Brett King

Posts Tagged ‘mobile’

Mobile Banking versus the Mobile Wallet?

In Customer Experience, Mobile Banking, Mobile Payments, Retail Banking on February 23, 2012 at 06:16

With recent news that Barclays Pin-git (or is it Ping-it) has had 120,000 downloads in 5 days, that Square has 1m merchants on their payments platform (1/8th of all US card merchants/retailers) and Starbucks is doing 25% of it’s North American payments via a cardless App – it seems like Mobile Payments are taking off like the H1N1 virus. The interesting thing is that many bankers are looking at all of this activity as if it has little meaning or impact on their business at this point in time. I think part of that may be that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the mobile can be utilized in the banking and payments space.

120,00 downloads in 5-day for Barclay’s PingIt

When showing glimpses of Movenbank’s Mobile App I often get asked by bankers whether it is a mobile wallet or a mobile banking app? It’s as if the two worlds of cards/payments and banking are destined never to meet when it comes to a conventional view of the banking world. In banks today, we even institutionalize this by having cards as a separate division or business unit, separate from the retail banking function. The only time they ever seem to meet is in the form of a debit card or within internet banking. But the cards business, while being a strong revenue earner generally for banks because of credit card fees and interest margin, philosophically is not really considered banking per se by most die-hard bankers.

In fact, I’ve known banks where if you walk into a branch, the teller needs to call the call centre to find out any information about your credit card, even your balance. With many of the banks I work with, in-branch or in the contact centre, CSRs/Tellers need to navigate between separate screens to see your credit card details and activity versus transactions in your checking account.

For a long time these two worlds have remained largely operationally separate. The popularization of the smartphone is destined to destroy that division of labor.

The world of Two Channels

Today retail banking is emerging out of the hyperconnected, digital transformation age as not much more than a collection of channels and utility. In the past, you had branches which were THE distribution channel, but that has rapidly fragmented. You also had cheques and cards which provided you a mechanism, or utility, for moving your money around. Historically banking was really about two primary things – storing or protecting assets, and helping in the conduct of trade and commerce. Rudimentary cheques (or bills of exchange) were around almost 800 years before physical currency, and prior to bank branches ‘assets’ were often stored in temples and palaces. At the core of banking was assets that you either kept safe, or moved around to effect trade. In many ways, that’s still at the core of the bank value proposition.

As some of you may have noted in BANK 2.0 I call out bankers for calling digital channels ‘alternative’ or e-channels because of the psychology internally within banks that tends to put these channels in a subordinate role to the branch. Recently I was approached by a recruiter looking at placing a global head of ‘E-Channels’ into one of the big global brands and asking me for my input into how could take on the role. I told the recruiter that any digital guy worth his salt would immediately stay away from this major banking brand, largely because the decision to classify the role as a head of ‘E-Channels’ already told me everything I needed to know about the brand – that they still thought of digital as ‘E’ rather than mainstream, everyday banking. That told me that anyone taking on this role would still be faced with massive inertia around branch networks and would be fighting everyday to justify budget, investment and mindshare in the total channel experience – and that is why I said this brand was not ready.

With Internet Banking being the primary day-to-day channel for banking in the developed world, and branch frequency/visitation off 90% from it’s peak in the mid-90s, the branch is really ‘alternative’ banking today, rather than pride of place at the core of banking behavior. So the pendulum has shifted.

So what are the two emerging channels?

If you characterize banking today from a day-to-day perspective, you’ve really got two core classes of activity. Payments AND day-to-day banking based on your assets, including applying for new products, wealth management engagement, etc. If you look at either customer engagement, transactional activity or the role of an advisor in respect to your assets, you’d be hard pressed to identify activities that aren’t done through either Payments Channels or Delivery Channels (credit to Terence Roche @Gonzobanker for this insight).

Given the way retail banking is structured today, this means that many banks look at a mobile wallet as an instantiation of payments – the ultimate, downloadable payment channel ‘function’ or utility.  However, they look at Mobile Banking as a mobile-enabled version of the Internet banking platform, which is ultimately just channel migration of transaction activity from branch to digital – hence, a delivery utility. Some progressive banks are even looking at onboarding customers entirely electronically through the web, mobile, ATM or call centre – without a signature. More delivery channels. The branch is the premier delivery channel still, and more so as transactions shift out of the branch, and it becomes about high touch sales and service (delivery of revenue and service).

