that prevents both Google and our partners from viewing our respective users’ personally identifiable information. We do not have access to any personal information from our partners’ credit and debit cards, nor do we share any personal information with our partners.”

In a statement released by the company, they insisted that their customers can choose to opt out of tracking through its Google Web and App Activity console. This did not seem to placate the multiple people who spoke out against the product. Multiple Google employees voiced their opinions saying the application did not have a much easier and obvious way for customers to opt out of the tracking.

When Mastercard spokesperson Seth Eisen gave a statement, he refused to speak specifically on the deal with Google, but he chose to stress the fact that Mastercard shares all transaction trends with its merchants and service providers in a bid to help them track the efficiency of their advertising campaigns:

“The information, which includes sales volumes and the average size of the purchase, is shared only with permission of the merchants. No individual transaction or personal data is provided,” he said. “We do not provide insights that track, serve up ads to, or even measure ad effectiveness relating to, individual consumers.”

The Implications

When Google announced the service which they tagged as “Store Sales Measurement,” they mentioned they had access to about 70% of U.S. credit and debit cards through its partners without directly naming anyone.

By that 70%, it stands to reason that Google has been able to reach deals similar to that it has with Mastercard with other credit card companies. Or it could also mean that they reached deals with companies that work with credit card users and 70% of those users are already logged into Google accounts when they click on a search ad done by Google.

According to two people within the company who are familiar with ‘Store Sales Measurement,’ Google has approached other companies about joining the program, but they could not confirm if they had closed the deals with any of the companies. Google, on the other hand, mentioned that their service applies to only individuals who are logged into its accounts and had yet to opt out of advert tracking.

Through its program, Google will be able to match anonymously existing user profiles to purchases made within physical stores. The result of this means Google will be able to tell who clicked on adverts and tell if those clicks led to actual purchases being made in stores.

Google’s spokeswoman said:

“Google is testing the data service with a “small group” of advertisers in the U.S. With it, marketers see aggregate sales figures and estimates of how many they can attribute to Google ads — but they don’t see a shoppers’ personal information, how much they spend or what exactly they buy. The tests are only available for retailers, not the companies that make the items sold inside stores. The service only applies to its search and shopping ads.”

For the people at Google who support the deal, it lines up perfectly with their grand effort to capture more retail spending. At the moment, advertisers spend a huge sum of money on Google to get actionable and valuable information. Until now, it has been difficult for companies to effectively tell how these adverts affect offline purchase behavior.

This was what drove Google as they strove to find a way for their largest customers to find that connection between their online adverts and sales. Joseph McConellogue who heads online retail for agency Reprise digital said, “Google needs to tie that activity back to a click. Most advertisers are chomping at the bit for this kind of integration.”

But no matter how much Google wants to place a spin on their deal with Mastercard, the whole situation causes many to ask, just how long can big companies like Mastercard and Google continue to sell consumer date without properly informing their users.

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team