pjg · HackerTrans

il y a 6 joursdiscuss

One of the reasons why legacy apps continue to live on (despite outliving their usefulness ) is third party tie-ins.

The reason most companies are reluctant to switch from slack is because they have external third parties i.e. their partners connected with external channels within slack. Changing their internal DM/IM system will remove their ability to communicate with their partners in the same system.

Perhaps a plugin where slack messages can be forwarded to Chatto and eventually bi-directional i.e. Chatto messages can be forwarded to Slack.

pjg

il y a 20 joursdiscuss

I interacted with Om a few times. Genuinely good soul. I met him a while back - about ~15 years or so. In spite of his busy schedule he took time out to speak with me. Gave me some valuable tips on startup world. I don't say this about a lot of people but the world is less of a place without Om. You were way too young to leave us Om. I will miss you.

Sidenote: In the heydays i.e. about 15-20 years back or so Techcrunch and GigaOm were competitors. Techcrunch was founded by Michael Arrington, known for his brusque and no holds barred blogs and barbs. He would roast his competitors alive, if he could. Well, all except Om. For Om, Micheal had nothing but praise.

pjg

il y a 2 moisdiscuss

There is nothing preventing PIX from going global (just like VISA/MC). If you look at the history of domestic systems e.g. China Unipay, India UPI/Rupay, Japan JCB they started off as local systems and went global.

Japan JCB is Internationally accepted. China Unipay is also considerably "international" i.e. internationally accepted and India's UPI/Rupay card is adding new countries at a fast clip. The reason most people "don't know" whether they can pay with China Unipay or India's Rupay is because they are not advertised with the same logos as VISA/MC on acceptance sites.

However both China Unipay and India's Rupay through their partnership with Discover Card (now owned by CapitalOne ) are accepted anywhere Discover card is accepted

The place where these "domestic" systems haven't quite measured up to VISA/MC is the issuing side i.e. the entities controlling these systems currently do not allow foreign banks to issue cards with their logos or use their network to settle the transactions. If you're in the US, you may not get a Unipay or Rupay card from a local bank. There are multiple reasons for that, some strategic some political.

It will be interesting to see how they evolve over time. In spite of the exponential rise of PIX , UPI and Unipay, VISA and MC themselves have been doing remarkably well in the past 10-20 years. Unlikely either of them will go belly up.

pjg

il y a 2 moisdiscuss

It is delightful to see PIX's exponential growth. It was preceded by India's UPI and borrowed heavily from it Here's a paper describing the experience: https://www.braziliankeynesianreview.org/BKR/article/view/33...

pjg

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

Zelle has many limitations:

1) The recipient needs to download the app and sign up. How does the Payor know whether the recipient has Zelle app or not

2) Even with the app, there are only about 50-100 banks that allow Zelle transfers. If someone's bank does not offer Zelle they are directed to enter their Debit Card number using "Push to Card" to receive the funds. While the funds land up in the bank account instantly either way, some Debit Cards have limitations and will not be enabled to receive funds

3) Zelle is essentially a "messaging layer" i.e. the actual settlement happens overnight using ACH rails. As a result the sending as well as the receiving bank are taking some risk in terms of allow the recipient to withdraw money when the underlying settlement hasn't happened. If the settlement fails the receiver's bank will need to claw bank the money from the receiver As a result there are some really low limits on daily transfers i.e. between 1-2K/day for most banks

4) Above all Zelle (like most other payment rails ) is a push system i.e. one can push money using Zelle. One may not pull money using Zelle

pjg

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

RFP i.e. Request for Payment is not part of this release. Furthermore there is no ETA from the Fed as to the release date for RFP.

Currently FedNow is simply a push payment system i.e. bank account holder may be able to use FedNow to push money out from their bank account to someone else's bank account.

The limitation here is the bank account holder must know the account number of the recipient. This is a huge limiter in adoption since most people don't want to share their bank account numbers and maintaining a directory of people's bank account numbers is cumbersome to say the least

Yes, the Fed is working on a directory but they have not yet announced the launch date for such a directory, not have they mentioned the index i.e. will it be phone number ? email ? something else ?

Bottom line: FedNow launch: Step in the right direction but still a long way to go

pjg

il y a 4 ansdiscuss

So this is what Will wanted to do when he left Plaid. Having the financial means to "buy" a bank certainly helped. Nice!

Getting a new bank charter since the financial crisis of 2008-2009 has been virtually impossible. The number of banks in the US in the past decade or so has come down from ~6K to ~4K. New licenses for banks (State or Federal ) since 2008 have been negligible. So, let's buy a "small" bank. So far so good

Next part is core banking software as well as Money movement software. This is where is gets interesting.

Smaller banks use Fiserv/FIS/Jack Henry (and a long tail of other core banking providers) and larger ones have a mix of systems with legacy cores e.g. DXC, Misys and bunch of others. While it's tempting to build an entire banking stack from ground up it may not pass regulatory and compliance muster for a while. Plus even some the legacy cores have now built a rich RESTful API. Would be interesting to know how much of the core was built in house over the past 3 years

Next part is Money Movement. This is where ACH, Push to Card, Fedwire and RTP come in

ACH isn't that bad. Most banks use ACH "aggregators" which in turn connect to one of the two ACH Operators. Once a bank has a business relationship with the Fed it's not tough to connect to these aggregators and simply sftp files to/from them

Push to Card is available through VISA Direct and MC Send. Given their financial resources and fintech background it wouldn't be difficult to get a connection going there

RTP would be an interesting one but a relatively easy one since the Clearing House is already used to working with multiple banks and have "plug-ins"

So, now it all boils down to the business procedures and KYC/KYB on Fintechs that want to use Column's services. This can be done very efficiently online

The T&Cs are heavily skewed in favor of column. Some of them may be unenforceable. But those can be negotiated

pjg

il y a 4 ansdiscuss

Disclaimer: I'm the founder of Checkbook.io ( a payments platform with a single API for sending payments)

There are 2 parts to any payment, the sender side and the receiver side. Bill.com has historically pulled all the funds from the sender's bank account and held them in a custodial bank account controlled by Bill.com to pay out the recipients

They have earned float on this amount and given they are a public company you can see from the historical statements what percentage of their earnings are from carrying such float. (It depends on the interest rate and given the rates have been low recently it was about 10%-20% historically, may increase or decrease)

They have decided to do the same on the receiver side now i.e. instead of disbursing funds to the recipient they will simply hold them until the recipient manually collects them. This is somewhat unprecedented in the payments world - I don't know of any other Business payments processor doing it. It's basically a paypal type wallet being foisted on the recipient without an opt-in

In so far as "Are they allowed to do so" ? Bill.com is registered as a Money Transmitter (not a bank ) so in partnership with their bank they can do this. From the principles of ...let's say "generally acceptable payment processing rules" this is bad, particularly since it's an opt-in

There are multiple other alternative payment processors available, including the company I work for

comments