Community

Cash is legal tender. Merchants who chose to decline cash are, in effect, spitting in the face of their nation's central bank. That they're given special dispensation by their own government is minor consolation. Anyway, it's early days: The dispensation is yet to become law and let's see how many merchants actually opt to use it. In any case, customers always have the choice to take their cash to other merchants who opt not to use the dispensation.

Great post. I couldn't agree more.

Just this past week, the Government of India launched two bank account linked insurance products, namely, Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana and Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana. Both brand names are in Hindi. While Hindi is India's national language, it's only one of 14 widely spoken languages across the 25+ states of the country. I know you're not a native Hindi speaker. Neither am I. But even many native Hindi speakers I know didn't know that the first product was for life insurance and the second one was for accident insurance! 

The policy-makers are perhaps trying to put the spotlight on their political masters by choosing such descriptive names but, unless they overcome this tendency and start using branding that resonates with consumers, many FI schemes like these might languish. Therefore, to your list, I'd add "simplicity in branding" as one more CSF for driving widespread financial inclusion.

Even back in 2012, I'd written in my op-ed piece in JIBC Journal that banks had very little to fear from neobanks (http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/articles.htm) but I agree with you that they've come a very long way even from then. Today, traditional banks offer much more comprehensive digital banking services compared to neobanks who still haven't gone past their glorified leadgen origins or servers of inane alerts about how my $3.99 coffee would bust my monthly budget, blah blah blah.

Maybe it's only me but I've a déjà vu feeling of having read this article before!

Others get benefitted when a consumer spends. Who gets benefited when a consumer saves? I guess the answer to this question will convince you that you need to make your own arrangements to get yourselff addicted to saving:). I'm saying this on the back of my experience of failing to get any of my banks or 3rd parties interested in creating a mobile app to automate a manual method that I've been using to ensure that I don't bust my budget while using credit cards for nearly 25 years. If, after reading this, you're looking for some graceful "out" from your resolution of saving, here's my favorite aphorism on the subject: "No one got rich by saving"!

On a side note, ICICI Bank is at least one bank I can recall that has been providing a Digit-like feature on savings accounts in India for over 20 years. Called Quantum Optima, it sweeps any account balance over a customer-set, static threshold into a higher interest-bearing fixed deposit account. I know that Digit computes the threshold smartly and dynamically but, despite not doing that, Quantum Optima type of accounts are just as effective. Besides, Digit sweeps the money away to another bank, thereby creating the friction of having to monitor yet another account, which is not the case with Quantum Optima type of accounts that not only keep the money in the same bank but also under the same Relationship ID.

I've long argued that instore mobile payments are solving a non-existent problem. But, in my blog post on Apple Pay (http://gtm360.com/blog/2014/09/12/apple-pay-puts-banks-squarely-at-the-center-of-mobile-payments/), I'd assumed that its emphasis on security will help Apple Pay succeed where other mobile wallets have failed. I guess that accounted for the first time use of Apple Pay reported in your article. Beyond that, I'm afraid what I predicted in my post has come true: "However, people have short memories and I wonder if better security alone will be enough to convert even the most zealous FanBoy or FanGal from plastic to mobile payment."

Use of fingerprint on iPhone6 to authenticate an Apple Pay transaction is one of the drivers for its adoption in a market that places a premium on a frictionless experience. From what I know, Apple Watch lacks a fingerprint reader. So, I don't see it increasing Apple Pay adoption. PIN may have happened in Europe 10 years ago, India 1 year ago but I don't see it happening in USA for at least another 10 years: According to recent reports, even the first phase of Chip+Signature is likely to take that long. And, ironically, the rise of Apple Pay was cited in one such report as being one of the major reasons for the slowdown in adoption of Chip + Signature in USA!

Bill Me Later blazed this trail successfully with a similar credit product and enjoyed a billion dollar exit by selling itself to Max Levchin's alma mater PayPal / eBay over 7-8 years ago. Millennials or otherwise, Affirm is on a strong wicket.

Outlandish claim given how almost every smartphone-based payment method today - including the most popular one, Apple Pay - uses credit / debit card as its funding method. Or did you really mean plastic when you said credit / debit card? That would make the claim slightly less outlandish.

I agree with you as I'd highlighted in my blog post Apple Puts Banks Squarely At The Center Of Mobile Payments. Loyalty, targeted offers, lower fees - I guess they're the way to go for Apple Pay. 

@MichaelD: Good catch although I think you meant 35% (800K/2.25M*100%). Based on my experience with some other mobile apps, an Install-to-Use conversion - or what some call Activation Rate - of 35% is not bad. Just that, when viewed at over a fairly long duration of one year, it suggests that people who did use it used it only once. Which in turn implies that, like many other mobile apps, PayM is not usable enough or lacks a compelling reason to use. I suspect it's the latter because P2P is known to be a very infrequent payment transaction. Any which way, I agree with you that celebrate is the wrong word. I know many VC-funded companies who have had their plugs pulled after greater traction than this.