A tectonic shift called “rebundling” is taking place.
- It happened with Spotify and Music.
- It happened with Netflix and TV.
- It’s happening right now with Curve and Banking.
To understand the tectonic shift that’s taking place in Banking, we should first understand how such markets operate, and have a dive into Bundling and Unbundling theorem. A good way to explain how these markets operate, Bundling and Unbundling is to take the examples of what happened in the music and TV industries.
The music industry
Back in the 90s, Sony Music and Warner Music Group were the category kings in the publishing and distribution of popular music. Both Sony Music and Warner Music Group operated as bundles. They controlled the entire value chain from Supply to Demand. They scouted, sourced, produced content and developed technologies to deliver the content (vinyl, cassettes, CDs), printed the content on that technology, owned and partnered with distribution channel like music stores, and were responsible for shipping and managing the price of the content which was sold on these stores. Their foothold as a bundle was so strong, that they de-facto owned the talent itself.
We claim that what defines the Bundle DNA, anything from culture, to processes, people and skills, is dependent on the technology which was available at the time to distribute the content. For example, in Music, it simply didn’t make sense to print just one song on a CD because of the costs associated with distributing the CD. So the record labels employed talented scouts who searched for artists with potential to write more than just one hit wonders, but 10 or 15 songs per album. Even more sought after were artists who could get beyond that difficult sophomore album and deliver multiple platinum albums in a row. This meant that the threshold for quality content increased, and in fact these record labels were the gatekeepers to our music taste.
The restriction put by the technology which was available at the time to distribute music – vinyl and CDs – therefore were key to resulting structure of the bundle – everything from its DNA, Purpose, Mission, Skillset, Culture, Business Model and Value chain.
With the introduction of the internet, supply has been commoditized and the distribution of digital goods has become much cheaper – in fact almost free. That allowed the introduction of a new model in the distribution of music – instead of ‘printing’ several songs on one physical CD it is now possible to distribute only one song over-the-top, via the internet, any place, any time, and with it a new category has emerged.
Steve Jobs and Apple was amongst the first who realised the power of the internet to distribute music one song at a time, and had the brand and distribution to make it happen. It convinced all major labels to sell their copyrighted content for $0.99 a song, something that many other companies had failed to do previously. Amazon was fast to follow with its MP3 service, and with it Pandora, Deezer, Myspace, Soundcloud, YouTube, Vimeo, and many other services began to emerge and provide a unique listening experience to consumers – one song at a time. Despite not owning the supply of content, these companies slowly began to own distribution, breaking up the bundles and soft monopolies, cutting out the middleman and blurring the value chain.
Now, instead of having to choose which package of tracks they wanted to buy, or to listen to one album at a time, consumers could choose from hundreds of thousands of tracks online building their own playlists – legally. With that technology innovation, consumer behaviour, expectations and tastes changed with the market. But although customers had gained choice, they have lost oversight. It was confusing, time consuming, and required a significant know-how to identify the what, where and how to listen to music. Curation and direction was missing.
From the market perspective, the fragmented music market which evolved, meant that margins eroded, and are now distributed via multiple players. Data was not leveraged as it sat across multiple touchpoints, which left a significant value untouched, de facto creating inefficiencies and market arbitrage. One of the first lessons we learn in Economy school is that market arbitrages are doomed to close over time, as the market becomes more efficient by increased competition and eventually consolidation. This arbitrage that emerged with the unbundling of Music was doomed to close down eventually.
With the unbundling of Music, Customers had gained choice but lost oversight. Navigation of the unbundled markets was confusing, required know-how (what – where – how), and most importantly – time consuming. In a day and age where consumers expect everything to happen at lightning speed, and available at a touch, the listening experience was far from ideal.
This situation gave rise to the opportunity to introduce a better experience to the market. To give access to the great variety the market has to offer, yet conveniently, simply and in real time. Only one question remained – who would be the first to rebundle the market?
