Community

It's been clear for a number of years that the problem of growing technology debt would come back and haunt banks that have continually invested in minimal compliance rather than modernization. Insights gathered by CGI back up Antony's statements with over 90% of banks believing that back office legacy prevents them accessing the benefits of spend on digitization. It's clear that some will up their game and perform 'lift and shift' migrations to new digital platforms, but we'll also see a big move to BaaS providers as discussed in the recent FCS webinar Financial Cloud Series 2023: Entering new and niche markets with Ba... (finextra.com)

This kind of service has been available in Belgium for the last 10-15 years (Zoomit by Isabel) and is a huge convenience for consumers and businesses. Delivery of invoicing in the same channel used for payment makes it easy to keep track of bills and the reconciliation data provided by the system makes it much easier and cheaper for utilities to get paid. This is definitely a model that more markets should look at.

This is long overdue. The security and accessibility compromises that were made by the card brands to proliferate mobile payments were a travesty and hopefully this will help to pare them back. PIN on glass hugely contravenes disability legislation in most countries - and was hugely damaging to the POS industry as it kicked the chair from under companies doing things securely and with consideration. The Banking industry needs to learn a valuable lesson about finding the balance between deployment of new technology and ensuring that all sectors of the public are able to access services without hinderance. 

Particularly as we move into the Open API era and 'app-ization' of banking, the instinct to place technology over customers is highly tempting, but this is people's money that we are dealing with. Unlike any other industry, if we deny service to the most vulnerable in our society - those with disabilities, the older generation, those not at home with technology - we not only isolate them, we run the risk of making their lives increasingly difficult and forcing them to find more expensive or risky solutions to their issues. 

It's nice to focus on UI and UX, but in all honesty banks have been white-labelling their services for years very successfully and making a big pile of money doing so. Whether that be providing indirect access to payment services, BIN sponsorship, credit line provision, white label mortgages for brokers, identity services, the list goes on... Yes, perhaps for some retail services 'the banks' will be 'relegated to the position of white labelled service providers' but this doesn't mean that the entire banking infrastructure and business model will collapse if they aren't in control of the front end. After all, gmail still works if I use the native app on my iPhone - and I still call it gmail.

Strange that the card networks have been validating interfaces for years and mandating security - SWIFT has not - and yet suddenly it's an issue now they're finally forced to admit hacks and fraud are happening. Years of work ahead sorting this out and in the meantime challengers will come...

It's funny that this is a story because apparently it already happened in 2010 - or were they wrong then?  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/8177237/Britons-use-their-debit-cards-more-than-cash.html 

The biggest issue with trying to demonstrate this trend is that there are no accurate records of cash transactions - the only number that you can use is declared cash transactions that are included for taxation purposes. It's great that card and FP volumes are increasing - I'm a huge supported of the cash-less society, but before we pat ourselves on the back as an industry, there needs to be a reality check. There are still large sectors of the community that are not terminalised, surcharging for low value transactions and little or no restriction on cash usage. Once these issues are solved, THEN we can start to talk about proper progress.

I've spent the last few years to and fro from the US working on the EMV migration there. Conferences and working groups are a stark contrast to Europe where the male:female ratio is near 50:50. All of the card brands (MasterCard, Visa, Amex, Discover and debit schemes) have talented women in prominent and powerful roles, and as drivers behind the US EMV changeover. It made a HUGE positive difference to the conversations that we were having and stopped a lot of the 'pee-up-the-wall' nonsense that happens in male-dominated fora. 

For me the banking infrastructure in Europe is in crisis because it's become staid, stale and with too much pride in some quarters to admit that things need to change. We've become tech focused rather than idea focused. Worried about the competition rather than serving the customer. This isn't just a need to get more women involved, it's a need to fundamentally change the way that we do things - and delivering a better gender balance would be the easiest way to achieve this.

Given that EMV & NFC are one and the same, 'has he earned the right to give us advice?' 

While it's great that Apple is bringing this to the UK, if they can't take from the interchange to make margin, who is going to pay for the transactions?

Please, please stop referring to contactless stickers as 'mobile payments'. They are by definition an alternate form factor for contactless cards and remain passive in the same way as a card. They are no more inventive than a contactless wristband, watch, key fob, side card or any other way to hold a contactless antenna and chip. You can achieve the same thing by sellotaping your regular contactless card to the back of your mobile - and it probably works better!!