90 Central Banks Seek Blockchain Answers at Federal Reserve Event
A number of major #central #banks worldwide have organizing working groups dedicated to exploring #blockchain #technology and digital currencies.
fintech techcrunch
Updates from user Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
user
-
user
Wrap of week #22: Midwest, Southwest, Insurtech, Altfi, Payments
Last #week we hovered over the #Midwest and the #Southwest; Kansas and Austin, TX. Kansas: A global alternative exchange that IPO’d; BATS exchange. Austin TX: An alternative credit history builder running in a bank; SelfLender. We continued our #Insurtech coverage focusing in the Auto Industry with 21 ventures. We offered insights in the broad&160;#Altfi space: For…Read more #Wrap of week #22: Midwest, Southwest, Insurtech, Altfi,&160;#Payments
Bank Innovation -
user
The Road Ahead: 3 Big Insurance Trends for the Next 12 Months
#Prediction and prognostication must be traits buried right in the genetic core of the human species. People’s desire to peer around the corner into what they can’t see and try to make sense of the shapes and shadows is almost a basic need. It makes us feel smart, it provides comfort as a source of clarity, it lets us show off our expertise.
So, while I may be motivated by some weird base instinct to call the #insurance industry’s shots- I also genuinely think the next year will turn out to be unlike any the industry has ever seen. At the least, we’re beginning to see some tectonic shifts in how insurance does business as it starts succumbing to the inexorable forces of #technology, customer demand, and most importantly, as it finally gives in to good old fashion evolution.
Here are the three big trends in insurance that I see taking shape over the next twelve months.
1. Venture capital firms will start to pick #insurtech leaders
There’s strong demand for insurance technology investments in the VC community right now. According to CB Insights, there was $2.65 billion in VC investments in insurtech companies in 2015, about three-and-a-half times the amount invested in similar companies the prior year. This makes sense too. Insurance is one of the remaining industries that hasn’t yet taken a huge, technology-based step forward and VCs are finally realizing the potential impact technology could have on how it’s bought, sold and administered.
So, while there has been a massive demand for insurance investments from the VC community, beyond employee benefits, the actual pace of investment has been relatively low due to an almost complete lack of investment opportunities with attractive business models, proven teams, and productive uses for their capital. Even including benefits, while $2.65 billion is a lot of money, it’s a small percentage of the $128.5 billion in VC money that was raised last year.
Over the course of the next year, we’ll see a few strong financial models emerge from companies who took seed rounds over the last 18 months that will attract sizable Series A rounds to fund growth and establish leads in their market segments. The noise and buzz around insurtech has already spawned a growing number of me-too copycats and business model clones but, as has happened with other formerly hot sectors for venture capital- the on-demand economy and marketplace lending- the benefits of scale and access to capital will accrue almost entirely to the innovative first movers.
2. Carriers will start more meaningful partnerships with startups to drive innovation
You can bet that all carriers are already having discussions about this in their boardrooms right now, it’s reflected in strategic VC investments even if not yet in meaningful operating partnerships, but over the next year we’ll see which carriers will actually pull the trigger on deals – be it acquisitions or partnerships – that lean on startups to help them jumpstart the pace of innovation inside the company. We’ve started to see meaningful partnerships with technology companies from the large #banks only recently, but there is reason to think that insurers will move faster.
Most of this activity will happen around finding new means of distribution, new ways to help claims adjusting, big data analysis for underwriting, and early efforts at incorporating the Internet of Things. It will be a fairly incredible thing to see for a couple reasons: first, it will be impressive to see massive companies realize that they can no longer “move at the speed of insurance,” and, second forward-thinking carriers who welcome technology to the fold will create sizeable business advantages against their more luddite rivals, and do so more quickly than ever before possible.
3. Migration of talent from old guard companies to insurtech startups
As insurtech companies raise larger amounts of capital, more and more executives from established insurance companies will start to join their ranks. Lemonade’s hires from AIG and ACE and Embroker’s own recent addition of Tom DeMichael from Willis will be the first wave of a larger trend as property and casualty focused startups will by their nature require more industry expertise than the first wave of employee benefits startups like Zenefits.
As funding increases for insurtech leaders (see prediction No. 1), on-hand cash at these startups will allow them to lure top talent away from the industry giants, just as the massive carriers and brokers alike will be adjusting to the brave, new world of insurance by trying to cut bloated cost structures. Seasoned execs that are dynamic enough to thrive in the fast-moving startup environment will be in short supply, creating great opportunities for the available free agents and new entrants alike.
