To see Finovate news updates in real-time, follow our feed on Twitter.
Who Wins with NFC-Based Mobile Payments?
Now we can stop speculating and begin to plan strategies for the new NFC-in-the-phone world. Google CEO Eric Schmidt announced that an NFC phone running Android Gingerbread would be available “within a few weeks.” He even demoed the NFC capability on stage on what is thought to be a new phone called Nexus S. He showed a location check-in, not a payment (see video below, first 6 minutes cover the NFC announcement).
You can be sure Apple will not let itself be out-innovated on NFC, so expect NFC on the iPhone 5 next summer. So what, if anything, does this mean for banks and credit unions?
There’s much to be determined still, depending on how much control Apple and the carriers try to exert. The Isis venture from AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon is an indicator that the U.S. telecom giants are actively looking to gain an foothold in mobile payments. And it’s not like the huge card issuers and MasterCard/Visa are going to sit on the sidelines. No one knows how it will play out.
But it’s interesting to try to figure out who stands to gain, and lose, from the inevitable move from plastic to mobile device. One aspect I hadn’t though about was brought to my attention in a conversation with M-Com’s Serge Van Dam yesterday. He pointed out one likely consequence of virtual cards running in phones: the resurgence of retail store-branded “charge cards” (non-Visa/MC).
By making store cards virtual, almost any size merchant will be able to jump on the loyalty bandwagon issuing their own virtual loyalty/charge “card” hooked directly to customer bank accounts (or PayPal), avoiding Visa/MasterCard interchange. It’s a decoupled debit play, but without the expense/infrastructure of issuing plastic cards.
Here’s my list of possible winners in the NFC world. What do you think?
Potential winners:
- As outlined above, the small merchant that uses virtual loyalty cards (i.e., in mobile apps) to compete with the bigger players
- Larger merchants that may be able to cut their interchange costs by routing virtual store card transactions away from MasterCard/Visa/Amex
- Mobile payment/commerce startups and clever financial institutions (including PayPal) that figure out ways to add value in the new NFC-enabled world (note 1)
- Mobile telecom players (carriers, networks, and Apple) that derive income from the increase in mobile commerce and advertising
- Card issuers, if NFC capabilities drive fraud losses down
- Consumers, who gain convenience by no longer needing to carry a wallet full of debit, credit and loyalty cards around
Potential losers:
- Incumbent payments brands, especially MasterCard/Visa/Amex, who could lose interchange revenue to upstarts
Google’s Eric Schmidt shows first NFC phone running Android
Note: NFC demo is in first six minutes
Notes:
1. My favorite quote from Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s remarks in the video above,” (NFC) will result in 500 new mobile payments startups.”
2. Picture credit: AsiaBizz.com
Capital One’s Online Prequalification System Rocks
If you’ve read Netbanker a bit, you know I can get pretty excited at just about any new and shiny bit of fintech. So if you went only by my blog posts, it might be hard to differentiate between a cool new feature and a major strategic disruption.
Well, take note, this is one of the big ones if Capital One can deliver on the promise. And that is a very important caveat. The card giant better be able to fulfill cards to the vast majority of those it prequalifies online or it will have legions of disgruntled applicants.
What the company has done is place a pre-qualification form between its online ads (see banner running on TechCrunch below) and the full application. The form asks for name, mail address, and last four digits of the Social Security Number, plus two multiple-choice questions about desired features and credit self-evaluation.
The whole process can be completed in as little as 35 seconds (in my test it took 24 seconds to fill in the blanks; 8 seconds for the results to be displayed).
Importance: Credit-savvy consumers, about the only ones who’ll be approved these days, know that every credit application negatively impacts their credit score, at least temporarily. Therefore, many are hesitant to complete an online app if they think there’s a chance they won’t be approved. Being able to test your creditworthiness (note 1) without a credit bureau hit is a powerful incentive to move consumers into the sales process.
The other advantage of this system is that even if you don’t complete the full application after the pre-qual, Capital One has captured your name, address, and a positive match with your SSN. So they can hit you with followups in the near future. However, I am surprised the company doesn’t ask for your email address. It must have dampened response in testing.
Capital One banner ad across TechCrunch (17 Nov. 2010)
Landing page emphasizing the lack of risk to your credit score (link)
Pre-qualification form
Results page with a recommended card and two alternatives
Note: I indicated a preference for travel rewards in the pre-qualification form.
