Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

itnews.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 238 posts

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#31

Post by stupidcar »

wowca wrote: post #23
sandos wrote: post #12

This sounds like the swedish product "swish" which is immensely popular. Nobody does bank transfers between people, everybody transfers to your mobile number. So far I think there are no fees for personal use, either, although they said it would come later a few years ago. Transfers are of course instant and you can see the recipients name before you send the money, which is a great pro compared to a bank transfer to…

Do people really transfer that much money between them on a regular basis? Everyone was touting this as the selling point for some of the crypto currencies, but I've always thought this is a non-issue. It's anecdotal but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I needed to transfer money to a person and not to a company.

I find I need to do it quite often. Usually because, for speed or convenience, one person in a group has paid for something, like movie tickets, a round of drinks, or the bill a restaurant. Being able to do it easily and immediately makes it much less likely that you'll forget and require your friend either to take a loss, or deal with the awkwardness of chasing people for money.

Right now we use Revolut for this, where possible. But that only works when the person receiving the cash also uses it, which isn't always the case. Having a more universal system that works for everyone would be very handy.

One amusing thing about doing this approach is that, if you tend to split who does the principal payment evenly between your group of friends, then you realise you are rarely adding or removing funds from your Revolut account, you are just shuffling the same small sums back and forth between yourselves in order to keep things fair.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#33

Post by Fredej »

wowca wrote: post #23
sandos wrote: post #12

This sounds like the swedish product "swish" which is immensely popular. Nobody does bank transfers between people, everybody transfers to your mobile number. So far I think there are no fees for personal use, either, although they said it would come later a few years ago. Transfers are of course instant and you can see the recipients name before you send the money, which is a great pro compared to a bank transfer to…

Do people really transfer that much money between them on a regular basis? Everyone was touting this as the selling point for some of the crypto currencies, but I've always thought this is a non-issue. It's anecdotal but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I needed to transfer money to a person and not to a company.

How often do you have outlays for another person or give someone cash?

The application can be used for any transaction. I usually use it if I've been out with some friends, then it's super easy to split the bill afterwards. Or if going shopping. Or if we share a taxi.

Before we would either settle in cash or by trying to spend approximately the same. Now everything is done this way.

That's atleast the way it works in Denmark.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#34

Post by madeofpalk »

wowca wrote: post #23
sandos wrote: post #12

This sounds like the swedish product "swish" which is immensely popular. Nobody does bank transfers between people, everybody transfers to your mobile number. So far I think there are no fees for personal use, either, although they said it would come later a few years ago. Transfers are of course instant and you can see the recipients name before you send the money, which is a great pro compared to a bank transfer to…

Do people really transfer that much money between them on a regular basis? Everyone was touting this as the selling point for some of the crypto currencies, but I've always thought this is a non-issue. It's anecdotal but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I needed to transfer money to a person and not to a company.

This is the entire basis of Venmo. That's pretty popular.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#35

Post by incompatible »

SyneRyder wrote: post #29
qzervaas wrote: post #10

The two banks I’ve checked only allow you to use your mobile phone number or email address as your PayID (CBA and ING). When paying somebody, when you enter a recipient’s PayID, the bank confirms by showing the recipient account holder name. So in effect, they’ve just implemented a nationwide number-to-name lookup system. Separate to this, these two banks are pushing it hard. It feels like a land grab, since a single…

Westpac appears to be limiting it to mobile phone number, not even allowing email addresses. I'm okay with giving out an email address, but not my personal phone number that people can call & buzz me any time of day or night. I'd rather just give out my BSB / Account Number. I'm happy to see real-time payments, though. That will make it easier to bounce money around between savings accounts at different banks, no mor…

It's not clear to me if the BSB / Account Number or BPAY payments will be in any way affected by this new system, or if they will remain as slow as ever.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#36

Post by henrikschroder »

sandos wrote: post #12

This sounds like the swedish product "swish" which is immensely popular. Nobody does bank transfers between people, everybody transfers to your mobile number. So far I think there are no fees for personal use, either, although they said it would come later a few years ago. Transfers are of course instant and you can see the recipients name before you send the money, which is a great pro compared to a bank transfer to…