When two worlds collide

The problem philosophically for retail banks is that the mobile device is collapsing this view of the world. Payments and traditional day-to-day banking utility will be packaged into one portable, handheld ‘channel’. It doesn’t make sense to have one app for ‘banking’ and one app for ‘payments’ or the wallet, you must have the utility of both the bank and payments capability in one.

That presents an organizational shift because it merges the two disparate parts of retail banking, but it also presents massive opportunities.

What is possible is that my day-to-day connection with my money is far tighter than it is in a traditional banking relationship. Whether it is simply the fact that I can see my balance before and after I make a payment (not possible with plastic, cheques or cash) or whether you can start to advise me day-to-day on how to utilize my money better – the opportunity for mobile is not the wallet, and not mobile banking. It is re-imagining the utility of banking from a mobile perspective.

What’s your banking instinct?

In Customer Experience, Future of Banking, Strategy on November 18, 2011 at 12:43

Without thinking consciously about it, over time core behaviors change producing different instinctive reactions. When a phone rings today, we go to our pocket or purse, not running to a device on a desk or on the wall. When we are interacting with a mobile phone that is not our own or an ATM machine, we’ll instinctively touch the screen to navigate, even if it is not a touch screen device. When you go from reading on a Kindle or iPad to a real book, the pages are frustratingly manual to turn. When we need to take a photo with friends, increasingly we reach for our phone, even if we have a camera stuck somewhere in our bag.

What was our instinct in banking?

The earliest instincts around banking was a safe place to store your assets, and in many ways that is still the case. However, banking in its infancy didn’t necessarily involve a bank or money at all. The earliest forms of banking involved the deposit of commodities or valuables that were traded, and often they were deposited in temples or palaces, the safest physical locations. It wasn’t until the 16th and 17th centuries that organized banking started to emerge globally, particularly as the wealthy tried to keep their assets safe during the dark ages. Even then, banking was still exclusive. It really wasn’t until the 20th century that banking became more mainstream and people started considering storing their savings in a bank.

Since then banking has been an instinctive part of the lives of most people in the developed world.

It wasn’t long before it became instinctive to pull out our cheque book to pay for a large ticket item. Some would also use lay-away or lay-buy plans, but these largely disappeared over the last decade or so. Over time those instincts changed to use credit cards, and more recently debit cards at the point of sale.

In the past our instinct when we needed cash was to think about where the nearest branch was and figure out when we would need to go to withdraw cash. Over time that instinct changed to using an ATM machine, and we went from planning when we’d withdraw cash, to just picking the nearest ATM machine when the cash in our wallet was getting low.

In the past our instinct when paying a bill was to write a cheque and send it in the mail, or to go down to a post office or office of the utility company and pay the bill in person. Today, that instinct has changed to where we pay online in an instant.

It’s ironic that we think of banking as a slow and steady institution that doesn’t really change, but in reality the utility of our money means that our behavior in respect to banking has always been changing.

The future instincts of banking

So what will your instincts for banking be in the next decade?

Not a place you go, something you do…

Firstly, we won’t instinctively think of banking as a place you go. The concept that a branch is at the centre of our banking relationship has been central to retail banking for over 800 years. This is the primary instinctual shift that will occur in the next few years.

Instead of looking for a place to store your money, we’ll look for a trusted brand that is safe to store our money, but equally important will be a brand that offers strong utility and a seamless connection to the things we do with our money. A safe and trusted banking partner will be a bank that offers me access to my money and access to financial services when and where I need them. A bank that demands or prefers a physical interaction, will increasingly be avoided instinctively as too hard to work with, as irrelevant to my daily life, and as slow and unwieldy.

On rare occasions for the minority of us that have complex asset allocations, trust structures and so forth, we’ll look for a physical place to go where we aspire to get the high-touch service of a personal banker who recognizes our status as a special class of banking customer – but this will not be an overriding instinct day-to-day, it will be incidental to our general banking experience. The majority of the time, even for the high-net worth client, instinct will simply dictate a much more efficient engagement of the ‘bank’.

Move and Pay, Safely and Efficiently

When it comes to day-to-day interactions, the emphasis on the movement of our money will be speed and security. Inevitably in the short-term our instinct will be to pull out our phone at the point-of-sale to pay for goods and services. We’ll do this not only because it is much faster than using cash or a card, but because our money management will be articulated through this personal device – we’ll see our balance, what our monthly expenditure is, what upcoming expenses we have and be able to understand the context of this payment on our financial life in an instant. The same would have taken much more effort with cash, our cheque book or our card.