Online application
Note: Users must start over as none of the pre-qualification form info is transferred over
Notes:
1. At the end of the pre-qualification process, the company only says you are “pre-qualified.” There is no guarantee you’ll get the card or credit limit you want.
2. For more on online lending, consult our previous OBR reports:
– Online Lending v5.0 (part 1) (Nov. 2005)
– Online Lending v5 (part 2) (Jan. 2006)
Certificate of Deposit Renewal Letters in the Digital Age
Today I received a letter from a large credit union (note 1) informing me that my certificate of deposit was up for renewal. I was given six choices at the bottom of a form (note 2) along with a postage-paid return envelope.
Had I received that letter in 1988, I would have considered it state of the art. But in the modern world of instant communications and researching rates via Google, the communication was inadequate and reflects poorly on the CU’s brand:
- No current rate info: I realize that rates are subject to change and are miserably low, but at least tell me what they are today so I have some idea of what’s going on. While you are at it, remind me of what my rate was. Avoiding naming the specific rate is a huge red flag that yours is probably not so competitive. Plus, it’s irritating when it’s obvious how easy it would be to program current rates into the form letter. The CU did at least direct me to its website and call center to find current rates. However, the call center had no main menu option for rates, so you had to guess which number made the most sense.
- No email/call center option for choosing: The only way to communicate my investment choice is to return a postage-paid envelope. How about an email address, phone number of even a simple URL?
- No email notification: I signed up for this account online, and the bank’s marketing messages arrive via email. Why didn’t I get an email asking me which option I prefer?
- No clear info on what happens next: According to the fine print buried in the accompanying Truth-in-Savings disclosure, my certificate will automatically renew if I take no action. But nowhere in the main letter does it say that, nor is the deadline for taking action spelled out. The “current maturity date” is provided, but that’s using banking lingo that could be clearer.
- No niceties (or even a sales pitch): The letter was bare bones with just two sentences and an info box about my CD (note 3). There was no salutation, no signature, no thank-you, no names of anyone at the CU, no local branch info, no encouragement to renew, and so on.
————————————————–
Notes:
1. As previously noted, we generally avoid posting the name of financial institutions that we criticize here; but we’ll privately tell readers so long as it’s not posted online (email me if you are curious).
2. The choices:
A. Change term to 6, 12, 24 or 36 months (it was already 12 months, so that was a
bit confusing, too).
B. Deposit to another account with a blank for writing in the account number
(and no instructions on whether that had to be an account at the CU)
C. Send a check for the balance (but with no ability to take a partial payout)
3. My CD is small ($500) and was set up online through a now-defunct third-party. So it’s very possible that there are different communications sent to larger CD holders, and/or those that were acquired by a specific branch.
Weekly Updates — Week of November 8, 2010
Here’s the news from the Week of November 8, 2010. To see our updates real-time, follow us on Twitter.
Google Testing U.S. Credit Card Comparison Ads
Today, when searching Google for “credit cards,” a small Comparison ad appeared on the top of the results page, above the individual paid spots (see first screenshot below; note 1). The title was “Credit Card Offers” and clicking on it delivered me to the following URL: google.com/comparisonads/uscredit (see second screenshot).
Google had previously disclosed United Kingdom tests for credit card and mortgage comparison ads, but this is the first I’d heard of them in the United States (note 2). The comparison page had 101 credit card offers that could be searched based on certain card attributes such as “no annual fee” and/or by the user’s self-evaluation of their credit quality.
Clicking on one of the offers delivered a page that summarized the salient points, but according to the fine print at the bottom of the page, Google isn’t currently being paid for these credit card ads. However, there was a source code in the URL that delivered me to the U.S. Bank application, so Google may be banking referral fees for completed applications.
If this practice becomes widespread, card issuers will need to adjust their Google search buy and figure out how to gain better exposure on the comparison-results page. Right now, APR (interest rate) is the default sort mechanism.
1. Google search for “credit cards” brings up comparison ad (10 Nov. 10)
2. Credit card comparison page includes sort and search options
3. The offer page provides detailed price info
Note: Clicking on the “application form” button takes users to the issuer’s site to complete the application
3a. Fine print at bottom of the page
———————————————-
Notes:
1. Searching from a Seattle IP address on 10 Nov. 2010 at about 5:00 PM Pacific Time via Firefox 3.6 on WinXP.
2. Apparently a few others have seen them; for example, Search Engine Journal reported on the practice in an October post (here).