Each of these are trends that will be at play not only over the next 12 months, but for several years at least to come. However, I expect now is when we’ll start to see real movement on each. One thing is clear: the insurance industry – as well as the burgeoning insurtech market – will be an incredibly interesting space to watch.
[linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/millermatthewc” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Matt Miller”] is founder & CEO of Embroker and a version of this post first appeared in the Embroker Blog
-
user
Digitalisierung der Immobilienbranche: Nachzügler werden abgestraft
Die Immobilien- und Baubranche wird durch die fortschreitende #Digitalisierung stark geprägt. Eine Studie der Hochschule Luzern zeigt, dass Unternehmen, welche die Herausforderungen verschlafen, existentiell gefährdet sind. Insbesondere kleinere und national agierende Firmen haben Nachholbedarf. Die Studie führt zudem die Schlüsselfaktoren auf, um im digitalen Wettbewerb erfolgreich zu agieren.
Mit einer breit angelegten Untersuchung bei den wichtigsten Akteurinnen und Akteuren der #Immobilienbranche hat das Institut für Finanzdienstleistungen Zug IFZ der Hochschule Luzern das «Digitalisierungsbarometer 2016» ermittelt. Die Analyse macht deutlich, dass 72 Prozent der befragten Unternehmen die Bedeutung der Digitalisierung erkannt und entsprechende Ziele in der Unternehmensstrategie verankert haben.
Die Qualität der Umsetzung ist jedoch sehr unterschiedlich. Bauunternehmungen und Architekturbüros etwa sind bezüglich der Digitalisierung oftmals schlecht aufgestellt, obwohl sie sich selber eher als Vorreiter sehen. «Durch den täglichen Einsatz von digitalen Systemen wie 3-D-Modelling oder CAD-Systemen scheinen sich insbesondere Architekturbüros bezüglich der vorherrschenden Digitalisierung als innovativ einzustufen. Doch sie erkennen noch zu wenig, dass sich mit der Digitalisierung nicht nur die Planungsprozesse, sondern auch die Kundenbeziehungen verändern #werden», sagt Studienleiter Markus Schmidiger.
Nationale Unternehmen unterschätzen Auswirkungen
Unterschiede gibt es nicht nur bezüglich Geschäftsbereiche, sondern auch hinsichtlich der Ausrichtung der Firmen. «Die 69 Prozent rein national tätigen Unternehmen wähnen sich noch in einem sicheren Hafen», so Schmidiger. International tätige Firmen spüren einen wesentlich raueren Wind, nehmen das geänderte Kundenverhalten und die stärkere Konkurrenz drastischer wahr und setzen die Möglichkeiten der Digitalisierung wesentlich konsequenter um. «Je mehr internationale Firmen in die Schweiz drängen, umso mehr werden die nationalen Unternehmen unter Druck kommen», sagt Schmidiger.
Effizienzsteigerung alleine reicht nicht
Drei Viertel der Betriebe haben die digitalen Möglichkeiten bis dato insbesondere für Veränderungen ihrer internen Prozesse eingesetzt. «Konkret fokussieren sich die Firmen hauptsächlich auf Effizienzsteigerungen und Kostenreduktionen. Die Chancen der Digitalisierung zur Gestaltung von Kundenbeziehungen werden noch zu wenig erkannt», sagt Schmidiger. Dieser Fokus wird sich in den kommenden Jahren verschieben. Mehr als die Hälfte der Unternehmen geht davon aus, dass die Digitalisierung dazu führt, dass sich Geschäftsmodelle grundsätzlich verändern.
Eine konsequente Digitalisierung von Geschäftsmodellen kann Produktivitätsgewinne von 80 bis 90 Prozent und damit traditionelle Anbieter massiv in Schwierigkeiten bringen. «Die Bewältigung dieser nächsten Phase wird von den Unternehmen den Mut erfordern, das eigene Vorgehen grundsätzlich in Frage zu stellen und sich im Extremfall sogar selber zu kannibalisieren», sagt Schmidiger.
Kundenverhalten ist zu wenig bekannt
97 Prozent aller befragten Unternehmen bejahen, dass sich das Kundenumfeld durch die Möglichkeiten der Online-Kanäle wandelt. So vergleichen Kundinnen und Kunden mehr, und sie sind preissensitiver geworden. «Das Internet baut Informationsasymmetrien ab und gibt mehr Verhandlungsmacht», sagt Schmidiger. Während sich die Kundschaft der Immobilienbranche in den vergangenen Jahren dank der Digitalisierung emanzipierte, hinken die Unternehmen im Bereich Kundenanalyse hinterher.
