Private banks have amateurish social media strategies, often failing to establish anything more than a token presence on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, according to research from investment portal assetinum.
Finextra stated "Whether consumers want to communicate with financial providers through social media is moot though" citing issues with whether consumers want to talk to Financial Service providers via social media.
The research referenced focuses on whether customers would engage financial service providers to discuss a product via social media. However, this is not how social media works, so the answer is predictable.
Research that focuses on customers trusting the brand or engaging for customer support, shows a mass adoption willingness. Which is exactly the opposite of what the editor is trying to imply here i.e. that FIs don't need to worry about social meda "it is
FIs do need to be very concerned about openly engaging with the customers through whichever channel the customer chooses. If you don't support social media properly already today, you are at a significant disadvantage from a brand engagement and credibility
Finextra is not "trying to imply" anything here; unlike some of our readers we have no skin in the game that would necessitate us taking a particular stance. There also seems to be some confusion over the definition of 'moot'; to clarify, it means open to
argument, debatable. I think that's an appropriate word to use in this instance and it certainly doesn't imply that Finextra thinks "FIs don't need to worry about social media", only, to labour a point, that this evidence suggests there is a discussion to
Interestingly, for our commentator, that BT/Avaya survey also found that "73 per cent of customers in the UK — and a similar number in Germany, Spain and the US — see their local branch as the most vital link with their bank in the future – second only to
Excellent salary with uncapped commissionMilton Keynes
© Finextra Research 2013