Ebilling Startup Doxo Launches First Client: Sprint
A few weeks ago, I wrote about Doxo, a newly launched startup, building what Microsoft, Checkfree, and others were unable to achieve a decade ago: an ebilling hub that consumers actually used. A number of the comments, and private emails I received, were skeptical given that history.
But today the startup put itself on the map with the launch of its first biller, Sprint, with nearly 50 million customers (press release). Interestingly, Sprint has been relatively successful in converting customers to paperless billing with 23% adoption (note 1). But that still means the company generates around a half-billion bills annually.
Because Doxo charges Sprint a fraction of what it saves when its customers turn off the paper statement (a requirement to use the system), the telecom giant has little risk in partnering with Doxo.
Co-branded landing page for Sprint customers (link; 9 Nov. 2010)
Note:
1. Many billers have found it difficult to drive paperless adoption beyond the 20% to 30% mark.
Weekly Updates — Weeks of Oct. 25 and Nov. 1, 2010
FinovateFall 2010 Demo Videos Now Available
We’re pleased to announce that the demo videos from FinovateFall 2010 are now available for free download (or immediate consumption) from the Finovate archives.
This fall’s NYC conference showcased 56 handpicked companies doing 7-minute demonstrations (no slides allowed) of their latest technology innovations to a sold-out audience of 650 financial & banking executives, venture capitalists, press, analysts and entrepreneurs.
Check out these cutting-edge ideas in financial, banking, payments, mobile, lending, investing and security technologies today for inspiration and your next edge on the competition!
(P.S. If you’re interested in joining us at the next Finovate event, tickets are now on sale for FinovateEurope (Feb, 1, 2011 in London). It is going to be an amazing showcase of European and global fintech innovation!)
Eric Mattson is CEO of Online Financial Innovations, the parent company of NetBanker, Online Banking Report and the Finovate Conference Series. He can be reached at [email protected].
FinovateFall 2010 Demo Videos Now Available
We’re pleased to announce that the demo videos from FinovateFall 2010 are now available for free download (or immediate consumption) from the Finovate archives.
This fall’s NYC conference showcased 56 handpicked companies doing 7-minute demonstrations (no slides allowed) of their latest technology innovations to a sold-out audience of 650 financial & banking executives, venture capitalists, press, analysts and entrepreneurs.
Check out these cutting-edge ideas in financial, banking, payments, mobile, lending, investing and security technologies today for inspiration and your next edge on the competition!
(P.S. If you’re interested in joining us at the next Finovate event, tickets are now on sale for FinovateEurope (February 1st, 2011 in London). It is going to be an amazing showcase of European and global fintech innovation!)
Eric Mattson is CEO of Online Financial Innovations, the parent company of NetBanker, Online Banking Report and the Finovate Conference Series. He can be reached at [email protected].
Charging More for Branch and Call-Center Transactions Compared to Online Ones
Recently, I spent 34 frustrating minutes in a branch completing a single international wire transfer. And 22 minutes of that was with the branch manager. How much did that cost the bank compared to the same transaction online? 2x more? 5x more? 50x more?
And more importantly, what’s the customer experience? How much happier would I have been to do the transaction online in the comfort of my own home? 2x? 5x? 1000x?
In this particular case the question is moot, because my primary bank does not support online or call-center wires unless I upgrade to a much-pricier commercial checking account.
But for those financial institutions that do offer a choice, the math is pretty clear. It costs WAY less to complete a transaction online and (most) customers are WAY happier to complete routine transactions online, assuming sufficient security is in place.
Yet, many banks still price the services the same regardless of the channel. While this is understandable from a simplicity standpoint (and you don’t want to alienate branch/call center users), it’s time to start using price to reward self-service.
For example, in my most recent Chase business checking account statement, I noticed that the bank is instituting a new fee structure for stop-payment requests. Beginning Nov. 13, each request made in branch or over the phone will cost $32. In comparison, online requests will be $25 each, a 22% savings. Wires are also $5 cheaper online than in the branch (see below).
The downside is that customers may be outraged by a $20/$25 fee for a transaction they initiate themselves online. But the discount, combined with the time savings, should help ease the pain.
Do "High-Touch" Branch Experiences Help Your Brand?
I honestly don’t think branches will be extinct anytime soon. Yes, I think they will drastically shrink in size/staff as transactional activity is eliminated. But they are part of the American landscape, provide a convenient place to open accounts, and reinforce your brand.
Or do they?
