Community

TBH banks don't give a damn about the financial health of their customers. 

As Financial Brand noted in a recent article, "For all the talk about supporting the consumer, financial literacy, financial health, etc., banks generate a lot of revenue due to poorly informed consumer decisions". 

PFM vendors shilling their products to banks are deluding themselves.

You've described the problems. Why don't you enrich your puff piece by describing your company's solution to these problems? By publishing your company's website URL, you've already breached Finextra's community rules. In for a penny in for a pound, and all that. 

Is it realtime from one fiat to another or just within Ripple?

Like I said, I don't know much about DIP, but it'd seem like Google Datashare will disrupt this product category.

Google Cloud launches market data sharing service

PS: I actually meant "compete with" but who can resist throwing around the D word, huh?:)

LOL EBPP and Innovation.

Electronic Bill Presentment has been around for at least 20 years. By printing a link or QR code on the bill, Billers and Banks powered Electronic Bill Payment for at least 15 years. In countries where RTP rail is available, such as UK (FPS), India (IMPS, UPI), the payment can also happen in realtime for at least 3-5 years. 

TBH it's highly reaching for a bank to call EBPP an innovation in 2021. If Mr. Mike Bellacosa really means that innovation is long overdue in EBPP *for his bank*, I have no argument:)

It's 29 years actually!

In 2017, Crossing the Chasm celebrated its 25th anniversary. At the time, I wrote a post about how the theory is still relevant for traditional software like ERP, CRM etc. but I did question its relevance for new-age software like Slack, Hootsuite, et al.

I don't know enough about the DIP software category to figure out whether it belongs to former or latter category.

I got a reply from Geoff. It can be read on my company blog post titled How Relevant Is “Crossing The Chasm” After 25 Years? (hyperlink removed to comply with Finextra Community Rules but this post should appear on top of Google Search results when searched by its title).

SAAS vendors are no different from COTS vendors in that both underplay the role of services. Everybody acknowledges that some degree of services are required by way of customer-specific configuration / customization / enhancement in virtually every site but vendors still underplay services.

There are many reasons for this behavior but the one that I find most powerful is the fact that most CEOs are comped on Stock Price aka Valuation. A pure product / SAAS company gets many times more valuation than a services company. Ergo, there's this tendency to suppress services in COTS and SAAS companies. As a corollary to this, in many product companies, services around the company's owned product is not even reported as services revenue but product revenue.

I get that but if you're claiming that the use of Google Pay and Apple Pay in Ecommerce scenario amounts to Contactless, then I'd argue that *every* method of payment used in Ecommerce is equally Contactless. After all, even when I pay with my plastic credit card for an ecommerce purchase, my credit card is not making physical contact with the ecommerce website, so why is not "Contactless"?

AFAIK, the correct term for payment methods used in Ecommerce is "Remote Payments", not Contactless. 

AFAIK, Contactless is CP / Instore Payment whereas Ecommerce is CNP / Remote Payment.

Maybe I'm missing something but how is Contactless relevant to Ecommerce?

On the face of it, this is a customer-centric move but, going by the popular narrative on Overdraft Protection, I'm quite sure it will eventually be seen as uncustomer-centric.

Anyone who wishes to transfer  £5000 or more to a total stranger is extremely motivated, to say the least. At that point, if the bank stops her from completing the transfer, her visceral reaction will be to rant against the bank with a comment like "why is my bank stopping me from using my own money?". Going by the reflexive reaction of people when they see ovedraft protection fee entries on their bank statment, I'm not so sure she'd thank the bank later for stopping the APP fraud. I'm also sure the same Which? will join her in panning the bank for excessive friction. 

IMO, key for banks to prevent this move from totally backfiring is to display a crystal clear error message for why the payment failed.