Don't tell them about Swish' absolutely brilliant QR codes, let them think they've caught up! :-D

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#37

Post by c2h5oh »

wowca wrote: post #23
sandos wrote: post #12

This sounds like the swedish product "swish" which is immensely popular. Nobody does bank transfers between people, everybody transfers to your mobile number. So far I think there are no fees for personal use, either, although they said it would come later a few years ago. Transfers are of course instant and you can see the recipients name before you send the money, which is a great pro compared to a bank transfer to…

Do people really transfer that much money between them on a regular basis? Everyone was touting this as the selling point for some of the crypto currencies, but I've always thought this is a non-issue. It's anecdotal but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I needed to transfer money to a person and not to a company.

Yes, in most of Europe it's a primary method of payment for anything people in US would use a cheque for (and most EU countries no longer have cheques at all). It is also often used for online purchases instead of cc, but that varies more per country. This is also how you pay your taxes and how vast majority of b2b payments are done.

It's cheap, fast and simple - all you need is a name of account holder and account number.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#38

Post by madeofpalk »

MattPearce wrote: post #6
jakecopp wrote: post #2

Does this just boil down to faster BSB/account number transfers between banks? I feel they're a little to late to the party for PayPal-like payments to a email or number.

Yeah, the basic idea of it is faster payments + the ability to transfer to an email address/phone number/ABN. The value is in it being supported by all the various banks and being instant, so you can just log into your banking app and instantly transfer to someone's account using only their email address, for example. Source: I work on the account resolution service that is part of this.

AND, my understanding, is richer data to go along with transactions. A shop could, theoretically, attach a receipt to payments so you can view that in your internet banking.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#39

Post by mstibbard »

dorian-graph wrote: post #11
mixmastamyk wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banking in ANZ is light years ahead of the US. Why on Earth would you want to use a potentially malicious rent-seeking third-party when you could send it directly bank to bank account for free? Looks like this is adding a convenience numbers/mapping to addresses and speeding the transfer time, which is welcome. Though I appreciated the nightly clearance because on a few occasions it gave me a chance to change the amo…

> Banking in ANZ is light years ahead of the US. And light years behind some other countries.

Out of curiosity, who is the world leader in banking?

Going from Australia to the UK felt like going back in time 20 odd years.

Re: Australia’s new real-time banking payments platform

#40

Post by bloodorange »

stupidcar wrote: post #31
wowca wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people really transfer that much money between them on a regular basis? Everyone was touting this as the selling point for some of the crypto currencies, but I've always thought this is a non-issue. It's anecdotal but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I needed to transfer money to a person and not to a company.

I find I need to do it quite often. Usually because, for speed or convenience, one person in a group has paid for something, like movie tickets, a round of drinks, or the bill a restaurant. Being able to do it easily and immediately makes it much less likely that you'll forget and require your friend either to take a loss, or deal with the awkwardness of chasing people for money. Right now we use Revolut for this, wh…

I'll be off topic I'm afraid but I did want to share my perspective on this. I've lived in two cultures - one where people split the bill and one where one person just pays for it and someone else does the next time and so on. I much prefer the latter approach and among well meaning people, it is hassle free. I believe this is so because on the long run, the differences don't add up to much.

I think, in some way, for me, it "shows more acceptance". I noticed that in the "split accurately" way, the greater resistance was not to pay for it but to have someone else pay for it - which in a way is disallowing someone from doing something small for you at that point of time. I dealt with this by proposing that the other person(s) could do it the next time etc. Some would find the proposal acceptable, some wouldn't.

I found that when I "converted" people this way, it led to a more relaxed setting. Perhaps it was a problem with me - finding it difficult to accept money from friends for just a cup of coffee or a meal. For me that meant the relationship was not important and the 'book had to be closed and made to add up'...

Of course, ultimately, these are only anecdotes - make of it what you will.

(Ninja EDIT: Minor clarification)

Post reply on HN