Updates from September, 2016 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • user 4:54 pm on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,   

    Entrepreneurship and the Id Machine 

    shutterstock_157504361

     

    Slavoj Zizek coined the term Id to describe an engine that allows for the materialization of one&;s desires. Id is the unorganized part of one&8217;s personality which contains one&8217;s most instinctual drives. The Id contains the libido which is the source of energy that is unresponsive to reality.

    Zizek applied the Id Machine to two movies by Andrei Tarkovsky: Solaris and Stalker.

    In both movies, protagonists are faced with an &;area&; &; in Stalker the area is called the room, located within the zone &8211; where their desires are materialized. Zizek names this &8220;area&8221; the Id Machine. The Id Machines are different in each movie. In Solaris, protagonists do not have any control over which desire materializes itself once they are in the Id machine, thus leading to terrifying realizations. In Stalker, protagonists need to figure out what they desires. The realization they sometimes do not know what they desire also leads to terrifying realizations.

    Tarkovsky&8217;s philosophical musings, as interpreted by Zizek give us one Id Machine that reveals the perils of our passive nature and another Id Machine that reveals the perils of our active nature. we get tripped by the unknown parts of our desires, by what we think are our desires and by our inability to formulate our desires.

    I think parallels can be drawn with entrepreneurs, startups and venture investing. VCs and entrepreneurs all enter an Id Machine at some point, where our desires materialize. Outcomes are never certain. Some outcomes are unexpected, others should have been expected, very few come out as expected.

    A Startup&8217;s main protagonists &8211; entrepreneurs and venture investors &8211; need to go through much introspection to sift through their desires. By desires I mean goals, visions, strategy, tactics. Clarity and transparency are paramount. Paradoxically, as the libido is the source of energy unresponsive to reality; the entrepreneur &8211; and to a lesser extent the venture investor &8211; also needs to be &8220;unresponsive to reality&8221;. In other words, the entrepreneur needs to be unshackled from the constraints of reality in order to achieve his dreams. However, she should not make complete abstraction of reality. Complete abstraction from reality leads to either Solaris or Stalker&8217;s Id Machine, with suboptimal results.

    I was recently asked what I actively sought in startups when investing. My answer was interoperability with the real world, pointing to the necessity for a blockchain startup to take into account the realities of the law, especially in the context of securities law in the capital markets space.

    I thought further about my interoperability answer in light of Tarkovsky&8217;s movies and Zizek&8217;s interpretation and believe I apply it to all startups. Further elaborating on interoperability, I define it as the quality to will a new reality while understanding the constraints of a current reality, incorporating these constraints within one&8217;s thought processes, and using them to the best of one&8217;s advantages. This is the quality I seek in an entrepreneur and in a startup. In Freudian terms, I seek an entrepreneur who can apply the right ego touches to her id. Too much ego touches and the id&8217;s desires never materialize, too little ego touches and the traps of the Id machine come in play. The right ego touch is also essential in regulating the id&8217;s tendency for instant gratification. Organic growth with the right tempo is often not recognized as one factor of success with startups. There are many pitfalls with fast growth and/or high valuations within short periods of time (too little growth also being a killer). This I view as being part of a certain interoperability with the real world, or with certain natural laws of organic growth.

    I find the above amusing on a personal note as I have always been more Jungian than Freudian in my interpretations. That may provide me material for another post.

    FiniCulture

     
  • user 3:40 pm on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Knowledge, , Proofs, , ,   

    The Trend Towards Blockchain Privacy: Zero Knowledge Proofs 

    George Samman, former CMO of Fuzo, looks at how solutions like could preserve on platforms.
    CoinDesk

     
  • user 3:35 pm on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: bezahlt, DemoSCOPE, , , Umfrage   

    DemoSCOPE Umfrage – So bezahlt die Schweiz 

    Rund die Hälfte (47%) aller Männer kauft mehrmals täglich ein. Deutlich tiefer der Wert bei Frauen, wo nur gerade etwas mehr als ein Viertel (28%) mehrere Einkäufe pro Tag tätigen. Insbesondere Männer mögen es dabei bequem und bezahlen stets oder gelegentlich mit der Kreditkarte (67% versus 55% bei den Frauen).