«44 Prozent der Firmen wissen nicht, wie sich ihre Kunden heute im Internet bewegen: Ob sie über ein Online-Portal auf das Angebot aufmerksam wurden, ob sie mobil oder stationär auf die Website zugreifen oder welche Informationen sie tatsächlich nutzen», sagt Schmidiger. «Damit fehlen den Unternehmen die Grundlagen, um ihre Produkte, Dienstleistungen und Vertriebskanäle zu optimieren.»
Digital Leaders setzen sich ab
Digital Leaders sind Firmen, die sich aktiv mit der Digitalisierung auseinandersetzen und entsprechende Massnahmen umsetzen. Sie konnten in den vergangenen Jahren stärker als andere Unternehmen neue Branchen, Zielgruppen und Regionen erschliessen und dabei sowohl Marktanteile als auch Einnahmen und Profitabilität erhöhen. Die Analyse zeigt, dass sich die Innovatoren in klar definierten Punkten von den Nachzüglern unterscheiden: Digital Leaders widmen sich vermehrt der Datenanalyse und kennen die Kunden und das Marktumfeld.
Sie wissen, mit wem sie wirklich Geld verdienen, und können deshalb ihre Angebote sowie Informationskanäle darauf ausrichten und sich besser auf Entwicklungen vorbereiten. Sie nutzen nebst den angestammten Offline-Kanälen auch Online-Kanäle konsequent, setzen aber trotzdem gezielt auf Beziehungsmanagement. Durch ihre Innovationskraft ziehen sie qualifiziertere Mitarbeitende an, die wiederum die Digitalisierung vorantreiben. Tendenziell gewinnen sie die anspruchsvolleren Kunden. Die #Nachzügler (immerhin 27 Prozent der Unternehmen) müssen sich mit den weniger anspruchsvollen Kunden und den weniger qualifizierten Mitarbeitenden begnügen.
Während knapp 60 Prozent der Digital Leaders sowohl die Einnahmen je Kunde und Einzelauftrag als auch insgesamt steigern konnten, sind es bei den Nachzüglern nur knapp 22 Prozent. Das deutet darauf hin, dass sich die Schere in Zukunft noch weiter öffnen wird. «Die Digitalisierung lohnt sich. Und sie wird zur Überlebensfrage: Wer den Zug verpasst, wird untergehen», sagt Schmidiger.
Für die Studie «Digitalisierungsbarometer: Die Immobilienbranche im digitalen Wandel» wertete das Forschungsteam knapp 1ʼ000 Antworten von Fachpersonen aus, die etwa in Architekturbüros, Generalunternehmen, Bauunternehmen, bei der öffentlichen Hand, in der Vermarktung oder im Bereich Immobilieninvestment tätig sind. Die Studie entstand in Zusammenarbeit mit Amstein + Walthert, Halter Immobilien, Wincasa, Garaio, ImmoScout24, Implenia, Migros Pensionskasse und Swisscom. Sie kann zum Preis von CHF 90.00 unter [email protected] bestellt werden. Das Institut für Finanzdienstleistungen Zug IFZ der Hochschule Luzern wird das Digitalisierungsbarometer auch in den kommenden Jahren veröffentlichen.
The post Digitalisierung der Immobilienbranche: Nachzügler werden abgestraft appeared first on Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH.
-
user
Fintech is playing the long game
Our team has been actively investing in #fintech for the past two years. In addition to reading pitches from hundreds of companies and meeting with dozens, half of our team has worked in the finance sector in previous careers. SparkLabs Global decided to create an easy to read overview for others to get up to speed on how innovation and #technology will disrupt the financial sector. Read More -
user
What’s the Trojan Horse Distribution Strategy for Online Business Lending?
An efficient and unique product #distribution model is critical if you want to scale your business. This is evident in the small business #online #lending space. Why? Well, as competition increases in the sector within well-trodden distribution channels, two things happen: Customer Acquisition Costs (CAC) in popular channels will increaseRead More
Bank Innovation -
user
How Fintech Startups should engage Finserv Incumbents
If my thesis on the growing importance of Corporate Venture Capital, b2b business models and #finserv (banking or insurance) #Incumbents as strategic partners for #fintech #startups – in lending, capital markets, payments, asset management and insurance &8211; then it is of the utmost importance for said startups to know how to #engage with their future investors/customers/partners. To be clear, for the purposes of this exercise I will assume there is a business/#technology rationale and intent to partner.The most optimal way to know how to engage with someone is to learn how they engage with you.