Your instinct for payments is changing again

Security of our cash will be also a primary reason for the shift to digital money. Increasingly we’ll look to the technology of encryption, geo-location tagging, biometrics and active identity management to secure the flow of our funds. We won’t trust a piece of plastic or a piece of paper that can be easily corrupted or stolen, and the technology of ‘hacking’ our cash from a secure device will require a level of expertise and high-performance computing that make it far less frequent than the compromise of traditional physical ‘payment’ artifacts.

At the point that it is simply no longer safe to do things with cash and plastic, our instincts will quickly change to keep our finances safe once again. Being able to see what has been happening with our money over time, will also drive us to increasing digital management of our money.

Core instincts are at the heart of the change in bank modality

First and foremost our instinct for banking is keeping our money safe, secondly is the need for the utility of our money. Neither of these core instincts will lend us to continue to support the physical elements of banking and payments that we’ve been used to in the last 100 years. We will measure ‘safety’ in the trust of a brand, not in the bricks and mortar of branches. We will measure ‘utility’ in the seamless access to our cash, and the availability of the bank in our life when and where we need it.

Our instincts are rapidly changing. We don’t store grain and gold in Temples or Palaces anymore. Already most of the world doesn’t use cheques anymore. If you’re heavily invested in branches and the physical, you don’t understand the core instinct that banking is.

Your online marketing and website are broken

In Customer Experience, Internet Banking, Media, Offer Management, Social Networking, Strategy on November 9, 2011 at 12:42

There’s generally a very poor understanding of the dynamics of the role of the website in retail financial services interactions today. There is an acceptance that ‘some’ customers use the web, when deciding on a new financial services relationship, but not of the critical nature of the web in that choice. Let me explain how things are different from a behavioral perspective.

The inertia assumptions

Historically the majority of acquisition in the financial services space was either from brand marketing and/or campaign activity that drove a potential customer to purchase or apply for a Retail FS product/service.  There is an assumption that the web, social media, mobile and other e-channels support that goal as marketing channels where we can extend the brand and campaign paradigm. That is, we can broadcast more messages, perhaps with a tighter demographic or psychographic focus, to an audience that is more diverse in their message consumption.

The problem is that the Internet has been responsible for a significant process shift in buying behavior, namely that the dynamics of buyer response has significantly flattened. In the past marketing stimuli was used to create first awareness, then interest that led to the buyer mentally listing your ‘brand’ on a sort of short-list of providers, and then finally based on further marketing stimuli (promotion, pricing, location, features) the consumer engages with your brand for your product or service. This approach to marketing is all based on the premise that consumer behavior is latent or responds to a marketing message over a defined period of time.

Now with digital interactions being what they are, a consumer can go straight from research to purchase or need to application instantly. So the ‘stimuli’ works differently today, it needs to be a ‘live’ interaction strategy, not a message strategy that waits for a latent response. The loser in this context is the traditional marketing campaign mechanism, because a campaign is a latent stimuli tool, not an interaction tool.

The new engagement model

So in this new world, buying behavior is very different. Assume a customer needs a retail financial services product like a mortgage, a new bank account, a credit card or a personal loan – what does he or she do?

The overwhelming behavior today is to think about how they will apply for that product or service, with the least fuss. They will probably be largely ambivalent to their choice of financial services provider, in that, the fact that they have a bank account with you does not automatically mean they’ll come to you for another product necessarily. What the majority of customers will do is start by looking at their options – and for that they use Google (or perhaps YouTube) as their starting point.

This research phase is critical, because it is the empowerment of the customer. Them matching your product to their needs set. What’s critical in this stage is not the features of the product generally, but the utility of the product. Take a mortgage – how quickly can they buy their house, how much do they need to pay each month and how quickly will they own their  home? They don’t start by asking what are the early pay out fees, what’s the rate, and can they change their payment terms or habits midstream.

The concept that this research needs to happen at ‘your bank’ is a holdover from our traditional branch approach to FI product sales. In fact, we build our Internet banking sites just like a branch – assuming that you’ll come, ask some questions and then apply for a product. Most of the time, we won’t let you apply for a product seamlessly through our Internet branch, and we’re aiming to push you to a ‘real’ branch. This is inertia talking and it is counter-intuitive based on behavior today.

The easiest thing to do is simply shift me straight from research to a buying action once I have you online, but the more complex that is, the more chance that I’ll simply leave your Internet branch and go looking online for a faster path to the solution. What won’t happen is that I’ll suddenly be inspired to walk into your branch and start talking to a person after reading your website.