We argue that the old bundles are unlikely to become the new rebundlers. Two key reasons make it extremely challenging for an incumbent to rebundle the market.
- The first is embedded in the company’s DNA and culture. As discussed briefly above, companies are born with a certain mission in mind, and the technologies available to them determines the company’s strategy, value chain, skillset etc. With the introduction of new distribution technology in the Music industry, the focus of power shifted from owning the supply to owning distribution, as the user experience became the most important thing. As such, companies had to develop a new mission, processes, structure and hire new people. This is not easy to change (to say the least), in a company that is already operating successfully in a market.
- The second is accounting practices. Old bundles are likely to be public companies, which have more pressure from their shareholders to provide immediate returns on their investment. Metrics such as RONA (Return on Net Assets) which measure returns on assets incentivise managers to make short term decisions at the cost of long term impact or market position. Add to that the ‘agent problem’, where managers are concerned and incentivised by short-term metrics vs. long term company market position, and the fact that some disruption means that the company may hurt existing business models, and you will get to how unlikely it is for an incumbent to change its skin (and game) to hone an opportunity they’ve identified in the market.
And indeed, the incumbent bundles such as Warner Music Group and Sony Music did not become the new rebundlers. Instead, they tried to block competition. In fact, they went through similar stages of grief; denial in the late 90s that the internet and the new MP3 compression would have any impact on them; anger that their market was being eaten by new entrants, and sueing these new entrants from accessing their copyrighted content; bargaining when losing thier case in the courts; depression and eventually acceptance by focusing on what they do best – managing the supply side from talents, to production to commercialisation through merchandise and concerts.
And then came Spotify. Launched in Sweden in 2008, and in the US in 2011. Spotify offered its customers access to almost any type of music, at any time, anywhere in the world. For $9.99 a month, or free if you’re willing to listen to ads, millions have signed up.
Spotify faced stiff competition from other streaming services like Pandora and Amazon Music. But what Spotify has done so well to keep its customer base happy is to unleash the power of data. Spotify sees what you are listening to, gets a good idea about your music tastes, and promotes rising artists tailored to you using its Discover playlists. It gave customers what they want – an everyday music that is varied, reflects their tastes, and is available at a tap. In fact, just over 10 years later, Spotify has become a full blown bundle, owning not only the distribution side of the market, but also identifying rising talent with their data, producing one song at a time, and pushing it through the Discover channel to the relevant audience at the right time. Spotify has become Warner Group Music, owning both the supply and distribution of music, however with one key difference – it is playing a different ball game. While Warner Group Music played baseball, Spotify plays basketball – using data and user experience as two of its key capabilities to win the market.
The same pendulum movement from bundling, unbundling and rebundling has happened in many other markets as well such as Netflix in TV, and Amazon in Commerce. All of which started by rebundling distribution in a fragmented market, eventually owning both the supply and demand side of the market.
And the same thing is currently happening in Banking.
The Banking industry
In the past, money was much simpler. Our parents sourced their banking needs from one bank, one branch, and often from the same account manager. They were highly likely to have chosen their bank because it was the one used by their parents. These banks combine various banking services under one roof – wholesale, retail, and investment banking. These banks, such as Santander, Barclays, HSBC, Chase and many others have dominated the Banking sector for decades.
In banking, we’re seeing a similar pattern emerging – from a bundled market position where global banks owning a significant share of the market, to an unbundled market where many players and new entrants offer better, faster, cheaper banking services, and what we believe is the inevitable eventuality – a rebundling of the market.
Firms like BlueVine and Kabbage introduced new models and experiences in business lending; Transferwise introduced fee free money transfer and foreign exchange; Robinhood is offering fee free trading; Affirm better lending; Habito faster and cheaper mortgages. And that’s just a fraction of the offerings available today in Banking. In fact, there are over 30,000 fintechs today, providing faster, cheaper, better financial services that compete directly with the incumbent banks.
