Community

You're probably right about the relevance of voice recognition in healthcare, government education, sports gambling and other apps. But, the functionality set currently offered in many mobile banking apps - a/c balance, last 5 transactions, mini statement, fund transfer, etc. - is so sparse that the icons are located comfortably apart on the screen, even in relatively small (2-3") screens, so fat finger is not a big problem. Of course, all that could change in the next generation of mobile banking apps and voice recognition could become important for them.

Beware: People might give your solution a piece of their mind until your solution gives them peace of mind.

Looks like Apple is testing the payments waters already: For all the examples around storing e-tickets, loyalty cards and so on, Apple demos Passbook with a payments use case (i.e. Starbucks Prepaid Card). By using a QR code in Passbook, I think Apple is signaling that it's not going to join the NFC camp, somewhat like PayPal in its new inStore app. Apps like keyring have been available for years for this use case. Apple's differentiation lies in using the lockscreen and location info to eliminate the need for the user to fire up an app and select one out of the many cards stored inside the app. Far as I know, this is not possible in any other mobile wallet. As usual, Apple is going to thump incumbent players by taking UX to unprecedented heights.

Until someone from NCR weighs in authoritatively, let me take a guess: Amount and PIN entered into NCR app on smartphone reaches NCR cloud via smartphone's data plan; NCR cloud sends said information to bank's switch via Internet or dedicated lease line; switch sends said information to ATM machine via internal LAN / WAN. If this is really how this works, the number of moving parts and the degree of convolutedness are even higher than I'd previously imagined.

@ShekharK:

When I read the line "can be used across a variety of establishments...", I was mislead into viewing openness from the merchant perspective. Here, there's really no problem even if a mobile wallet supports only one funding source since most merchants, who have tended to accept a wide variety of cards for a long time, are likely to accept this one card. No wonder, despite supporting only one card, Google Wallet can still proclaim, as it does, that the consumer can "pay with Google Wallet anywhere MasterCard PayPass is accepted", which is not a small number. 

Thank you for clarifying that you meant 'open' from the point of view of the consumer / payor. There, I agree with you that supporting only one or two funding sources - the way Google Wallet (NFC) does at present - severely limits the utility of a mobile wallet for the consumer / payor.

Having said that, a quick search for "mobile wallet" on Google Play brought up over 300 apps, many of whom are 'open'  since they claim to support a wide range of credit, debit and loyalty cards. Against that backdrop, it's interesting to observe how a 'closed' product like Google Wallet has garnered a disproportionate share of voice among mobile wallets.

Although a technology marketer, I recognize that not all technologies successfully overcome the often-conflicting priorities between cost reduction, revenue enhancement and improved customer service. HSBC India's experiement with Cheque Deposit System is a good example of a technology that (arguably) helped the bank cut costs but became a major pain area for customers. Thankfully, the bank has finally realized this and has de-commissioned all its CDSs.

This example just reinforces the need for banks to choose their technologies carefully so that they can optimize their alignment with business objectives. On this count, I'm not very gung-ho about 'open API' and such technologies: We all know how banks earn more fees and increase stickiness by being 'closed' and 'proprietary'. While the technology is very appealing, 'open' and 'API' seem to be the exact antithesis of the business model that has worked so well for banks all along and made them 'too big to fail'. Maybe some nonbank will come and disrupt the scene but I won't bet on that happening anytime soon. 

@Alexander P:

Since SQUARE is the only startup you mention, let me say:

• Its founder Jack Dorsey is not even 30! (could be wrong here but not by much)
• As I've pointed out elsewhere in my Finextra comments, SQUARE is an ally - not adversary - to banks. Before SQUARE, all those "Florida boardwalk" type of merchants were only able to accept cash from their customers. Thanks to SQUARE, a lot of their transactions now happen via bank-issued credit / debit cards, fetching banks an incremental source of interchange revenue without the incremental risk - as banks see it - of issuing acquirer accounts to such merchants. I hope the US$ 4B valuation of SQUARE factors in the risk that SQUARE takes by acting as a sort of 'master-acquirer' for all these merchants. 

@LeonO: Thank you for your response. Waterfall and Agile differ quite substantially. Much as a hybrid between the two methodologies is desirable, I'm not sure if it's feasible. At the risk of generalizing, I predict that startups will begin with agile and move towards agile as they become big, whereas large IT shops will continue with waterfall. My belief stems from, among others, my personal experience of seeing how change control process has become even more long drawn out in large banks and corporates, thanks to tighter IT budgets, greater IT savviness of end users and increasing involvement of business in reviewing and approving individual Change Requests.

Personally, I won't trust one penny of my money with any company that calls itself a bank without possessing a banking license. Anyway, the point is moot because (1) Banks are supposed to be dowdy and old-fashioned, so why would a startup founded by a few 20-somethings want to be called a bank? (2) In any case, nonbanks lack the legal latitude to call themselves banks where I live.

As I've mentioned in my earlier comments, the said 'cardless ATM cash withdrawal' product is from ICICI Bank, a bank that has a banking license and happens to be among the Top 5 banks in India. As of now, nonbanks can't even offer self-branded ATM services, let alone create an interesting ATM-based product like this.

Just another example of a bank waiting and watching and, in one single move, gobbling up a couple of startups who've achieved critical mass or threatening to wipe out years of work done by dozens of fumbling startups. Citi did it with eCount, AmEx did it with RevolutionMoney, now HSBC is doing it with M&S.

On another note, kudos to HSBC and M&S for placing the branch at the center of their new bank. It resonates well with my recent personal experience with HSBC's Cheque Deposit System: After years of paining customers by forcibly keeping them away from the branch by installing these machines that never worked properly, HSBC India recently decided that it wasn't worth inconveniencing the customer to save its operating costs. It has now brought back the good old cheque drop box - which work very well for its customers - inside its branches during business hours, with human assistance readily available if required.