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

No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

popularfintech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 452 posts

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#161

Post by toast0 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #64
m101 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Regulation has been set so high on banks that it makes it extremely difficult for new players to compete. The reasons given for regulation are: - protection from failure because of inability to not bail them out (and it has done a good job of this by and large, with some obvious risk oversights - e.g. silicon valley bank) - money laundering regulations The real corruption/monopoly in financial services that nee…

The big problem with amex/visa/mastercard is that it's a three sided market. So make it a 2 sided market, unify the processor into one of the sides. In other words, either a merchant co-operative or a consumer co-operative. In this case, a merchant co-operative seems a natural fit. The merchants jointly own the co-op, and get a refund of their fees proportional to the profit of the co-op. And you get the consumers on…

I don't see how this is going to work.

Rewards cards already bribe me at 2% (and there are better offers). Big merchants often offer a store card, sometimes a store card that's also a general use card, but they typically bribe people with 5%.

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#162

Post by rendaw »

malfist wrote: post #141
buyucu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You and I are free to not buy it, but that doesn't mean Russia or b Saudi's or China or Zuckerberg isn't going to buy a bunch to influence our president

Rather than regulate crypto, it might have been better to not elect him in the first place.

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#163

Post by catlifeonmars »

Waterluvian wrote: post #6
scarface_74 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and crypto doesn’t have any inherent risk like a sitting President creating a crypto currency where he has 80% of the currency, will probably make a half billion dollars and then do a rug pull. https://fortune.com/2025/01/22/donald-trump-net-worth-memeco...

That’s the thing I can’t ever come to understand about crypto. It’s purely about perception of value. At least with some precious metal, it has a floor value as a function of its practical uses and abundance. Which leads me to believe that the only thing that could be honestly said is that a crypto is purely about winners and suckers and timing.

Precious metal floor value is not immune either, since (1) it is dependent on supply and (2) specific technologies/industries that require their use may become diminished or obsoleted. Definitely a lot less volatile than something not bound by reality though.

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#164

Post by larrydag »

I believe disruption can come in the form of underwriting and servicing loans. The old model of large call centers that do buying and servicing loans has been around forever. It scales fairly well but it is costly and very inefficient. If those processes are lean then savings could be passed to pricing. Basically creating a credit union model to a national scale.

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#165

Post by xwolfi »

ranger207 wrote: post #88

The products being pointed out in this article as an attempt to disrupt banks seem to be basically the same product for a different price. Like, a high-yield savings account is just a savings account with a better price, right? How do you disrupt an industry by selling the same products? The advantage of startups is that they're more nimble, can pivot to fit the market better, and can adapt to customer requests faste…

Plus hum, would you deposit large money amounts in a small fintech company ? The advantage of giant banks is that you sort of trust their size will make them able to weather a crisis, if only because so many taxpayers are involved that the government has no choice but to help.

A fintech with 1M users screwing up loan rate timings being unable to finance savings accounts and facing a run, would not have much runway and the government would simply slowly try to make people get 50c on the dollar and tell them to go back to a big bank if they want better...

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#166

Post by danpalmer »

1a527dd5 wrote: post #114

They might not be disrupting them, but they are definitely causing competition in the market place again. My main bank account is with Halifax, everyday spend is with Starling. Then Monzo for anything risky. Before Starling/Monzo the Halifax app was _crap_. Barely got any updates and was very basic. Now? The Halifax app is on par with the newer banks, and sometimes even release new features before (e.g. scan cheque i…

Yeah I feel like Monzo and Starling really forced the high street banks to level up their game. A friend of mine was a PM on an app at one of the big high street banks and they said the instruction from the top was explicitly to be like Monzo, and they did iterate, get better at app development, and ship a bunch of features that people like (spending notifications, in app card freezing, etc).

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#167

Post by scarface_74 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #120
dylan604 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> didn't want credit card payment for some reason. i'm guessing 3.5%+ is the some reason

Tradesmen who are allergic to credit cards are always avoiding tax, period. The proper response is to ask for the cash price.

Exactly this. Paying 3% more for credit card vs cash is a wash for me. I get 2x back by charging it to my Amex Blue Business Plus, those 2x points are easily worth more than 3% when transferring to an airline.

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#168

Post by scarface_74 »

zellehell wrote: post #94
scarface_74 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zelle is run by the banks and transfers are instant and free. https://www.zellepay.com/faq/how-long-does-it-take-receive-m...

Zelle isn't run by the banks, it's operated by Early Warning and it's a scam service designed to harvest everyone's bank transaction history for intelligence gathering and fraud detection services https://www.earlywarning.com/

An the Early Warning System is co-owned by 7 banks

https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2024/08/14/zelle-inv....

> Zelle is owned by Early Warning Services, a financial tech firm and consumer reporting agency that is co-owned by seven of the largest U.S. banks: Bank of America, Capital One, Chase, PNC, Truist, U.S. Bank and Wells Fargo,

Once you are part of the banking system, everything is tracked anyway

Re: No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones

#170

Post by Joel_Mckay »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #157
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people have zero notion of what money is... let alone what banks offer as a business. Indeed, the entrenched investment industry has become less fair (or an outright liability) to customers, but casinos are at least honest with their customers. Gambling with other peoples money was not a real financial service until relatively recently. There is a market for a fiscally sustainable savings/investment industry, bu…

> bonded fiduciary services I never saw this term before. Google shows me nothing. Can you explain what you mean, please?

It is a legally enforceable relationship with your investment managers: "A fiduciary financial advisor is a financial advisor who is legally and ethically bound by fiduciary duty to serve in your best interests"

This detail becomes important when various cons come around to bleed off your assets. Could be as simple as a "friend" hyping worthless pump-and-dump stocks, or a fund manager with ballooning fees.

In general, the lack of impulse control shown on YC seems to indicate this information is not that useful for many readers. Some people like being poor apparently lol =3

Post reply on HN