    Und rund ein Viertel (23%) könnte es sich vorstellen, dabei ganz auf Bargeld zu verzichten. Darum verzichtet beim Online-Shopping auch nur gerade ein Siebtel auf die Kreditkarte, so die Erkenntnisse einer bevölkerungsrepräsentativen nationalen Studie von *)

    Gerade Personen, die täglich mehrmals etwas kaufen, verwenden die Kreditkarte um ein Mehrfaches häufiger. Bequem und schnell, das scheint bei vielen das Motto zu sein. So erstaunt es nicht, dass Personen, welche die Kreditkarte regelmässig nutzen, häufig (61%) mit einem „Tap“ (kontaktlos) bezahlen.

    Knapp jeder Dritte aller Befragten (29%) bereits kontaktlos. Männer doppelt so häufig wie Frauen und Deutschschweizer rund 50% häufiger als Westschweizer. Dennoch scheint noch nicht ganz allen bekannt zu sein, dass mit fast jeder Kreditkarte (rund 90%) „getappt“, sprich kontaktlos bezahlt werden kann &; und das an zwei von drei Zahlterminals.

    credit-card

    From: Pixabay

    Am häufigsten wird die Kreditkarte beim Online-Shopping (84%) eingesetzt. Männer leicht häufiger als Frauen (87% versus 81%). Auch Ferien- und Flugbuchungen (77%) sowie Ausgaben im Ausland (76%) werden bevorzugt mit der Kreditkarte beglichen. Und nahezu die Hälfte aller Befragten mit einem höheren Einkommen will von Bonusprogrammen profitieren.

    Wenn nicht mit der Kreditkarte bezahlt wird, kommt die Debitkarte mit 73 Prozent noch vor dem Bargeld (71%) zum Zug. Rund ein Viertel (23%) aller Befragten kann sich vorstellen, ganz auf Bargeld zu verzichten. Besonders 18-34-jährige und Männer im Vergleich zu den 50-65-jährigen und Frauen.

    cashless.ch

    *Die bevölkerungsrepräsentative Online- wurde von DemoSCOPE im Zeitraum von 6. bis 17. Juli durchgeführt. Befragt wurden 921 Personen aus der ganzen im Alter von 18 bis 65 Jahren im Auftrag der Interessengemeinschaft Schweizer Kartenanbieter.

    Featured Image: Pixabay

    The post DemoSCOPE Umfrage &8211; So bezahlt die Schweiz appeared first on Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH.

    Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH

     
  • user 12:18 pm on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ,   

    Credit Karma Hits 60 Million Users, Will Add Mortgages 

    now has 60 . Yes, that zero is supposed to be there. And the company, which gives out free credit scores and generates revenue from selling lending leads, is adding 1 million to 2 million users &; which the company calls &;members&; &8212; per month, a Credit Karma official told anRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 11:36 am on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , mobile payments, , ,   

    Will PayPal’s Deals With MasterCard And Visa Spark a Revolution in Mobile Payments? 

    aaeaaqaaaaaaaafcaaaajgfhzdhjmzrjlwu3zjetngi5ni05mja3lwyyowm1odm0ywfkoa

    famously split from eBay Inc. last year leaving many to wonder what their next move would be. Over the years the online-payments pioneer had picked a few unwise fights with heavyweights such as and . But there finally seems to be a change of strategy.

    PayPal Joins the Fold

    PayPal sealed deals with Visa and MasterCard that will soon allow customers to select their credit or debit cards as default payment methods rather than just their bank account or PayPal balance.

    By calling a truce on their battles with the major card issuers in the industry, it seems the initiative is to promote PayPal as a universally accepted method of payment both online and offline.

    It’s refreshing to see , credit card companies, and PayPal putting their differences to one side. Traditional banking had made no secret about being resentful of PayPal’s free bank transfers and heavily promoting its online payment system over conventional banking.

    The recent deals seem to satisfy all parties as they realize they are all stronger together than apart. Ultimately, PayPal will enjoy lower fees and obtain a visibility in physical stores for quick and easy payments. MasterCard and Visa will get their hands on customer data they were previously locked out of. But more importantly, they should see a massive increase in online and .

    The strategic decision by PayPal enhances their reputation as a universally accepted payment method while card issuers receive much-needed help with their mobile payments initiatives.