But this unbundling has made money complicated, inaccessible, and often expensive. Although offered more choice, consumers already use a variety of financial products and services, are not left with much more headspace to onboard an additional product – even if it could save them a few dollars here and there. More consumer choice has greatly increased anxiety, which has paralised adoption of new products and services. This ‘paralisis’ will further support the market rebundling, and the movement of Banking to the cloud.
The only question remains – who would become the new rebundler? Would it be the powerful banks, or a new entrant? For reasons discussed above, we believe it is unlikely that the incumbent banks would be the new entrants who will rebundle money. Walmart did not become Amazon, and Sony Music did not become Spotify. The only question we have here at Curve, is what will be the type of product which will win the rebundling race, and would it be a new bank?
If you come to think about it, your bank is doing a great job – keeping your money safe. Keeping your money safe (i.e taking deposits), is the only real job of banks. Everything else that a bank does today one can do without a banking license, but one job – taking deposits.
The reason for this is simple – from a regulatory standpoint, banks have a unique role in our economy which is to act as money multipliers. The banks’ initial job was to take deposits, and multiply money back into the economy. This unique and powerful role which has been delegated to them by the regulator/central bank, is why banks are amongst the most heavily regulated entities globally.
People’s expectations in banking are no different than their expectations in other aspects of their lives – listening to music, watching TV, and shopping. They want it simple, convenient, always available and always on.
Several startups have realised this and started to develop new banking experience, from the ground up. Companies like Monzo, Revolut, N26, and Chime have all built a fully regulated bank, with an accompanying app that provides a better banking experience. But will they be the answer to the market rebundling? We are not so sure about that. Few reasons lead us to believe that the winning strategy to rebundle money and move banking to the cloud requires a different strategy than the one the ‘challenger banks’ have chosen:
- Once you realise that the only job of the bank is to keep your money safe, you conclude two key learnings; first – that your bank is doing a great job at it, and therefore the switching costs are high. Second, that you can do anything a bank can do today, but taking deposits, without a banking license. Not being a bank provides huge advantageous, predominantly around return on equity, capital requirements and cashflow, regulatory overhead, etc.
- Your money is not just with one bank. It’s everywhere. Multiple accounts for personal, business, joint account, back home accounts, student accounts, debit cards, credit cards, Venmo, Paypal, and the list goes on. The older you grow the more financial products and services you consume, and building a new bank – the best bank – will still not solve all use cases. And to think that one bank will replace all these services, feels a bit megalomaniac – even to us.
- History teaches us that all rebundlers started by rebundling distribution. Not ‘publishing’/’manufacturing’. More specifically, all of them started as an over-the-top layer that provided a better experience over existing rails. e.g WhatsApp did not create a new mobile network. Netflix did not create a new cable/satellite TV. Amazon did not sell their own products, or built their own store. The winning rebundlers was always an OTT layer providing better, faster, cheaper experience on top of existing rails; focusing first on distribution and eventually venturing into creation of content.
In fact, we believe that challenger banks were a bit lazy. They started their companies as prepaid cards, eventually moving into a full fledged bank because that was the paradigm available to them at the time. By choosing to become a bank they believe that banks are doing a poor job, which means either they don’t understand the role of the bank (money multiplier), or they honestly think they can do a better experience keeping my money safe. In addition, they also believe that they will be able to compete with the likes of Chase and Bank of America; take enough market share from them by offering a better bank account experience.
We can’t disregard the fact that even if one of the challengers is building the very best bank in the world – I’m talking a kick ass bank coming directly from the 25th century; by being a bank it means that it merely answers one use case I have with my money – my personal, my business or my mortgage account. Whatever that service my be, it will only be around my deposits, and will disregard other places my money is parked (e.g Paypal, Venmo, etc.). If we use the analogy of Spotify, it’s as if Spotify had told its target audience – ‘Spotify gives you access to the best music – you never heard about’, rather than connecting you with the music you know and love.
A true rebundler must be agnostic of where the customer money sits, and connect it all together into one interface. The Over-The-Top Banking paradigm, a paradigm which Curve introduced into fintech, is the way in which we believe the rebundlers will emerge.
