Fintech ?? Food - 29th May 2022
Hey everyone???, thanks for coming back to Brainfood, where I take the week's biggest events and try to get under the skin of what's happening in Fintech. If you're reading this and haven't signed up, join the 14,768 others by clicking below, and to the regular readers, thank you.???
Hey Fintech Nerds ??
I spent much of this week at the Lendit conference, which despite the talk of layoffs at Klarna, Mainstreet, and rumors of many more to follow, had a "keep calm and carry on" vibe.
There is a feeling the tide is out, and things could worsen (particularly for consumer Neobanks) before they get better. The Chime CEOs' comments stood out to me. Chris noted they're not seeing consumers spend less; they're still seeing demand for their product and significant sign-ups.
This would chime (ha!) with market data that shows unemployment is still at an all-time low (3.6% in the US), and the consumer is still spending. If the consumer is still spending and employed, companies who make money on spending transactions won't be feeling the pain. Yet.
Chris?also said?during the pandemic, Chime scaled from 300 staff to 1,300 to cope with consumers' demand for digital banking.?
Demand hasn't gone away yet, because interest rates haven't risen to a point yet where they would kill demand.?
But they will.?
You have to imagine when interest rates do rise, companies that scaled staff by 4x could feel some pain. But consumer Neobanks who help low-income segments will also be a lifeline for consumers.?
Neobanks have to find break-even. And when?less than 5% have done so?to date, the next 12 months will be challenging. That break-even doesn't have to look like Uber's sudden price surges in search of profitability. It could look like a product extension and a better cost discipline.?
More pain is coming, but the long-term trend is for a consumer who needs support. And Fintech companies are on the front line of trying to deliver that. Not all will do so profitably and sustainably. But some will.?
And this is why people in the industry are heads down and building.
Because there's so much to do.
Another long one today. If your email client clips the content remember to check out the website version here so you don’t miss any content ??
===========
Weekly Rant ??
Why is everyone doing a web3 Wallet?
In the past week,?Robinhood,?Revolut, and?GameStop?announced launching a web3 (self custodial) wallet. As Crypto prices capitulate, is this a hangover from the late-stage euphoria, some cheap marketing trick, or is there a genuine business case here?
Do these web3 wallets stand any kind of chance against the might of the Apple and Google behemoths?
Is web3 itself some crazy collective delusion?
Is asking questions of the reader a worn-out format?
The answer to all of those is yes and no. Because life is never quite that simple.
There are many arguments to lay out to make sense of these moves. There is a solid case for the prosecution and defense, so I'm going to try and tackle it as follows:?
Web3 wallets are a different beast.
"Wallet" is such a loaded term.?
In Fintech land, it generally means some app or service that allows a person or business to store value and move value. That's not a web3 wallet.
Then there are services like BlockFi or Blockchain.com that help users hold and move Cryptoassets (and much more). These services hold the asset on the user's behalf, and the user doesn't interact directly with the underlying Blockchain network. That's also not a "web3" wallet, in my opinion. It's a web2.5 wallet.
Lastly, some apps and services allow users to interact directly with Blockchain networks (examples include Metamask, Phantom, and Rainbow). Using one of these wallets facilitates interaction between you and the network as pure software. When an asset sits in your web3 wallet, it's yours as if it sat in your leather wallet or purse.?
But web3 wallets?aren't a Fintech thing; they're an internet thing.?The best way to demonstrate this is with a picture (from the 11:FS web3 report).
If web3 takes off, web3 wallets will become the primary interface used by consumers and businesses to interact with this new world. And wallets start with storing and moving value but can do much more (like signing transactions, voting, and more).
If web3 becomes a thing, operating a major web3 wallet might be a great place to be.
And.
Fintech Companies that did Crypto did well.
FOMO is a hell of a drug.
What do CashApp, Robinhood, and Revolut all have in common? They all launched Crypto to consumers in a similar time frame and saw massive consumer acquisition and daily active use due to the demand from consumers.
Frank Rotman from QED investors once told me he saw Fintech companies adding Crypto in the short term as a "CAC hack" - driving new users to the platform and getting attention just by adding Crypto and serving that market demand.
The simplest business case for adding Crypto was the marketing benefit.
So perhaps adding a web3 wallet is just an extension of that?
Or maybe web3 is a genuinely new paradigm, and it was existentially important Fintech companies got on the front foot to deliver it to their customers.
One thing is for sure, the timing of these announcements is interesting. With the Crypto bull run, plenty of Fintech companies will have started internal projects to figure out "how the add DeFi" or Web3, and perhaps now we're just seeing those efforts come to the surface. Just as Crypto prices absolutely crater.?