    Payment Practices Upheaved

    PayPal is encouraging its customers to pay using their service as a mobile wallet. The blurry line between online checkouts and those we find in physical shopping malls is close to being torn down. In many ways, 2016 is proving to be a watershed moment regarding payments as users begin to embrace smartphone and contactless payment cards.

    Numerous reports suggest the recent deals could subject PayPal to losses in the short term. But it’s clear the online payments giant is playing the long game here. With 157 million active account holders worldwide and widely known as one most common online payment methods, getting Visa and MasterCard on board to pursue the high street is a very shrewd move.

    Cultural Change Vis-à-vis Digital

    All consumers are essentially carrying around a super computer in their pockets. The ability to book a restaurant table, cab or accommodation on the other side of the world with a few taps of a smartphone screen has changed everything.

    The bottom line is that all consumers now have a simple set of 21st-century demands. The choice to pay when, where and how we want in a seamless, simple and secure method. The easier companies make exchanges, the faster they will happen.

    The biggest obstacle to widespread mobile payments is industry fragmentation. Platforms such as Apple Pay, Android Pay, and Samsung Pay are all heavily reliant on devices and software. This is not the way it should be. If you replace your smartphone, it should not affect how you pay for items online or offline.

    Bluntly put, people want a universal platform that will make it easy to share and spend money. Maybe other businesses will begin to follow the positive example set by Visa, MasterCard, and PayPal.

    Digital Transformation Shows No Signs of Abating

    The simplification and personalization of everything shouldn’t be labeled disruptive. Technology is being interwoven seamlessly and invisibly into our daily lives. If anything, it’s the opposite of disruption. It’s imperceptible.

    Businesses that team up in this way and merge their forces have a better chance of underpinning consumer’s lives from the ground up. This unity is a point in case.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/anuragharsh” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Anurag Harsh”] is Founding Executive at Ziff Davis

     
  • user 7:36 am on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Money Transmitter License, ,   

    How to get Money Transmitter License coverage for your Startup? 

    aaeaaqaaaaaaaaipaaaajdewodrhzmrhlwu1odctnduyyi1hzta1lwrhnwuwzwnlzmzing

    Some practical advice on how to go about it.

    In the US, one of the biggest challenges faced by startups in the space, is that of money transmitter licensing. Obtaining money transmitter licenses is no easy feat. It involves a large amount of paperwork, money and time. It can take up to two years to amass all 50 state licenses.

    Needless to say, not every fintech requires money transmitter license coverage. For most, licenses would not be a requirement, but for those who do touch money as part of their business model, getting money transmitter licenses from the states in which their clients are based is important.

    While there is a lot of legal documentation and opinions on who is classified as a money transmitter, the basic tenets are:

    • You are neither the originator of the transaction, nor the beneficiary of the transaction.
    • You are a financial intermediary.
    • You can apply a fee for processing such a transaction, even if it is a de minimischarge.
    • As part of processing the transaction, you get to touch the funds, i.e. the funds collected on behalf of the parties traverse through your bank account (even if only for a little while).

    If you are meeting one or more of the tenets above, chances are you might be considered a money services business and be required to have money transmitter licenses (or MTLs for short).

    MTLs are issued by the financial regulators of each state. You can click here to see a list of all the financial regulators for all 50 States and US territories.

    MTL Options

    I’ve written extensively regarding the various options pertaining to MTL coverage (Read: US Money Transmitter Licensing). However, there is another option that many are not aware of.

    It is called the Bank Sponsorship, i.e. a bank handles the money movement and channeling on your behalf. You don’t get to touch the money and the bank provides license coverage on their license.

    The Sponsoring Bank works with an entity called the Program Manager (PM). In this scenario, you have two contracts: one with the bank and one with the Program Manager that manages the entire sponsorship program with the bank and provides the APIs, etc.

    The way the arrangement works is that the bank handles your money. You are not allowed to touch the funds. You simply instruct the bank how to move / process funds. These instructions are sent via the API, which the bank then acts upon.

    Program Manager’s core responsibilities include:

    1. Provide the API that is specifically geared to/for the payments industry. This means implementing additional ID verification, AML controls, accounting, filters, customization, etc. (remember there are two components to a transaction, the US side and beneficiary side. The PM stitches it all together in a compliant manner for not only the Bank, but also from the State/Federal rules regarding money transmission (eg: Reg E, etc.)
    2. Aggregates other technologies and processors, for example if you bring in a card processor who you would be allowed to work with, then this processor is integrated with the PM.
    3. Overall monitoring and ensuring everyone is playing by the rules, anomaly detection etc.