A finserv Incumbent will engage you along three vectors: a) the venture investing vector, b) the innovation vector, and c) the business vector.
Answering questions around what, how, who and where along these three vectors is paramount to your future success. Answers to many of the questions I am mapping out below will help you gauge not only the mechanics of engagement but the culture of the strategic partner you are dealing with and if that culture fits with your vision.
Your goal is to figure out how difficult the road ahead is and what to do to maximize success. Remember that dealing with a finserv Incumbent is eminently more difficult that dealing with an independent venture investor.
As a rule of thumb the more abstracted, specialized and sophisticated each of these vectors are, the easier it will be to achieve your goals, assuming business alignment and intent are present. Picture a finserv Incumbent where there is no venture or innovation team per se and where all decision will be made on balance sheet by business leaders with little understanding of early stage technology or business models and you will readily understand that your path will be rather arduous.
Here are a few pointers I recommend fintech entrepreneurs pay heed to when interacting with a bank or an insurance company. Answering these questions will lead you to better understand what beast you are dealing with.
1) How does an Incumbent invest in startups: Does the group you are dealing with have a dedicated team specialized in venture investing or a generalist team that takes care of any type of investment? Is the venture team investing on balance sheet or are they organized as a separate entity? How much capital is dedicated to venture investing? Who sits on the Investment Committee, only the venture team, only executives, a mix? What can they invest in and what cannot they invest in? What makes them consider making an investment? Can they invest without a commercial or strategic rationale?
2) How mature is an Incumbent’s venture investing practice: How many investments have they made? What is their due diligence and investment process? How long does it take? How deep is the due diligence process? How much capital is left to make investments in the next 3 years? What is their reputation? Are they specialized enough to know venture investing is as much of an art as it is a science, if not more?
3) How does an Incumbent approach innovation: Do they have an innovation group? Is it centralized or decentralized &8211; especially important if you are dealing with a global incumbent? In case there is a central innovation group and decentralized teams, who is the decision maker when considering innovation projects? Is the innovation group divided into specialized teams?
4) How mature is an Incumbent&8217;s innovation group: How long has the group been in existence? How many projects has the group worked on? How many projects can the group work on simultaneously? Does the group work on projects with early stage startups as well as established service providers? How savvy are they with your technology? What is their reputation in the marketplace? Are they leaders, “me too” players?
5) What is the role of the business group involved: Do they have decision making powers when contemplating an investment, when contemplating a commercial agreement? When do they get involved &8211; early in the process, late? Can they contemplate a commercial agreement without making an investment?
6) How mature are the Incumbent&8217;s business groups when dealing with startups: How many startups have they dealt with? How many commercial agreements have they completed? Where they front line or did they rely on Venture and Innovation? What is their reputation? What is the average time for them to go to market with new projects? How is their incentive, top line or cost wise, with your particular business? Are they urgently in need of your business solution?
7) Interaction between Venture, Innovation and the Business groups: Who leads, who follows, who reports to whom? Is the interest in interacting with your startup initiated by Innovation, by Venture, by the Business group and what are the implications? How will Venture or Innovation help you navigating potential commercial agreements with Business groups? Who has &8220;skin in the game&8221; compared to the others? Who has more &8220;skin in the game&8221; than others?
8) How is the decision making process influenced: Who are the decision makers, the gatekeepers and the champions? Where do they sit in the org chart and among the Venture, Innovation and Business groups.
9) Motivations of each of Venture, Innovation and Business groups: Are the motivations aligned? What are the goals? Pay special attention to how aligned the Business group is with Venture and Innovation. Do commercial imperatives trump innovation imperatives? Do long term strategic imperatives trump short term commercial ones? How do these motivations and imperatives apply to you and your startup?
10) Reporting Structure: Who do Venture and Innovation report to? Directly to the CEO, the CFO, the Board? If not who do they report to? Does Venture report to Innovation? Are both Venture and Innovation hidden within the bowels of an Incumbent or do they have the necessary and required exposure and support from C-level executives?
11) Explore the role of legal, compliance and regulatory: How convoluted will be the legal and compliance process? Will you be dealing directly with legal and compliance or will you be shielded by Venture, Innovation of the Business group? When will legal and compliance be involved? Are they well versed in the legal arts of early stage investing? Will they bring a bazooka to a knife fight? How much of a burden will they impose on you? Will there be a regulatory approval hurdle to clear?