The rebundlers in each category – Netflix, Amazon, Spotify – are all data companies that are focussed on the customer. And similarly in Banking, the future rebundler will be a company that is focussed on distribution, have the highest access to data and builds the best, fastest, cheapest, most delightful User Experience on top of it. Curve moves your bank accounts, credit cards and other financial products and services to the cloud. By doing this, we will use data to demystify your finances by connecting your money, right at your fingertips. We will be able to spot where you could do better financially and we will help you discover products that are a better fit for you, and we will execute these for you. No challenger bank can claim that they are the one platform for all bank accounts. But with Curve’s unique DNA, vision and positioning, we believe we will be. We look forward to delivering this new ball game to you – creating incremental value to our customers and partners. We are rewriting the rules to build the new Over-The-Top Banking category that allows you to Spend, Send, See and Save – better, faster, and cheaper.
STOP THE CONFUSION: HOW TO KNOW IF YOUR BUSINESS MAY BE INSURED AGAINST COVID-19
By Alex Balcombe, Partner at Harris Balcombe
The last few weeks has seen businesses in hospitality, tourism, retail, leisure and more forced to close their doors following the Government’s orders that they should close to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
While this is expected to flatten the curve and reduce the number of coronavirus cases, it will of course have an impact on businesses and employees alike. For small businesses especially, there are many concerns about how they can claim on their insurance to weigh the fall of this impact.
In response to calls to help struggling businesses, the Government has informed the public that companies who are facing turmoil will be able to claim on their business interruption insurance during this difficult time. For most, this is wrong.
The insurance industry has also been extremely vocal that there is no cover for any coronavirus-hit businesses during this tough financial period. This isn’t strictly true either.
How can businesses see through the mixed messaging and best secure their future and their livelihoods and reduce money worries? It’s an extremely stressful time for many companies, and confusion over whether or not they can be covered can only cause more unnecessary stress.
Since it’s a new disease, most businesses will not be covered for business interruption due to COVID-19. In fact, the vast majority of policies do not cover anything related to COVID-19.
That said – don’t rule out the idea that you may be covered. There is a chance that you will be covered against COVID-19, but not know it. This is a very small chance, but your current cover may already protect your business against the consequences of coronavirus, and the nationwide response to it – though those with this cover are unlikely to realise it.
How Could I Be Covered?
Not everyone has business interruption insurance, as it’s not a legal requirement. It is entirely up to the policy holder to weigh up the benefits of having it, and their ability to trade should a disaster happen.
To be considered for cover for COVID-19, there are two types of policy extensions to your business interruption cover that can potentially cover you for this situation:
Infectious Disease Extension
Many policies expressly state which diseases fall within the realm of being an infectious or notifiable disease. If this is the case, your policy will not provide cover. As it is a new disease, these policies will not have included COVID-19.
Other infectious disease extension policies will define the disease with reference to the actions of the government. Since the UK Government has named COVID-19 as a notifiable disease throughout the UK, it is possible that your business may fall into this definition, thus meaning you may be able to make a claim.
However, again, it’s not always that simple. Many policies require the disease to have been on your premises, while others specify a radius from your premises in order to qualify.
Denial of Access Extension (non-damage)
Denial of Access Extension (non-damage) policies may cover you if you’re prevented from accessing your property. This could be due to an event, or by the actions of a competent authority, which could cause your business interruption cover to engage.
If covered by this clause, there are often very subtle differences in wording in your policy. This could depend on the insurer or policy. You may well be covered, but it will depend on your particular circumstances, and the specific policy wording.
It’s clear that the Government needs to do more in ensuring there is clear messaging for businesses, and to help the insurance market look after policy holders. This is an unprecedented situation, and with many people looking to claim on their insurance, we’re already seeing major delays which could have a domino impact.