    Finding a Sponsoring Bank for you.

    In order to find a sponsor bank, a mini business plan is required from you. The mini business plan (or dossier) is then realigned to the template/format that the – that I work with – require.

    As there is a pool of banks at the back end who would like to win your business, they don’t want to be made known immediately, hence the proxy through my company.

    The business plan allows them to discreetly look at the opportunity and determine if they want to proceed ahead. The dossier contains basic information about the fintech business (or startup), your photo ID information for background check, your business plan, your website, LinkedIn profiles, your compliance program, projected volume for the next 12 months and the foreign countries you will be terminating in (if applicable).

    Based on the interest received from the bank(s) a further engagement between two parties is established (after signing off a referral agreement for myself naturally).

    Once the bank has shown interest, the entire process takes between 60–120 days to get approved. Average time consideration is 90 days.

    A time-motion flow-of-funds diagram is required. This would be needed in the final form when submitted to the bank, however, in the interim period you are free to send across your flow of funds diagram. You can find an example of the flow of funds here and edit this diagram on http://www.draw.io

    Under the agreement, the bank sponsors the product and any/all accounts opened by your customers are actually bank accounts being opened at the bank. It is imperative to note that you cannot bring in your own AML/KYC, etc. You must follow the bank’s AML/KYC guidelines.

    Secondly, to work with the bank, you have to use one of their basic/core services. You cannot just unilaterally rely on the bank to provide you coverage. That is not the intention the bank is looking at. What the bank wants to do, in order to sponsor you, is to go into a revenue share agreement with you. By doing so, you have to subscribe for one of their core services, like ACH, Card Processing, etc. You cannot bring 3rd party payment processors into the equation, until and unless the bank approves of it.

    The bank is not interested in a flat-fee model, as that is indicative of a license rental and is wrong and looked down upon by the regulators.

    For providing you with FBO (For Benefit Of) Coverage for your funds and in turn licensing under their umbrella, the bank wants to go into a revenue share partnership with you. The bank is always looking to increase the number of accounts it has as well as increase the overall number of dollar volume that flows through it.

    With the bank sponsoring you, and providing you umbrella coverage, you’re not bound to invest in heavy and expensive licensing that can take up to 2 years to obtain and not to mention, cost in excess of US$ 1 Million (including paid-up capital).

    Please kindly fill out the application on the following link:https://faisalkhan.com/remittance-as-a-service-application/

    Please also note, the following information would be required to do basic due diligence.

    • A copy of your passport (for the person who would be the signing authority in your company)
    • 12 months projections
    • List of countries you would be seeking permission for
    • Average ticket size for each corridor
    • Currently monthly volume on your existing license

    If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/faisalkhan99″ connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Faisal Khan”]

    About The Author: Faisal Khan is a passionate fintech expert, cross-border money transfer specialist and certified speaker & moderator. He is the CEO of Faisal Khan & Company, a boutique firm specializing in banking and payments consultancy. He also serves as the co-host of a weekly podcast called Around The Coin.

    He has received extensive acclaim for his achievements and has been 1 on the Top 38 Fintech Blogs and even is one of the 38 Most Influential People to Follow in Fintech in Asia. In addition to financial , Faisal Khan loves to help people and does this through volunteering his time and writing on the popular Q&A website, Quora. His efforts have earned him the title of Quora Top Writer2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016.

     
  • user 3:36 am on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Bilanz, , , Liste,   

    6 Fintech Unternehmer in Bilanz Top 100 Banker Liste 

    6 haben es doch tatsächlich in die Top 100 Bankers Liste der Bilanz geschafft. Zumindest sind die Fintechis diejenigen welche in der Top 100  ohne Kravatten glänzen.

     

    Marc P. BerneggerMarc P. Bernegger, Rang 74
    Investor FinLeap

    Er ist unter anderem Mitgründer der Plattform Usgang.ch, die 2008 vom Axel-Springer-Konzern (zu dem auch gehört) gekauft wurde. Heute ist er vor allem als Fintech-Investor aktiv, etwa bei FinLeap, einer auf die Finanzdienstleistungsbranche spezialisierten Firma mit Standort Berlin, für die er in der Schweiz Aufbauarbeit leistet.

