Blog article
See all stories »

Weve been clueless

Today, three CEOs of the UK top mobile operators shared their view on Weve. Let's get it straight from the horse's mouth.

The use of smartphones to "shop with and buy everyday items instead of credit and debit cards" was singled out as a major opportunity for brands. The operators were referring to consumer brands there, yet the only brands relevant to payments are Visa, MasterCard, Amex and the banks - who were not invited to the party... 

Vodafone: "Every single phone coming out of the production line regardless of manufacturer, by and large, by this [end of] year will be NFC-enabled." Even if we leave the product portfolio aspect of that statement aside, why is that relevant? To turn all those NFC phones into payment devices, operators would need to open up access to SIM cards (i.e. secure elements). Which they are only prepared to do on the terms unacceptable to the banks. Ditto.

O2: "Our customers will value their relationship with us by the access we afford them." Access to what? Castrated phones? Eye-watering roaming charges? Walled garden?

Speaking of the latter, O2 suggested that "the one insight we all had at the start is, we can fight over a small piece of cake, but why not make a big pie and then we can all compete happily for a big slice of it…" What Ronan Dunne forgot to add was "we, the top tier mobile operators".

Vodafone: "Weve is positioned as a single door for advertisers." We can guess who will be the doormat... I even coined a new word for that - "pesterizing" (annoying pestering of consumers by mind-numbing advertising and irrelevant offers).

Speaking of pesterising, sorry advertising, Vodafone said that "we have re-orientated our businesses to get the very necessary opt-ins from our customer bases." Thank you, thank you, thank you. What made you "re-orientate", by the way? And even after that re-orientation, how many irrelevant offers should one receive before the last person leaves the room through that "single door"...

"We have spent a lot of time with lawyers to make sure Weve and the team can really execute ideas with minimal intervention from our side." Perhaps they should have spent more time with all those companies they forgot to invite to the party. Like Three. And Google. And Apple. And me (just kidding).

My wife told me not to use the phrase "delusional megalomaniacs" in this post, so I won't (not that I intended to). I guess saying "anti-competitive cartel" instead is OK then. Let's ask a simple question: was Weve formed to make our lives better or to attempt to allow just three companies to make more money?..

To make a big pie, one needs to bring to the table value, not control. And that table has to be open to all members of the ecosystem. Eating the pie alone behind the high wall could make one choke, by biting more than one can chew.


Comments: (3)

A Finextra member
A Finextra member 23 March, 2013, 09:36Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes Talking of opt-ins (or, rather, the totally screwed up opt-out process used by some operators), have a look at this: -- it takes two STOP messages and a (charged for!) phone call to fully opt-out...
Ketharaman Swaminathan
Ketharaman Swaminathan - GTM360 Marketing Solutions - Pune 25 March, 2013, 17:33Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

In deciding not to invite Visa, MasterCard and the others who really matter, maybe these MNOs were drunk on the Kool-Aid of how every Tom, Dick and Harry is going to disintermediate banks from payments.

A Finextra member
A Finextra member 25 March, 2013, 17:40Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

Well, it's a (big) question mark as to who can disintermediate whom...

Retired Member

Member since

19 Mar 2009


Blog posts




This post is from a series of posts in the group:

Innovation in Financial Services

A discussion of trends in innovation management within financial institutions, and the key processes, technology and cultural shifts driving innovation.

See all