What the new web looks like

The new web we need to build right now is a set of tools to empower customers and help them complete the buying task they are looking for as seamlessly and as frictionlessly as possible. In that environment, the rolling promotions and offers we see dominating many retail FI websites today will be largely gone, relegated to simple landing pages connected to those dying campaigns.

The new website will be rich in imagery and process workflow for the engagement process, heavily personalized around what I already know about you, either through cookies, login or something like your facebook connected profile.

Additionally, the new website will be built from the ground up to be browser agnostic. It will work on a tablet, on a mobile phone, on a laptop with a whole range of resolutions and screen sizes – seamlessly. You won’t build buttons that require a mouse click, you can use your finger. You won’t populate with lots of text or links, when big images or stories will accomplish the same stimuli to an engagement.

Apple's website works as well on Tablet and Mobile, as it does online

Coming out of all of this will be a fundamental shift in marketing budgets and team structures. In just 3 years, 30% of your website visitors will be using a non-PC screen. Social media will represent 25% of your marketing budget driving brand advocacy and participation, and 50% will be on engagement and journeys, and the rest on a supporting framework of traditional media to build broader brand awareness.

When your Telco becomes a Bank

In Customer Experience, Economics, Future of Banking, Mobile Banking, Mobile Payments on September 8, 2011 at 16:46

The announcement that the Canadian carrier Rogers Telecom has applied for a banking license should hardly come as a shock to the retail banking fraternity. There is already a plethera of mobile carriers fully engaged in mobile payments right now, from Safaricom in Kenya, Orange (with Barclays) in the UK, the ISIS collaboration in the US, LG Telecom in South Korea, and the list goes on. Everywhere you look right now, there are carriers trying to muscle in on the mobile wallet and payments space.

Should Banks be Worried?

They should be terrified.

The fact is that it makes perfect sense for mobile operators to start thinking about offering banking products and services as we dispense with plastic and start using our mobile phones as payment devices. Increasingly, banks are being detached from the end consumer by a technology layer. Let me prove it.

PayPal reinvented the customer experience layer around payments, and in doing so set the benchmark by which Peer-to-Peer payments are made. Sure there are banks at the back-end of PayPal, but today I can take out my phone or get online and send you money and all I need to know is your email address or your mobile phone number. This is compared with the average wire transfer which requires account number, account name, bank name, bank address, SWIFT Code/ABA Routing Number or IBAN, etc, etc. Now we’re all wondering why it’s simpler, and in many cases cheaper, to use PayPal than a wire transfer through our traditional bank. Why go back to complexity and friction?

Today, if a bank wants to allow their customers access to Mobile Banking they have to go through a layer of technology called an App Store (or Marketplace). Sure, there is HTML5 and mini-browser mobile sites, but the fact is that if you want best-in-class interaction and engagement, you need to go App. So today, a bank must ask Google, Apple or RIM for permission to have clients access their bank via a smartphone.

Mobile Carriers are a significant threat to day-to-day banking

Are Telcos a Threat to the High Street Bank?

Well, yes and no.

If you look at broader offerings of financial service products, then mobile operators really don’t want to play in that arena. What most of the mobile operators are looking to do is play in the payments space, taking control of the wallet on your phone or offering pre-paid debit card type services.

In 2008 about 17% of the US mobile subscriber base were on prepaid deals, but since the GFC (Global Financial Crisis) approximately 65% of net new subscribers are prepaid users. In emerging markets like India and China 90%+ of the subscriber base is prepaid, and the same counts for sub-Saharan Africa, and broadly across Eastern Europe and Asia. So what does this have to do with banking?

Prepaid subscribers for mobile phones generally speaking are more likely to be at the lower end of the scale for retail banking (less profitable, underbanked) or even in the unbanked segments. These are customers who don’t have extensive multi-bank relationships, and who increasingly are moving to products like prepaid debit cards to facilitate their day-to-day banking needs.

So guess what happens when you combine a prepaid debit card with a prepaid mobile phone? It’s a marriage made in heaven! What’s the difference between making a telephone call, an ATM withdrawal or a debit card transaction at a merchant – they are all just transactions from a value store.

It’s likely that as Telcos figure this ‘secret’ out that they will be aggressively going after that marginal layer of customers that are underbanked, and promising utility that a bank can’t provide in the payments space. The combination of prepaid phone deal with a prepaid debit card will likely result in the loss of around 10% of the retail banking consumer market in developed economies in the next 5 years in my opinion, as they migrate to this type of modality.