Is this just horrible timing?
Web3 presents new opportunities for Fintech Companies.
Beyond FOMO, I think there is an actual strategic rationale for consumer Fintech companies to do web3 wallets.
If you're a consumer Fintech company that has saturated your home market and with slowing growth, the better question might be. Why wouldn't you do a web3 wallet (or at least investigate it)?
What about Big Tech Wallets like Apple and Google?
Apple has been playing the long game, people actually use Apple Pay, and Passbook is slowly integrating directly with US identity sources like state-level driver's licenses. Apple has also been the most conservative regarding Crypto or Web3. Where Meta is integrating NFTs with Instagram, and Google is announcing its "Big Web3 team," Apple is typically quiet about the subject.?
Apple is all about vertical integration and its ecosystem. On the surface, web3 is the opposite of that. It is incredibly horizontal and open. But Apple also positions its products as more private and less reliant on selling consumer data than its competitors. To Apple, web3 could present a set of open source technologies it starts to use as infrastructure. Apple wasn't an early adopter of the cloud, but iCloud was a pretty solid effort when it eventually arrived.?
Short-term Apple doesn't?have?to embrace web3, which could be dangerous. If web3 does become a new paradigm away from the device/app ecosystem, it is an existential threat to their dominance.?
Google is a different beast. The history of Google launching a thing early, only to not fully support it, then pivoting a few years later is something even they acknowledged at the latest I/O conference. Google Wallet became Android Pay, which became Google Pay and is now Google Wallet again. Google Plex was an attempt to build the ultimate consumer dashboard for finance, and it was a?fabulous?product that, again, Google just didn't persist with.
Google has all of the pieces, though. Gmail and "login with Google" is already massive in enterprise and consumer ecosystems. If they simply adopted some web3 technologies there (like acquiring a major wallet, using decentralized identifiers and verifiable credentials), they could significantly get ahead of the curve.?
The real question is can they execute? (and I say this as a Pixel owner).?
If these companies don’t do something in web web3 soon Fintech companies and others have a window of opportunity. If Big Tech was to get into web3, the best route might be via acquisition.?
Can Big Tech afford to ignore web3 wallets? Maybe if there’s too much risk.
Why will some avoid doing web3 wallets?
Some people really don't like web3.
Like, really, really hate the thing.
Regulators see all of the risks, hacks, scams, and fraud of an early space, and there is plenty of consumer harm.?When apps offer 20% APY to consumers (via things like TerraUSD and Anchor protocol) only to collapse,?that's what?causes consumer harm.?People lost money on false promises.
There are also plenty of scams. If you've ever used Discord or Twitter and interacted with Crypto, there's always someone with a "giveaway" competition that wants you to connect your web3 wallet. If the wallets and protocols aren't preventing this, who is??
The problem with consumers being their own bank is they're not a fraud team and compliance department. Being your own bank is fraught with risk for most people. In TradFi, you'd expect the consumer interface (e.g., bank or Fintech company) to help manage the risks. But in web3, that would be like asking your leather wallet or purse maker to help you manage the risk of cash. Stupid.
领英推荐
As a result, (some) regulators call web3 or self-hosted wallets "unhosted" wallets. That gap of "nobody is stepping in" is scary sounding. In reality, we could do plenty of things* to help manage those risks that don't turn web3 wallets into banks. This is an opportunity for Fintech companies to find the line between their TradFi business and web3 wallet.
Many Fintech companies (especially regulated banks like Monzo, Starling, Nubank, and Varo) will tread carefully regarding web3.?
*A topic for another rant
Web 2 maximalists believe there is always a better way to solve a problem with existing centralized technology.?The most efficient way to build a new payment system would be to simply develop it in a centralized way and open the API. Stablecoins that require wallets, miners, and other actors add complexity that reduces efficiency. And if our goal is to reduce the cost of payments and financially include people, having a slower, more complex ecosystem is illogical.
Perhaps the best example is Moxie, the founder and lead of the secure messaging app signal, whose?criticisms?include. Users don't want to run their own servers, and protocols are slow to develop. As such, decentralization isn't possible, and threats can emerge faster than the ecosystem can react. If web3 is about decentralization, why does everyone use Opensea and Coinbase?
The nuts thing here is all of these criticisms are correct. Web3 has points of centralization and bugs, and it's not very efficient (yet). And yet, Blockchain networks function as a global CRM of asset ownership. Yes, Opensea is the dominant marketplace, but it is also not captive in the way a Web 2 platform is. Moving all of your NFTs to another market is trivial. Moving all of your photos from Instagram to another app is less so.?