I spent 34 minutes in a branch today and came away with a number of brand impressions, none of them good. Here’s the blow-by-blow account (skip to the Bottom Line section if you, too, have recently sent a wire from a bank branch).
Yesterday, I went to a small branch of a major bank to send a $20,000 international wire, something I’ve done only once before. I missed the “12 or 12:30” cutoff time and was told I’d need to come back tomorrow (note 1). They were nice about it, but it was 15 to 20 minutes wasted, although I did grab a tasty Americano across the street, so it wasn’t all bad.
Today, I was near a much larger branch, so I decided to give it a try, hoping that the process would go faster with more staff available. It was mid-morning on a Friday (note 2) with only two or three customers in the branch and at least six employees, so I thought I’d made a good decision. Unfortunately, the only person available that could process an international wire was the busy branch manager (note 3), and I was directed to a seat on the couch where I waited for 12 minutes watching the six employees handle a trickle of customers.
No one approached me during this time to offer an update on the wait. Finally, the harried branch manager stepped over and apologized for being “slammed” (even though the branch was nearly deserted) and went on to explain his staffing woes that would soon be over since there were “three job offers out at that moment.”
At that point, I had to turn over my driver’s license, tell him my Social Security Number, and then wait another 22 minutes as he hammered away on the computer to complete the wire. At least once I’m pretty sure he was typing an email to someone, and he also made a quick phone call about another matter. Along the way, he asked me for the symbol for British pounds. Since I didn’t know, he proceeded to the back room (where more employees were hidden, note 4), and since they didn’t know, he said he would Google it. And he did.
Next, he handed me all the info on the transfer so I could proof his work. And, like the last time I sent an in-branch wire, an error popped out. The form stated payment was for a boat, which, besides being incorrect, was especially interesting since the money was headed to London. He blamed the autofill on the computer (why would autofill be enabled on wire transfer forms?).
I said I wished this could be done online, and he said it had to be done in branch to reduce fraud and money-laundering. While that may have been an okay answer, he then contradicted himself and said if I did more than two wires per month, I should consider the bank’s $100/mo commercial service. So much for the fraud problem, I guess.
Finally, he walked across the room to call in the wire (why didn’t he use the phone on his desk?). He completed the process by scratching in pencil on the back of his business card my confirmation number and U.S. dollar equivalent of the transfer (see inset). Apparently, the branch’s wire system doesn’t provide an automated receipt.
Bottom line: Branch proponents say that consumers value the “personal touch” and hand-holding that branches provide on major transactions. And that those warm feelings create trust and positive brand associations.
So what were my takeaway “brand impressions” after my experience today? (And I’m not saying these things are necessarily true, but they are my very real perceptions).
- They do not value my time: First, I had to make a second trip since I’d missed the cutoff. Then on the second trip, it took 34 minutes to complete the process.
- The bank is inefficient: The branch manager had to spend 22 minutes with me to generate $50 in fees. And I was in a huge, 10,000 square-foot structure with a large parking lot and 30-foot ceilings, that was serving a trickle of customers with a bevy of staffers.
- The staff is poorly trained and/or lack tech support: The branch is “slammed” with 3 customers across 6 employees! The branch manager has to use Google to fill out the wire transfer form.
- The systems are cobbled together: Employees have to find currency abbreviations on their own. The wire had to be “called” in by the branch manager. My “receipt” was handwritten on a business card.
- They made me feel less than secure: I had to tell him my Social Security Number out loud, which is always unnerving when you don’t really know who’s listening. And they left me scratching my head about wire fraud.
- It must be a crappy place to work: They were down 3 employees, despite a 9+% unemployment rate.
On the plus side: The staff was very friendly, cookies were on the counter, and I got a blog post out of it. That helps. A lot.
——————————————–
Notes:
1. I’m not sure why they couldn’t take my info today and send the wire tomorrow, something they had done before on a domestic wire.
2. He did mention something about an “operational audit” going on, so this might not be the normal experience. Although the last time I sent a wire at another branch, it took even longer because that manager “was learning the new system.”
3. The astute reader will notice that today is Wednesday, not Friday. I wrote this a few weeks ago on a Friday afternoon and held it until today. Frankly, I wasn’t sure whether to publish another “analyst whines about customer service” post. I promise it’s my last one of the year.
4. I’m not naming the bank, because this is a story about two visits to two branches which may or may not reflect what goes on in other parts of the bank. But I will name the bank via private email if you promise not to publish it. Just drop me a line.
5. Graphic upper right: Kinesis