So What? We can Afford to Lose a Few Marginal Customers!

This will be the justification for lack of action from many retail banks; that the loss of these less profitable customers is not a bad thing. There’s two problems with that logic.

Firstly, this shift will create momentum behind changing payments behavior that will fragment day-to-day banking for many customers. Increasingly even your best, most profitable customers will be abandoning the old ways of payments to go for the utility of a combined mobile phone and payment device. Once I am managing your day-to-day spending activity, I can start to influence your decisions, spending and choices for more complex financial products too.

Secondly, the fact is that even these ‘marginal customers will likely be extremely profitable for Telcos, because to them it is just new revenue, and they don’t have all the expensive infrastructure that banks have around the very traditional (some would say antiquated) retail banking system.

The implications for banks is that they lose touch day-to-day with customers, and the day-to-day retail front-end of banking becomes owned by telcos, App stores, social networks and marketing organizations. The bank becomes the back-end manager of risk and the product manufacturer, with the lowest margin of the whole value chain.

The Total Disruption of Bank Distribution – Part 3

In Bank Innovation, Customer Experience, Future of Banking, Technology Innovation on July 12, 2011 at 07:37

Massive spend on innovation at the front-end of retail financial services

Putting aside conjecture of whether or not we are in a bubble at the moment around tech, social media, and mobile services (which I believe we very well could be), the reality is we are seeing a flurry of massive investment in new distribution models and organizations acting as either technology or behavioral enablers. We’re used to seeing big numbers for M&A activity in banking, but we’re not used to seeing such a flood of start-ups and non-traditional competitors facing off against traditional players at the retail side of the business.

In just the last 3 years there has been more than $7Bn in private equity, venture capital and private investment made into non-traditional financial services start-ups that challenge existing models. This is the first time globally that there has been this scale of challenge to the traditional retail financial services space from start-ups in the technology arena. To illustrate the level of activity, here are just a few recent investments in the New York fintech space alone (source: Quora):

SecondMarket ($15mm)– marketplace for illiquid financial instruments; secondmarket.com
Kapitall ($7.3mm)– discount brokerage with gaming elements; kapitall.com
Betterment ($3mm)– online brokerage for small investors; betterment.com
Plastyc ($2mm)– mobile based banking for the underbanked; plastyc.com
AxialMarket ($2mm)-
online middle market i-bank; axialmarket.com
BankSimple ($3mm)- online/mobile banking interface; banksimple.com
Covestor ($11mm)- platform to find SMA providers and invest with amateur traders; covestor.com
Hedgeable next generation investment management firm; hedgeable.com

However, in addition to these plays you have very some serious initiatives now doing major business in the space that used to be considered the sole domain of ‘banks’. Here are four examples:

Personal Financial Management

Mint was acquired by Intuit in September of 2009 for $170m. Mint has experienced meteoric growth in customer base. Today Mint has more than 5m customers willingly giving their personal financial data, bank account and spending information to receive the benefits of fine tuned recommendations for financial services investments and credit products.

Businesses like SmartyPig, which has a collaborative play with the industry, are very successful at stimulating simple behaviors like savings for specific goals. SmartyPig has raised over $1.2Bn in deposits for the partners banks it works with such as Citi, West Bank, BBVA, ANZ, etc. They utilize social media to encourage your friends and family to assist you in your savings goals. For example, my kids were able to use SmartyPig to solicit assistance from their grandparents, uncles, aunties, etc to help with their savings goal.

Admittedly, we also seen Blippy and Wesabe crash and burn in recent times. However, the readiness of the investment community to experiment in the space of services that are complimentary or competing directly with traditional FIs is clearly increasing.

P2P Lending

Lending Club, Prosper and Zopa are just three examples of recent successes in the P2P lending space. Lending Club is lending around $20m a month in loans, and have lent more than $300m, with an average loan size around US$10,000. In France, FriendsClear has recently announced that Crédit Agricole will be joining their efforts in a collaboration of sorts; exactly how this will work is still under wraps.

Zopa has lent more than £150m which means they are now approaching a 2% market share of the total UK retail lending market. Zopa’s average loan size is around GBP 5,000, but what is more significant is their Non-Performing Loans (NPL) ratio. Major U.K. banks typically recorded NPL ratios in the 2%-3% range from the mid-1990s through to 2007, but by the end of 2009 Lloyd TSB’s gross NPL was as up to 8.9% and HSBC’s hovering around 3% (source: Standard and Poors). So how did Zopa perform in this environment? Zopa’s NPL ratio sits at around .9%. That’s 10% of Lloyds and 1/3rd of the best bank in the UK HSBC!