     

    Stefan A. HeitmannStefan A. Heitmann, Rang 82
    CEO & Co-Founder of MoneyPark

    Dr. Stefan Heitmann ist Gründer und CEO des Finanzdienstleisters MoneyPark (vormals MyMoneyPark). Zuvor war er als Partner bei der Beratungsfirma McKinsey für den Bereich Banken in der Schweiz verantwortlich.

     

    Johann GeversJohann Gevers, Rang 87
    Chef Monetas

    Seine Monetas bietet eine Plattform, auf der alle Arten von Vermögenswerten transferiert werden können. Es braucht dazu ein Smartphone und eine App. Starken Anklang findet diese in Afrika, wo die Firma Übereinkünfte mit 16 Ländern unterzeichnet hat.

     

    Michael StemmleMichael Stemmle, Rang 87
    Gründer Additiv

    Additiv ermöglicht Banken mit Beratung und Software-Lösungen den Eintritt in die digitale Welt. Bekannteste Entwicklung ist der «Investomat» für die Glarner Kantonalbank, ein Tool für Online-Portfolio-Management.

     

    Urs HäuslerUrs Haeusler, Rang 93
    CEO DealMarket

    Urs ist CEO von DealMarket. Vor DealMarket war er im Management Team von amiando &; Europas führendem Ticketing-Anbieter im Event- und Businessbereich. Als Chief Sales Officer u.a. verantwortlich für die Internationalisierung von amiando und den Aufbau der Offices in London, Paris und Hongkong.

     

    Niklas NikolajsenNiklas Nikolajsen, Rang 93
    Chef Schweiz

    Seine Zuger Firma Bitcoin Suisse macht mittlerweile rund 120 Millionen Franken Umsatz pro Jahr, überwiegend mit dem Handel von Bitcoins und anderen Kryptowährungen. Mit BitPay stellt er ein Zahlungssystem, das die Stadt Zug für kleinere Zahlungen akzeptiert

     

     

    fintech unternehmer top 100 bilanz banker liste

    The post 6 Fintech Unternehmer in Bilanz Top 100 Banker Liste appeared first on Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH.

    Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH

     
  • user 12:18 am on September 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Bonds, , , ,   

    Finovate Day Two: Bots, Bonds, and a Bit of Blockchain 

    On the second day of FinovateFall 2016, fintechs continued to wow attendees with bright, dazzling new finovations. Attendees from , credit unions, and other companies saw 31 demos of that has applications across the financial sphere, from financial data analysis to mobile payments to trading. The three dominatingRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 10:43 pm on September 10, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , ,   

    FinTech – its older than your great grandma 

    aaeaaqaaaaaaaacxaaaajdgxmwjkmtbjltk0yjktndaync1inzhhlwizntm5nzvkzjlloa

    A. – its older than your great great grandma

    “Financial ” or “FinTech” is often seen today as a new phenomenon. However, the interlinkage of finance and technology has evolved over three distinct eras. FinTech 1.0, from 1866 to 1987, was the first period of financial globalization supported by technological infrastructure such as transatlantic transmission cables, SWIFT interbank transaction communications, ATMs, Credit cards etc. This was followed by FinTech 2.0 from 1987-2008, during which financial services firms, just like most other traditional industries, increasingly digitized their processes. Internet usage spread across the world and all industries, including banking, came online during this period. Since 2008 a new era of FinTech has emerged that is defined not by the financial products or services delivered but by who delivers them. The key difference in this era of FinTech 3.0 is that many of these innovations are led by start-ups.

    However, it is not right to think of FinTech only as a start-up phenomenon. FinTech now refers to a rapidly growing industry representing between US$12 billion and US$197 billion in investment as of 2014, depending on whether one considers independent start-ups (FinTech 3.0) or traditional financial institutions (FinTech 2.0). McKinsey’s proprietary Panorama FinTech Database tracks the launch of new FinTech companies – i.e., start-ups and other companies that use technology to conduct the fundamental functions provided by financial services, impacting how consumers store, save, borrow, invest, move, pay and protect money. In April 2015, this database included approximately 800 FinTech startups globally; now that number stands at more than 2,000.