People throughout the world are understandably facing all kinds of worries because of the current pandemic. Our ways of living have changed, and many business owners will not have experienced a situation like this in their life times. If you own a business and are unsure about whether you can claim for business interruption, or are confused about ambiguous wording, get in touch with a loss assessor.
These claims are not simple, but loss assessors will be experts in business interruption insurance, and will specialise in large and complex claims. They will be able to help and guide you along the way, check your wording and work on your behalf to make sure you get everything you are entitled to.
HARNESSING ANALYTICS IN THE FIGHT AGAINST FRAUD
By Anna Lykourina, EMEA Fraud Analytics Expert at SAS
In the past, the fight against fraud has been a bit hit-and-miss. It has relied on auditors to identify patterns of behaviour that just didn’t quite fit. They often only detected problems months after the event. And then organisations had to claw back stolen funds through legal processes.
In a world where transactions happen in under a second, however, this is no longer acceptable. We need to be able to detect fraud immediately, if not before it happens. Customers want safe and protected data that is not vulnerable to identity theft through company systems. But they still want to be able to pay online and in seconds. The stakes are high, but fortunately new tools and techniques in fraud analytics are enabling companies to stay ahead of fraud.
Trusting machines to do the work
Machines are much better than humans at processing large data sets. They are able to examine large numbers of transactions and recognise thousands of fraud patterns instead of the few captured by creating rules. On the other hand, fraudsters have become adept at finding loopholes. Whatever rules you set, it is likely that they will be able to get ahead of them. But what if your system was able to think for itself, at least to a certain extent?
New approaches to fraud prevention combine rules-based systems with machine learning and artificial intelligence-based fraud detection systems. These hybrid systems are able to detect and recognise thousands of fraud patterns and learn from the data. Automated analytical-based fraud detection systems can reveal novel fraud patterns and identify organised crime more consistently, efficiently and quickly. This makes them a good investment for businesses across a wide range of sectors, including public sector, insurance, banking, and even healthcare or telecommunications.
How, though, can you harness analytics as a tool in your fight against fraud?
Identifying needs and solutions
The first step is to identify which options you need. Probably the best way to do this is through a series of company-wide workshops with the fraud analytics experts to determine what analytics you need, which data to include and techniques to use, and what results to report. They can also identify the ideal combination of rules-based and AI/ML approaches to detect fraud as early as possible.
Companies looking towards advanced analytics for fraud detection will need to make a number of decisions. They will need to optimise existing scenario threshold tuning, explore big data, develop and interpret machine learning models for fraud, discover relevant information in text data, and prioritise and auto-route alerts. There may be industry-specific decisions to make, too, such as automating damage analysis through image recognition in the insurance sector. By automating these areas, companies can both significantly reduce human effort – reducing costs – and improve their fraud detection and prevention.
Benefits of an analytical approach to fraud detection and prevention
Companies that are already using an analytical approach for fraud prevention have reported several important benefits. First, the quality of referrals for further investigation is better. Investigators also have a much clearer idea of why the referral has been made, which improves the efficiency of investigation. Analytics also improves investigation efficiency by reducing the number of both false positives (that is, alerts that turn out not to be fraud) and false negatives (failure to spot actual frauds). This improves customer experience and reduces risk to the company.
Analytics makes it possible to uncover complex or organised fraud that rules-based systems would miss. Companies can group together customers and accounts with similar behaviors, and then set risk-based thresholds appropriate for each scenario.
There are several sector-specific benefits too. For example, insurance firms can identify fraudulent claims faster to prevent improper payments from going out. Claims investigation is likely to be more consistent because claims are scored through technology, algorithms and analytics, rather than by people. Finally, it becomes possible to shorten the claims process through automated damage analysis. It is no wonder that organizations across a wide range of sectors are placing analytics at the heart of their anti-fraud strategy.
CUSTOMER CARE TODAY WILL BUILD RESILIENCE FOR FUTURE CRISES
Cathal McGloin, CEO of ServisBOT writes, “The COVID-19 pandemic has created major spikes in calls to financial sector helplines dealing with customers...