12) Explore the role of procurement: Assuming there is a vendor management or procurement group, will you need to clear that hurdle too? What will it mean to you, how many resources will you have to engage immediately and over time? What type of data will you need to provide? Are they gatekeepers or decision makers too?
13) Explore who will be in charge of a commercial project implementation and integration: Will the Business group be responsible? Will they have the skills and understanding required to fully digest your technology and business model? Will they rely on a separate IT or operations group? If so, how does the IT/Ops group interact with new vendors when implementing and integrating? How mature and sophisticated is the IT/Ops team? Have they engaged startups in the past or are they more of a &8220;we build our own stuff&8221; outfit?
14) Explore how your future finserv Incumbent partner interacts with the broad ecosystem: Are they aligned with independent hackathons, independent accelerators? Who are their natural peer partners &8211; other #banks or insurers they have invested with in the future or entered in JV or commercial agreements with? Who are their natural competitors &8211; those they will not want to deal with or invest with or JV with? Which traditional VC investors have they invested with in the past? Which non-bank companies do they partner with? Does partnering accelerate your chances of additional partnerships?
15) Gauge how you will need to adapt: Inevitably, you will need to adapt based on answers and observations you glean along the way. I do not mean adapting in fundamental ways such as radically changing your business model or your technology, and if that is a requirement then you #should think twice about the costs and benefits before engaging fully. Rather I mean marginal adaptation to clear certain understandable hurdles around technology delivery for example. How much professional services will you need to incorporate? Will you need to localize to a certain geography? Will your partner&8217;s compliance thresholds lead you to tweak your technology? The sooner you get clarity on the need to adapt and how you will need to adapt, the sooner you will be able to quantify and qualify the associated costs.
16) Explore post integration life as a startup partner: Are the rules of engagement well defined? Will there be periodic reviews? How will you be reviewed? Will the relationship be balanced? Who will participate? Will the champions, gatekeepers and decision makers that you identified during the pre commercial phase be the same?
I realize I have mapped many questions. My purpose is not to scare a fintech entrepreneur. Do realize the end goal is a potential prize of investment, referenceable client, commercial agreement and cash flow generation. In other words, the rewards are overwhelmingly worth the pain of discovery and engagement strategy building.
Additionally, even if there is a demonstrable strategic/commercial rationale, answer to the above may lead you to realize you are not ready for that particular finserv Incumbent as a partner, or that they are not ready for you. That type of epiphany may save you form serious heartburns down the road.
More specifically, dealing with a finserv Incumbent is unique from the point of view of regulatory, compliance and legal complexities as well as the type of individuals you will encounter (business leaders may not know how to engage with a startup, IT/Ops may not be up to par knowledge wise). Knowledge will allow you to mitigate more effectively.
Finally, remember that the mature service providers and vendors that sell to banks or insurers are very sophisticated and know how to sell, to whom to sell, how complex it is to sell. As a fintech entrepreneur you are competing with these mature service providers with limited resources. You need the smarts and the framework to close that gap and become a sophisticated &8220;enterprise&8221; focused fintech startup in your own right.
-
user
Fintech: friend or foe? Money20/20 presentation by ING CEO Ralph Hamers
Should #banks treat fintechs as friend or a foe? That’s the basic question #ING CEO #Ralph Hamers posed at a keynote address he gave at Money 20/20 Europe in Copenhagen.
-
user
How Accenture, Deloitte, KPMG, EY & Capgemini are helping fintech start-ups to disrupt FS – Computer Business Review
Disruption to the financial services market is coming from several different angles, from regulations, to customer demand for change and cost. These factors have come together to aid the introduction of #fintech companies into the market.
Fintechs have appeared and started to disrupt numerous areas of finance, aided by a customer first approach and backed by #technology. Fintechs don’t have the legacy that the incumbents have and so are able to quickly roll out new services and features as customer requirements change.
While this agility is a vital factor behind the speed at which disruption is happening, another equally important factor is the support that they are receiving from consultancy firms.
-
user
France’s New Fintech Regulator Gets Muted Welcome
Today marks the official start of France’s new #fintech regulatory division. Unfortunately, it is not garnering much interest — and that might be because, well, it&8217;s boring. The Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), France&8217;s financial #regulator, has a job ad on LinkedIn for a “Chargé de mission” for the new fintech division. ItRead More
Bank Innovation
Reply