Community

Does anyone know if the Chancellor investing her own pension and that of the rest of the cabinet into one of these so called mega funds? 

Is anyone out there still believing anything Rachel Reeves says?

Is that the same Chancellor who spent her first 100 days talking down UK entrepreneurs' positive mindset with her message of economic doom to serve her party's political aims? 

Is that the same Chancellor that promised not to raise National Insurance tax? And then raised National Insurance tax.? Zero trust from here. And don't get me started on how chnages to employment rights and a four day week will improve UK productivity?

Is that the same Chancellor that utterly destroyed her relationship with small and medium-sized  business owners (which represent 2/3rds of UK GDP) by defining them as not being 'working' people? Any fintech entrepreneurs out there, not working?

Is that the 'cut & paste' Chancellor who can't do her own research or come up up with her own original thoughts?

Is that the Chancellor who is sitting inside an echo chamber fuelled by divisive 1970s class hatred, surrounded by people with *zero* experience of actual wealth creation, or generating growth through taking personal risk on board? Or even simply having ever worked in the private sector?

Anyone with any experience of being in the frontline of business knows that this Chancellor and her budget are crushingly bad for UK fintech entrepreneurs, risk takers, growth enablers and innovators. 

With this Chancellor there's no understanding, no empathy, no concept of a fair exchange of risk and reward.

See you in Singapore. Or Dubai. Or the US. 

Martin Whybrow - the longtime commentator on the banking systems marketplace - has posted his own recollections of George Koukis here.

Its not rocket science but I like this story from NatWest (everyone likes a league table). All banks need to up their game in turning scams, phishing and other security risks into accessible, popular topics of conversation among mainstream audiences. Communicating risks or dangers is counter-intuitive for banks but is the best way to educate consumers to better protect themselves.

Massive respect for Anne Boden. Always loved her atypical fintech disruptor approach - no t-shirt, no ponytail, no techbro attitude - just solid experience from deep inside the operational side of banking, and a healthy focus on getting to profitability. 

Wondering how many startups will have had a wake up call moment about the implications of the FSC deposit guarantee limits and will now be looking to spread their business banking arrangements from a fintech/neobank, and into a big, dull, safe, too big to fail, old school bank.

Shame to see SVB in this type of trouble. They were early entrants to support and champion fintech. 

This story has that 'moment in time' feel about it. Let's hope it signals the nadir, not the start, with worse to come.

Anyone thinking fintech could sail through current economic headwinds is getting a wake up call. This news, and the Silicon Valley Bank story, are making the point. If there's anyone out there naively still thinking optimism and buzzwords will get them through, had better get with the program: cut costs; conserve cash; concentrate on customers.

Spending tax payers money carefully is a good motive. But I worry that entrepreneurs and tech startups won't have much empathy with a huge bank. I have no firsthand experience of dealing with either, but Tech Nation seemed to fit the purpose and requirement. Barclays Bank, spearheading UK tech innovation, really?

The elephant in the room question, with this and similar actions in other fintechs: was this a decision by the founders, or the VCs?