THE CO-BRAND CREDIT CARD MARKET – SINK OR SWIM
By Chris Vinnicombe, VP Financial Services at Acxiom The co-brand credit card market is the result of the partnerships between...
HOW TO MANAGE YOUR CASH FLOW IN UNCERTAIN TIMES
While the world is constantly changing, probably at a faster pace now than ever before, businesses need to manage cash...
NEW IVALUA STUDY SHOWS TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES ARE HINDERING PROCUREMENT TEAMS FROM ACHIEVING BUSINESS OBJECTIVES
Lack of system integrations and actionable insights are stopping organisations from accurately measuring performance Ivalua, a leading provider of global...
WHY DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION IN FINANCIAL SERVICES IS ABOUT CULTURE FIRST, TECH SECOND
Stuart Templeton, Head of UK at Slack In today’s world, there’s no such thing as a ‘non-tech fin’. Every...
STOP THE CONFUSION: HOW TO KNOW IF YOUR BUSINESS MAY BE INSURED AGAINST COVID-19
By Alex Balcombe, Partner at Harris Balcombe The last few weeks has seen businesses in hospitality, tourism, retail, leisure...
BRAVE NEW WORLD: A FUTURISTIC VISION OF PAYMENTS
James Booth, VP, Head of Partnerships in EMEA for PPRO Over the last ten years, the retail e-commerce ecosystem...
A PROPTECH FOUNDER’S BEGINNING, THE START OF KLEVIO AND HOW ACCESS-TECH IMPROVES FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
An interview with Klevio’s CEO and Co-Founder, Aleš Špetič What is Klevio? Klevio is a smart intercom that allows...
HERE’S HOW YOU CAN LEARN TO TRADE RISK-FREE DURING THE COVID-19 MARKET CRASH
Trading app BullBear has launched new features to support budding investors looking to hone their skills against the backdrop of...
ENTERPRISE BLOCKCHAIN: DRAGGING INSURANCE OUT OF THE DARK AGES
Ryan Rugg, Global Head of The Industry Business Unit at R3 The history of insurance traces back to the development...
DISPELLING BIOMETRIC MYTHS AND MISCONCEPTIONS
By Lina Andolf-Orup, Head of Marketing at Fingerprints Gangsters cutting off enemies’ fingers to access secret locations and spies lifting...
FUTURE FX PROMO
FOUR WAYS OPEN BANKING AND AI WILL REVOLUTIONISE ACCOUNTANCY
Ed Molyneux, CEO and co-founder of cloud accounting software company, FreeAgent It’s been just over two years since the...
HOW FINANCIAL SERVICES CAN GET TO GRIPS WITH RISING SUPPLY CHAIN RISK
By Alex Saric, smart procurement expert, Ivalua UK businesses have never been more dependent on their suppliers to help...
TWO TO TANGO? MARKET DATA AND OPINIONS IN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT
Sebastien Lleo is Associate Professor of Finance at NEOMA Business School (France) Analyst views and expert opinions matter. They...
AN ULTIMATE GUIDE TO TURNING YOUR EARLY RETIREMENT DREAM INTO A REALITY
Rick Pendykoski is the owner of Self Directed Retirement Plans LLC, a retirement planning firm based in Goodyear, AZ. ...
WHAT EVOLUTIONARY AI MEANS FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES
by Babak Hodjat, VP of Evolutionary AI at Cognizant Many banks and other financial services institutions (FIs) are beginning...
HARNESSING ANALYTICS IN THE FIGHT AGAINST FRAUD
By Anna Lykourina, EMEA Fraud Analytics Expert at SAS In the past, the fight against fraud has been a...
ERSTE BANK HUNGARY IMPROVES AND SECURES THE REMOTE BANKING EXPERIENCE WITH ONESPAN MOBILE SECURITY
Leading Hungarian bank deploys OneSpan’s Mobile Security Suite to one million customers to make mobile banking convenient while fighting fraud...