Community

I think electricity as you noted is actually a good example. We don't have to have to carry voltage converters with us when we travel, we just expect our devices to work. We do have to carry plug adaptors, but in truth we would rather that we didn't.

And so I think it is with money as well. If I want to send you some money now, should I have to worry about the precise mechanisms as to how it gets to you, and really should I have to go out and find specific money transfer agents / enrol with new (potentially risky) companies just because you decide that you want / can only receive money via mechanism Y? No - my bank should handle all of that for me.

The AML / Risk / Exposure elements that the bank needs to carry out are the equivalent of the voltage converter - it should just happen transparently to me (unless something fails in which case I experience the equivalent of a blown fuse?).

We should be looking at this from the consumers' perspective, enabling and empowering them, rather than - as the majority of banks seem to - deciding its too hard / complicated.

Will Pinterest keep on growing though? Recent reports suggest possibly not - As Pinterest’s Hype Peaks, Growth May Be Slowing | TechCrunch http://tcrn.ch/IWfNWk

Both security and privacy have been taken in to account when designing Misys GeoGuard. A customer's check-in is not taken on its own, and is used to supplement existing fraud-prevention measures. Rules and analytics are built in to determine the validity of a check-in, and how "trustworthy" it is. On the privacy front, a customer would share with the bank or other FI, via Misys GeoGuard, only information that they are already posting - they don't need to change their behaviour whilst the banks are able to make use of this "personal data feed" to deliver better customer experience. For those customers that either don't wish to share their social data with their bank (and we only reference location data on an opt-in basis, and per check-in, and don't store reams of historical check-ins that could be used to "route" a customer), or don't wish to use social media at all, banks are able to offer a private check-in service directly via their own channels: for example they could allow a customer to check-in by using the bank's mobile banking app.

Leveraging services such as Facebook, foursquare or TripIt however, would mean that a customer carries on as usual. When travelling, they wouldn't have to individually notify each bank or credit card company they had cards with. One check-in is all that it takes.

I would guess that yes, existing POS equipment can read these - looked like a "standard" bar code reader on the video that Brett posted, but I guess it depends upon the specific model. For what Starbucks have created, which appears to simply represent the equivalent of a stored-value/gift card number as a bar-code, is any other security (between phone and reader) required? All you've done is presented a graphical representation of a number; there's no stored value on the phone and the POS does the same validation as if you had presented a physical payment card.

Other scenarios then yes, I would agree, greater security would be required (perhaps encrypted text generating the bar code). On this occasion, Starbucks have followed the tested principle of KISS.

In isolation, these individual payment apps can work well, however I've not yet been sold as to how good a mobile wallet experience will be, replicating my real-life wallet where I carry a variety of cards. I have no fear that this will be answered, and broadly agree with BK's timeline that NFC will gain broader acceptance by 2015.

The other issue here is trust, and who is going to own the customer on the device? MNO's will make a play here (as per O2) and of course the banks.

I also believe we'll see Apple, Google and Facebook jostling for a position - in fact, I was involved in a Finotribe session at Sibos debating a new, virtual mobile currency: could this now be realised through Facebook Credits? And who is to say that Apple, when releasing the iPhone 5, will allow third-party access to the NFC?

I have a real concern though that we'll see fragmentation at the point-of-sale, and this will impact the wider adoption. Customer confusion might reign for a while before consolidation takes place. 2015 doesn't feel that far away now.

But then the poor mobile signal drank all my battery and my phone died...

Thanks for the comment on ZashPay. However, this is exactly the scenario that should be avoided. ZashPay is US only (according to their information), and both the payer and the payee need to have a relationship with ZashPay. I don't want to have to maintain multiple "method" relationships, just to cater for who I may be sending money to/receiving money from. I already have a trusted relationship with my bank, and it is them that I want to use for remitting funds. There is a dash for covering this middle-ground at the moment, with companies such as ZashPay competing with PayPal and others. This market fragmentation will - in my opinion - disrupt P2P adoption. We need a global network with common points of reference, where banks and other FI's (and perhaps MNO's) can leverage existing connectivity or rapidly plug in to. Not to the advantage of the likes of ZashPay, admittedly, but it would reinforce the banks' position as your trusted financial partner.

Thanks David. I don't think you are alone in your usage of Facebook - for many people Facebook is the internet. We are almost coming full circle for these people, as what Facebook are achieving reminds me of the early days of AOL, and indeed what the MNO's first delivered when they launched WAP - the walled garden. If you want to get in front of your customers, you have to be within those walls.

Of course, security will be a key element. Are we seeing the movement of Facebook becoming a de-facto federated ID - the global SSO? I'm not sure that banks would accept this; perhaps we will have limited read-only when you are using your Facebook ID, then requiring a higher level of authentication to view in more detail or transact. Another risk is that your Facebook authentication becomes the proverbial keys to the bank - if your Facebook ID is broken into, how much wider damage could be done?

However, whilst the banks may not allow you to perform much using a Facebook ID, it is strange how a number of banks allow you to consolidate your financial data through an aggregation service...