Community

SDA should be more rigorously implemented in order to reduce any risks. I am sure that has the potential to become a global standard in itself.

I am more keen on looking at it from an integrated point of view where at many key places of the world, the settlement cycles differ with one another.

With UK coming to T+2, it would be mostly in sync with Germany, but would differ with US and Canada who still practice T+3. The Asians are more incoherent with cycle ranging between T+1 to T+3. Post-crisis nature of the trading activity has become more delicate and with European economy loosing confidence as a whole, the movement to T+2 by UK should be evaluated carefully at systemic levels.

While it might be in accordance to Basel III norms of reducing counterparty risk exposures and also reducing costs of transactions among the presently incoherent economies, the need of the hour is a careful evaluation of acceptance for such a step in terms of global harmonization.

Quite rightly said when you mentioned about the issues with the large European or american financial organisations which are sitting cashless. When no cash, they cannot think of new car bacause new one comes with a premium. No matter even if the vendors launch multiple variants (from a basic one to full-specced), the banks dont have the money and hence dragging the existing setup.

The immediate need is to address the core issues banks are facing, reducing ops costs and increasing risk coverage across asset portfolio. IT will be one of the enablers to achieve this but t has to start with pruning down the existing car bit by bit. In parallel picking the newer ones bit by bit and building the new car.

BANP can definitely be a game changer but before we delve into the potential hurdles as far as industry and the banking architecture is concerned, we need to evaluate the following:

- Whether a real need exists for this?

- Does customer loyalty has any proportionality to the bank account number(s)

- Will this address in any manner, even the slightest of the issues which the industry is facing today in terms of ever changing consumer loyalties, need for effective compliances and architectural longevity

- Fraud is one of the biggest concerns the industry is facing today and imagine the traceability impossibilities BANP will be putting up infront of us

- Worldwide, there are legislations and mandates for the banks to make the switching easier for a customer, which in turn makes the bank introspect and address potential problems within the system

While BANP will make the switching easier, it would be a huge effort and technical and regulatory investment across countries and companies, Is it really a possibility !

In my understanding, post recession, the aim of implementing Basel III is to curb/minimise the non-performing investments by banks and also maintaining a higher CAR. This is now faced with a situation where secured lending is on an increase. Even if the client is securing its Inventory/AR/Fixed Assets (in some cases), how would a bank can rest assure that still the loan will be repaid by the client successfully. It may instead turn sour. Result could be that the banks may stop funding clients within/across a sector and hence curbing the sectoral growth. While I have not coem across any success story related to Basel III, the issue gets more deep when we see that many of developing nations like India, are yet to implement Basel II.

Very effective sum-up of the decade trends. I would be interested in the full report.

As more and more economies are migrating towards paperless banking / online and mobile channels, these will become more serious threats. Looking at the figures provided above, 2.5bn GBP is a huge leak from a nation's monetary pipeline.

Since quite some time I have been searching for an answer as to whether we really need 'branch banking', looks like we do. Number of fraudulent activiites in terms of identity theft are perhaps lesser here than an online environment.

Mutualism works well when the bigger entity gives a sense of protection to smaller ones and in parallel get themselves scrubbed off of unwanted things. Two things to concentrate here are: Protection and scrubbing-off unwanted things.

Looking at these two things, the more complex situation is of the competitors.

- The direct ones are the big fishes themselves, so no point asking them avail/provide protection and also they wont waste effort in scrubbing the unwateds.

- The smaller ones (perhaps tier 2 and below), are the niche players servicing a specific area in a specific manner. In a managed service environment, we can ask for a collaboration but not mutualism.

How much does it cost to a bank to install an ATM at a location? my guess would be a cost comprising of 'Lease/rental + machine cost + security + AMC + VISA/gateway costs etc'.

If this cost is not recoverable by the bank for that ATM in a specified time, then the surcharge is definitely a way out.

In a country like India, where ATMs are nowhere chargeable, the reason I can only think of is simple break-even ease. Although, I dont have figures with me at the moment.

With the way the PSH is currently dealt with by various banks across the world, it is re-silo-ing the already siloed payments architectures within a bank.

While technological roadblocks can be overcome by better collaboration, the core issue still lingers which is 'Is the bank ready for such an investment?'. Presently there are no NPVs to support the decision on a grand scale and hence smaller hubs are being implemented.

Next wave would see a Hub of hubs being talked about, will be really interesting to see the literal imitation of cloud formation in Payments scenario given that everyone wants to move to PSH.