Community

@SteveA:

"Square’s new chip reader ... works with iPhone, iPad, ..."

While iPhone6 might lend a certain degree of coolness to the transaction, s/he will be happy to enter their PIN even into older models of your iPhone & iPad:)

After contributing to and following this topic for years, for reasons highlighted in my comment here, I'm slowly beginning to believe that basic human nature comes in the way of the emergence of a golden mean between convenience and security. One has to take precedence, with the other taking a backseat. Which does what will be driven as much by cultural factors as anything else e.g. security will take precedence in India whereas convenience, in USA.

I think the security lobby is using sensationalism to peddle its wares. Take this Apple Touch ID hack for example. It will compromise my Apple Pay payment only if (1) my iPhone is stolen (2) by a robber who has captured my fingerprint (3) freshly (4) on a gummy bear. I tend to believe that crossing the road might be more dangerous than the simultaneous occurrence of these four events.

A bank that uses a CBS that you might be aware of wanted to get an instant account opening portal developed. For precisely the same perceived advantages mentioned in your blog post, the bank invited only its CBS vendor to bid for this digital solution. But when it received the proposal, the time-to-market and price quoted by the CBS vendor were completely out of whack. The bank started doubting whether its CBS vendor was really as strong on domain, integration touchpoints and technical skills as the bank had originally given it credit. Long story short, the bank placed the order for its digital solution on another vendor. Moral of story: Claiming superiority in words is not enough. An incumbent vendor must back its claims in action with faster delivery period or lower price or some other concrete customer benefit.

It's clear that your kid was vaccinated against typhoid among other diseases. However, it's not clear against what "disease(s)" you're recommending vaccinating a software product: Scope creep? Defects? Bad UI? Its very existence?

Banks must be under the impression that their customers think "ignore is bliss". Well, personally, they're not wrong:) As a bank customer, I want to know about a breach not when it happens but only if - and that's a big IF - someone has actually used the breached info to steal money from my account. And, when my bank informs me about that, I want it to tell me that it has already reversed the fraudulent charge, that I need to do nothing and that all's well. Maybe it's only me or maybe I'm representative of the average customer. 

@JimW + 1, as I'd highlighted in Calling B.S On Banking The Unbanked 

In all this debate about whether branches are required or not, it's often forgotten that bankers can sell big ticket products much better with face-to-face contact in a branch than via remote channels. I suspect this is unstated in BankMobile's decision to supplement the digital channel with live telephone, the next best alternative to a branch. 

Now we know how Apple will know how much fees to collect from card issuers without knowing the value of the individual Apple Pay transaction:

"fees paid to Apple would be collected by the major card schemes Visa and MasterCard, with Apple maintaining the right to audit the issuer's Apple Pay records at least twice a year."

The CEO of MasterCard should love this app. Advocating the merits of a cashless economy to his subordinates, he was labeled a cheapskate when it was found that he didn't have any cash to tip the concierge in the hotel they were staying (http://ow.ly/AQHok)!

How's half a million pounds "tyranny" for a bank that must be having an IT budget of close to billion dollars? This is a negotiation ploy to soften up the concerned vendor. At least that's how it sounds to the marketer in me.