Zopa's NPL Ratio is 10% that of Lloyds TSB in the UK

So how is it that a social network that lends money between its participants is better at managing loan risk than banks that have been at this for hundreds of years?

The key here is the positive psychology of social networks versus banks. If I lend money off a bank and I’m having difficulty paying that back due to loss of income, or just having a hard time making ends meet, I’m likely to let the loan slip and wait for the bank to chase me. P2P networks like Zopa, on the other hand, are finding customers proactively contacting them to make payment arrangements when they can’t meet their monthly commitment. Why?

Firstly, there are people at the end of the loan – not a big bad bank who “can afford the loss”. Secondly, the fact that there are people at the end of the loan versus a bank means that people are more inclined to prioritize paying back their loan to other people, over that of a large institution. This positive peer pressure is producing astounding results. I also asked Giles Andrews from Zopa about why he thought Zopa was better at managing lending risk than banks…

“I think our low defaults aren’t just because of P2P but because we built a better credit model, taking more account of over-indebtedness and affordability than banks”
Giles Andrews, CEO, Zopa.co.uk

Who would have thought that social networks would be better, safer, and more efficient at lending than retail banks?

In fact, P2P lending has been so successful that in recent times both Umpqua Bank and Fidor Bank (a start-up online, direct bank in Germany) have incorporated some P2P as a component of their bank platforms. Why take all the risk yourself as a bank, when some customers are willing to cover the risk themselves? But don’t think that P2P is just easy money. Wall Street Journal reported in June of this year that 90% of Lending Club’s applications were refused.

Maybe that’s why P2P is good business – because they actually take fewer risks than banks?

Pre-paid debit cards, E-Money Licenses and Payments

Amex, Greendot, NetSpend and Walmart are just three organizations that have recently made big pushes into the prepaid debit card arena in the US alone. Significantly, the US now has 40-60 million underbanked consumers (source: FDIC, Financial Times), half of whom have college degrees, and 25% of whom are prime credit rated. Many of these are opting out of the traditional banking system, but carry a pre-paid debit card. The pre-paid debit card industry will account for more than $200 Billion in funds by the end of 2011 along (source: Packaged Facts).

Top 5 reasons people get a prepaid Debit Card

The financial crisis has accelerated the increase in those whom no longer participate in the formal banking system. Since the financial crisis 60% of new mobile phone users in the United States have been no-contract, pre-paid phone users.

“As an economy becomes richer and incomes rise, the normal expectation is that the proportion of the unbanked population falls and does not rise as is now happening in the United States…”
Washington Post, December, 2009

Combined with increased account fees from big banks recently affected by reduction in interchange revenue, and modality changes, I think we can expect that increasingly customers who don’t need complex banking relationships will opt out of the banking system by using prepaid debit cards and in the future prepaid wallets enabled via NFC and mobile Apps.

In the UK Google, O2, BT and others are looking seriously at the combination of prepaid debit cards type functionality into a wallet. Google already launched their Google Wallet earlier this year, and we can only see more and more of this action in the coming months.

The raft of P2P payments, mobile payments and mobile enablement are bewildering at the moment. Undoubtedly, we’ll see many variations of mobile payments in the near future. With PayPal predicting $3 Billion in mobile payments in 2011 alone, the future of mobile-based prepaid debit cards looks very healthy.

Conclusions

We’ve never had such a concerted, technology-led explosion of retail financial services solutions that are directly in competition with the traditional players in the space. While some of these initiatives are complementary, increasingly we’re seeing startups that realize you don’t need a banking license to play on the fringes of the banking system. When you only know one way of running your business you will be increasingly challenged by customers who don’t relate to the questions you ask, the processes you have in place, and the insistance on using outdated physical artifacts and networks.

This is the first time we’ve seen a global attempt at reinventing the way banking fits into our lives on a day-to-day basis, and it is bound to create massive friction for a sector known to be very attached to traditional modes and models. One thing is clear, increasingly banks will be competing with new businesses that are faster, better, more relevant and aggressive than the long-held bastions of traditional savings and loans.

These businesses will embrace and exploit changing modality. These businesses will love disruptive customer behavior, they’ll encourage it!