    B. Its an , not a revolution… but there is something different this time

    One key feature of the FinTech 3.0 era is the unbundling of financial services. FinTech start-ups are cherry picking specific segments of financial products and consumers segments to design their offerings. At a high level, these can be categorized as –

            i.           Debt Funding Platforms– online platforms that help small businesses and entrepreneurs to get loans. These can be crowd funding platforms or credit marketplaces using institutional money of various types. Some examples are – Lending Club, OnDeck, GroupLend, Kiva, Capital Float, Neogrowth, Indifi, LeningKart etc.

          ii.           Equity Funding Platforms– online platforms for crowd-sourcing of equity investments in start-ups and early stage businesses. E.g. – Fundersclub, Globevestor

         iii.           Wealth Management Platforms– technology driven solutions for automated wealth management recommendations. E.g. – Wealthfront, Betterment, Intelligent Portfolios

        iv.           Payment Processing solutions– products for simplifying and/or automating various steps of the payment / cash flow value chains. E.g. – Currency Cloud, Square, Tipalti, Flint, Check, Zipmark, Stripe , Astropay, WePay

          v.           Others – various other kinds of solutions like personal finance tracking and fraud monitoring (e.g. BillGuard ), virtual banking (e.g. BankingUp), alternate Credit rating services (using big data, social profiling etc)

    And then there is the whole ecosystem of virtual currencies / digital wallets and the platforms built around them. Each one these categories has a world of depth in its own right.

    C. FinTech 3.0 is driven by some big changes in the market

    Banking has historically been one of the sectors that are most resistant to new start-up driven . Since the first mortgage was issued in England in the 11th century, have built robust businesses with multiple moats: ubiquitous distribution through branches, unique expertise such as credit underwriting underpinned both by data and judgment, even the special status of being regulated institutions that supply credit, and have sovereign insurance for their liabilities (deposits). Moreover, consumer inertia in financial services has traditionally been high. Consumers have generally been slow to change financial services providers.

    The Global Financial Crisis of 2008 was a watershed moment and is part of the reason why FinTech is now such hot area of growth. The key factors driving this rapid growth of FinTech start-ups right are –

    1. Demand side

            i.           Loss of trust in banks – One big reason why banks continued to hold a monopoly over financial services was because consumers put a large trust premium on established banks while entrusting them with their money. However the 2008 banking crises caused by reckless actions of bankers made consumers loose that trust. People are now willing to trust non-bank entities with their money decisions. A 2015 survey reported that American trust levels in technology firms handling their finances is not only on the rise, but actually exceeds the confidence placed in banks. For example, the level of trust Americans have in CitiBank is 37%, whilst trust in Amazon and Google respectively reaches 71% and 64%.  Digital entrepreneurs are viewed as more trustworthy champions of consumer interest as compared to over-paid bankers who are perceived to be manipulating the system to make fat profits.

          ii.           Expectation of ‘one click’ delivery – In an era where people get simple single click fulfilment of their day to day needs, traditional banking feels way too outdated. The millennial generation is now used to the user experience levels of iTunes for listening to music, Amazon for same day delivery of online shopping, Expedia for global travel bookings, AirBnB for economical international lodging, Uber for inter-city transport, Whatsapp for communication and Tinder for dating. Traditional banking feels way too bulky and outdated in this context. Consumers have no patience for an industry that takes weeks to process mortgage requests and small working capital loans; nor do people accept silently the non-transparent charges for services like cross-border money transfers and investment brokerages etc. There is a strong demand for simple, fast and transparent financial solutions that can be accessed at a click of the mobile phone touch-screen.