The user benefit comes from a global record on a Blockchain network, which has?some?level of decentralization at its very core. This persistent state of what a wallet has and did is potent. The argument is often about the trade-offs between decentralization and user experience.
Bitcoin maximalists find web3, not decentralized enough.?
Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk are the least likely candidates for Bitcoin Maximalists but articulate the worldview well. Essentially, anything that is not Bitcoin is not credibly?decentralized?enough.?As Ethereum looks to scale, it introduces points of centralization (like Layer 2 scaling solutions or API abstraction layers like Infura and Alchemy).?
Many web3 projects are backed by VCs who do incredibly well from token sales in liquid markets. By contrast, Bitcoin is quietly sitting there, not changing, and gradually delivering lightning network (which may function as another payments rail).
It's interesting how much momentum this argument has with some Big Tech companies. Bitcoin is both the least ESG-friendly network and the lowest regulatory risk. Yet David Marcus left Meta to build a Bitcoin lightning network-based solution, and Block is building a decentralized wallet for Bitcoin (not web3). Bitcoin presents a paradox, it might be Big Tech's entry into web3, but it might also mean they miss the party.
What about web3 native projects disrupting?
What if web3 wallets are your new home on the internet? Your digital backpack to access applications, your personal balance sheet, and buy a coffee becomes a critical piece of your digital life. The new players who get to own this space become not only the banks of the internet but the next big tech players aggregating data on behalf of users and managing services. This is a generational opportunity.
But today the wallet ecosystem looks like bank cards before Visa or Mastercard. Each decentralized application has to build connectivity to each wallet (or use Wallet Connect). This lack of standards makes it hard for larger players who have to worry about things like data privacy or regulation.
But for disrupters, it creates white space.
And that means opportunity.
Web3 wallets create a new user behavior and that’s going to take time to develop and gain adoption. But as the real-world use cases of web3 start to appear, the tech will disappear.
Web3 wallets need better interoperability between DApps and each other. Dare I say it they need standards and need to figure out as an industry, how they become backwardly compatible with the real world, with compliance, risk, with reality.
When the tech is ready it disappears.
Perhaps today these web3 wallets are too technical and lost in the weeds. Perhaps they’re focussed on their ecosystem or infrastructure. But there are some focused on the user, and thinking a few steps ahead. Can they build a sustainable business over time that users love, and delivers on the promise of web3?
Where do I stand?
Fintech companies would be crazy?not?to experiment with web3 at a minimum. Big Tech companies don't have to do anything and can create much more value by focussing on their core business and owning government identity and finance. Long term, this could be their undoing.
If DeFi has almost no labor and marginal cost for finance as infrastructure (per the IMF), then the opportunity is to manage the things that go wrong. That's something Fintech companies are very good at.
A question this rant didn't play with that warrants further exploration.?
Which Fintech infrastructure companies are best placed to enable this new world?
Digital Assets-as-a-Service and BaaS providers are already making moves, as are payments companies. The next phase will be helping consumers and businesses manage the risk and complexity of living across both worlds).
If web3 emerges as the future of the internet, then being the interface to that future is a great place to be building. Because controlling ownership and value is intrinsic to web3 as a concept, those who understand Fintech (and have user bases) could be an interesting bridge between the two worlds.
And speaking of bridges, TradFi (and Web 2) won't disappear overnight. We'll need to be backwardly compatible. This is where things like open banking could play a crucial role.
For me, web3 is about the new business models.
And growth opportunities always come from business model innovation.
To unlock the future wallets need a network for web3, standards around managing risk, and getting backward compatibility for reality.
The eternal question is always, can the innovator get scale before the incumbent gets innovation.
But who knows, maybe web3 is a Ponzi and collective delusion.?
I doubt it, though.
ST.
==========
4 Fintech Companies ??
1.?Prograd?- Credit Karma for Gen Z Education Funding
2.?Themis?- The compliance collaboration tool
3.?Cytus Finance?- DeFi rails for Real-World Lending
4.?Shares.io?- Social investing app for Europe
================
Things to know ??
==========
Good Reads ??
God damn, the team at a16z is good.?
===========
Tweets of the week ??
Available on substack
That's all, folks. ??
Remember, if you're enjoying this content, please do tell all your fintech friends to check it out and hit the subscribe button :)
Founder and CEO of Themis
2 年Thank you for covering Themis - it means a lot coming from a compliance / risk insider!
Managing Director at BankTech Ventures; Founder at Operate
2 年Totally agree with your description of the vibe there. If you were anywhere near the networking tables, they were a consistent hive of activity. I’m still recovering from it!