    2. Supply side

            i.           Abundance of skilled financial entrepreneurs – As the financial crisis morphed into an economic crisis, large numbers of highly skilled professionals lost their jobs or were now less well compensated. This under-utilized educated workforce found a new industry – FinTech 3.0, in which to apply their skills. These highly skilled individuals were inspired by the success stories of high profile digital start-ups in other industries. There was also the newer generation of highly educated, fresh graduates facing a difficult job market. Their educational background often equipped them with the tools to understand financial markets, and their skills were well adapted for FinTech 3.0 start-ups.

          ii.           Regulation – after the 2008 financial crises, regulators have become more acceptable to opening up the financial industry to specialized players who serve specific parts of the financial value chain. This can be seen happening both in developed and developing countries. E.g. in the US, the JOBs Act assisted small businesses to by-pass the credit contraction caused by banks’ increased costs and limited capacity to originate loans. The JOBs Act made it possible for start-ups to raise directly the finance to support their business by raising capital in lieu of equity on P2P platforms. UK’s FCA is facilitating innovative FinTech’s through Project Innovate and its ‘Regulatory Sandbox’ that provides these FinTechs to operate in safe spaces to test their models. South Korea is developing a specific regime for online-only banks. In India, the banking regulator recently created two new types of banking licenses that are specially tailored for FinTech companies – The Payments Bank License and The Small Bank License. Similarly Chinese government issued Internet Finance Guidelines in July 2015 to continue growth of FinTech innovation. Similar examples of financial technology innovation friendly regulation can be seen across many developed and developing countries.

         iii.           Telecom revolution – In many parts of developing world, mobile phone has become ubiquitous. Mobile phone ownership far exceeds formal banking coverage in these countries. E.g. while only 40% of Indians have active formal banking relationships, 80% of Indians have mobile phones. For these unbanked people, the “reputational” factors that provided an edge to banks for offering banking services are not relevant. Mobile based financial services are often the only, and the preferred, means of reaching these populations. For these populations, “banking is essentials, banks are not,” as it was rightly captured by Bill Gates.

     

    D. Banks are not dying – Pioneers get killed, settlers prosper

    While the headlines may give the impression that FinTech start-ups are coming to eliminate traditional banks, that may not be the case yet. Unlike startups, banks have had decades to build extensive infrastructures, develop solutions for compliance and regulatory challenges and establish close networks with other financial institutions. Banks also have leverage over startups because someone still needs to hold the world’s money, ensure compliance and so on, and building a mature institution’s full technology stack — or its equivalent — from scratch is expensive, difficult and time-consuming. As can be expected, banks are also investing heavily in financial technology innovations. E.g. approximately one third of Goldman Sachs’ 33,000 staff are engineers – more than LinkedIn, Twitter or Facebook. Paul Walker, Goldman Sachs’ global technology co-head that they “were competing for talents with start-ups and tech companies”.

    FinTech start-ups that are solving superficial problems without strong defendable USPs will run out of steam at some point. As an illustration, why would a small entrepreneur want to take a working capital loan from an independent start-up when his regular bank, where he maintains his savings / current account, implements its own FinTech solutions and offers its customers a loan at similar or lower rate with as user friendly a process as the independent FinTech startup does?

    While the current situation of exponential growth in FinTech start-ups differs from the earlier dot-com boom, the failure rate for FinTech businesses is still likely to be high. However, FinTechs focused on specific market segments and solving real world consumer problems will break through and build sustainable businesses. They will reshape certain areas of financial services – ultimately becoming far more successful than the scattered and largely sub-scale FinTech winners of the dotcom boom. In five major retail banking businesses – consumer finance, mortgages, lending to small and medium sized enterprises, retail payments and wealth management – from 10% to 40% of bank revenues (depending on the business) could be at risk by 2025. FinTech attackers are likely to force prices lower and cause margin compression.

    D. The real disruptors

    The FinTech startups best positioned to create lasting disruption in the financial industry will be distinguished by the following six markers:

            i.           Lower cost of customer acquisition – FinTechs that are able to acquire customers at a lower cost and at a faster speed have major competitive advantage. That may mean developing win-win partnerships with other players in the value chain. E.g. during the dot-com boom, eBay, a commerce ecosystem with plenty of customers, was able to reduce PayPal’s cost of customer acquisition by more than 80%. Today, many business lending FinTech players are partnering with various electronic networks, like e-commerce portals, centralized air-ticketing platforms, credit card transaction processing platforms etc to acquire consumers in bulk. The start-ups that are able to execute such unconventional approaches have a higher chance of sustainable growth.

          ii.           Lower cost to serve – FinTechs start-ups are providing their services with no or very little physical infrastructure. Online lending platforms conduct most of their processes online in an automated manner. In some cases such online lending platforms have an upto 400 bps advantage over traditional banks in their cost to serve consumers. Similarly, FinTechs in PoS payment processing space are providing innovative solutions that significantly reduce the time and cost for small business owners to set-up electronic payment systems at their premises.

         iii.           Innovative uses of data – Traditional business and individual credit rating systems seem outdated today. They also lost their credibility during the 2008 financial crises. Many FinTechs are experimenting with alternate credit scoring methods that involve looking at online transaction history, educational backgrounds, social media activity, travel patterns, mobile phone usage and so on. Big data and advanced analytics offer transformative potential to predict “next best actions,” understand customer needs, and deliver financial services via new mechanisms like mobile phones. Credit underwriting in banks often operates with a case law mindset and relies heavily on precedent. In a world where more than 90% of data has been created in the last two years, FinTech data experiments hold promise for new products and services, delivered in new ways.

        iv.           Segment-specific propositions – The most successful FinTech start-ups will not begin by revolutionizing all of banking or credit. They will cherry pick, with discipline and focus, those customer segments most likely to be receptive to what they offer. Across FinTech, three segments – Millennials, small businesses and the under-banked – are particularly susceptible to this kind of cherry picking. These segments, with their sensitivity to cost, openness to remote delivery and distribution, and large size, offer a major opportunity for FinTech attackers to build and scale sustainable businesses that create value.

          v.           Leveraging existing infrastructure – Successful FinTech start-ups will embrace “co-opetition” and find ways to engage with the existing ecosystem of established players. E.g. PayPal partners with WellsFargo for merchant acquisition. Some business lending platforms enable banks to participate as credit providers on their platforms. Conversely, some banks partner with P2P lending platforms to provide credit to those borrowers who would otherwise not qualify for banks own credit lines. Some enterprising banks may even realize that running a banking framework might be very lucrative if it is done thoughtfully and cost-effectively. A few could embrace being an infrastructure firm supporting today’s new wave of fintech companies, becoming banking’s equivalent of Amazon Web Services. Others may open up more to startups through their own “App Store,” offering customers startup apps running on their infrastructure.

        vi.           Managing risk and regulatory stakeholders – FinTech start-ups are flying under the regulatory radar so far. However that may change in the near future. Regulatory tolerance for lapses on issues such as KYC, AML, compliance, and credit-related disparate impact will be low. Experience of microfinance industry in many developing countries the past is a good indicator of the high impact of regulation on an unregulated industry. Those FinTech players that build regulatory capabilities will be much better positioned to succeed than those that do not.

    The path to FinTech nirvana will invariably be covered with blood of thousands of wannbe disrupters. But as in nature, so in business – Protein is never wasted when death occurs. Good ideas put into motion by some of the failed start-ups will be picked up by more mature players and taken to their logical conclusion.

    The start-ups that play successfully on combinations of the above six dimensions are the start-ups that have the most potential to disrupt the financial sector — something that’s difficult to see in a large infographic of hundreds of FinTech start-ups today.


    About the Author

    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/rantejsingh” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”
    Rantej Singh“]

    Rantej Singh is a creative ‘ideas to execution’ professional who has successfully blended blue chip MNC management career with innovative entrepreneurship for the last 15 years. He has worked with Thomson Reuters, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and ICICI bank in Strategy, Innovation, Product Management and Operations roles, and founded / co-founded two high impact businesses. He currently works with a boutique Swiss management consulting firm specializing in emerging market financial institutions. Rantej is a co-author of ‘Practitioners book on Trade Finance’, the recommended course book at Indian Institute of Banking and Finance.

    References –

    ·        http://hollandfintech.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/10/SSRN-id2676553.pdf

    ·        http://www.fintech.finance/news/why-fintech-startups-arent-killing-banks-yet/

    ·        http://techcircle.vccircle.com/2015/12/02/banks-will-provide-tough-competition-to-fintech-startups/

    ·        McKinsey Report – Cutting Through the FinTech Noise: Markers of Success, Imperatives for Banks

    ·        Economist – The fintech revolution (May 9th, 2015 Edition)

     
  • user 6:43 pm on September 10, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Cooler, Debates, , Protocol,   

    It Isn’t ‘Consensus’: Toward Cooler Protocol Debates 

    The idea that and blockchains run on “” among their users is counterproductive, argues Jim harper.
    CoinDesk

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami