Archive for: January, 2012
In this fourth post in our series on interoperability, we describe interoperability at the customer-level. Read the first three posts here.
 One agent. Five mobile money services (Photo taken by Ben Lyon of Kopo Kopo near Geomaps Centre in Nairobi) In our work on interoperability, we find that there are some questions that we are unable to adequately address at the platform and agent levels alone. For instance, the opening of USSD gateways by mobile operators may allow customers of one operator to access services of another operator without either platform interconnection or agent sharing.
We identify two interoperability scenarios related to the mobile handset:
1. Customers can access their account through any SIM on the same network. For instance, one service in East Africa allows its customers to access their service from any handset as long as it is on their network.
2. Customers can access multiple accounts on one SIM. For instance, SMART in the Philippines allows customers to access SMART Money on their SMART SIM, as well as access accounts with various banks through different enabled interfaces.
Allowing customers to access their account via other SIMs or other accounts via one SIM increases the potential size of the market and increases customer convenience. In the latter case, providers may fear that customers will readily switch to another provider. MNOs run the risk that another service accessible to their subscribers will cannibalize their own service. Providers with large market share, in particular, may be less inclined to allow customers of other services to access their accounts. In addition, number portability has made it easier for customers to switch telecom providers.
Mobile money and the link between the mobile phone number and mobile financial services are supposed to help retain customers. Even if providers permit access to other services, they may use pricing, marketing and other features to try to keep customers from churning (e.g., make it hard to find the other service on the menu).
Read the rest of this page »
by Sarah Rotman : Thursday, January 26, 2012
I think it is safe to say that the financial inclusion world has started to get used to the idea of thinking about financial service providers more broadly than traditional microfinance institutions, rural banks and financial cooperatives. With the recent growth of mobile network operators, technology providers and agent network managers, it’s evident that financial inclusion encompasses a broad set of providers. But even I am sometimes surprised to learn about some private companies that seem to have a very tangential link to the unbanked financial sector taking advantage of new opportunities in branchless banking.
Take OXXO as an example. OXXO is the largest convenience store in Mexico (comparable to 7-Eleven in the US) opening a new store every 8 hours…yes that’s 8 hours! 7.5 million people come through their stores every day, most of whom are looking for things that a normal convenience store would offer…food, snacks, paper goods, etc. But OXXO is diversifying its products to offer its wide customer base the “convenience for everything you’d need in life any time of day.”
In this video, Aiko Fujimura, Manager of Financial Services for OXXO, explains how this added convenience extends now to financial services offered through the OXXO e-wallet. She admits that there are certain challenges. “It is easy to sell soda and snacks, but not as easy to sell financial services.” Training a huge network of employees and convincing people to trust the store with their money are two issues OXXO is currently facing.
Few companies have the scale of OXXO, but convenience stores and other retail outlets are still being used to build up branchless banking agent networks. In this video, Johannes Kling of the agent network company DD-DEDO talks about the role that convenience stores play in Colombia in expanding the outreach of banks. As he explains, Colombia is still very early on in the growth curve when it comes to branchless banking. But as we all know, a strong agent network is one of the early pieces of the puzzle in building a branchless banking ecosystem.
Next week, we’ll share two more videos from more traditional players – a bank and a mobile network operator – but each with an interesting take on their new business model to reach the unbanked.
- Sarah Rotman
This is the third post in our series on interoperability and related issues in branchless banking and mobile money. Read the first post that presented the overall framework for the discussion and the second post that looked at the interconnection of mobile money platforms. Today, we discuss interoperability at the agent level as it relates to agent exclusivity. We include agent exclusivity in the topic of interoperability because it raises many of the same issues as platform interoperability.
Agent exclusivity revolves around the ability of a customer of one provider to use the agent of another provider for cash-in and cash-out services related to that customer’s account. Non-exclusive agents can expand financial access by providing more access points to a greater number of customers, while limiting the rise of a dominant actor which could ultimately reduce competition. But as with platform interoperability, regulators are cognizant that prohibiting exclusive agents could deter private actors from entering the market. What service provider would invest in identifying, training, and equipping agents if competitors can piggyback off their investment?
To be clear, when we speak of agent exclusivity, we are only referring to the cash-in and cash-out services performed by agents – not other services (where permitted) such as customer enrollment, related KYC, and processing of loan documents. Agents providing only cash-in and cash-out services are often called “cash merchants”. We distinguish the cash merchant services from other services because cash merchant functions arguably present less risk to the financial service provider since agents typically transact against their own accounts. Think human ATMs.
We identify at least four different ways to share cash merchants:
Read the rest of this page »
To commemorate the 2nd anniversary of the Haitian earthquake, we are running a few blogs on the mobile money industry that has developed in Haiti over the past two years. The consulting firm Dalberg has recently completed three pieces of research on the Haitian market as part of Haiti Mobile Money Initiative (HMMI). You can read their Haiti mobile money case study here and their research on the NGO experience of plugging into mobile money here.
Today they release the third piece of research on the payments market, specifically on the topic of market segmentation. Our guest authors are Vicky Hausman, Yana Watson, Matt Shakhovskoy and Lorenzo Bernasconi from Dalberg.
 With a year of operations under their belts, providers of mobile money services in Haiti are looking to move from a push for rapid expansion to a strategic pursuit of profitable markets. The industry’s kick-start came from a $10 million prize pool supplied by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Now as the prize mechanism nears its completion, the focus is shifting to sustainability based on supply and demand. For providers of mobile money services, we believe that a successful strategy will depend in large part on market segmentation.
The Haitian economy, though poor, is dynamic and resilient, and mobile money could fit into it in many different ways. Establishing possible uses through research and then offering a mix of services to suit distinct groups of customers will be key to the industry’s long-term viability. Studying and prioritizing these groups through segmentation will help companies to collect the highest return on their investment.
Segmentation is particularly important in nascent industries like mobile money, since identifying early adopters and low-hanging fruit can create opportunities to grow quickly and achieve economies of scale. While it isn’t an easy process, especially in a country where data on markets are hard to come by, it can insure against wasted effort and unprofitable investments. We recommend starting by estimating the size of different segments, then prioritizing them based on the costs and rewards to serve them, and finally planning a strategy to capture the segments that present the highest returns.
To see how we prioritized the segments in Haiti and to read a profile of one of the most promising – the agricultural value chain – see our report here.
Over the past week, the world has been commemorating the 2nd anniversary of the Haiti earthquake. Today and tomorrow we will have two guest blog posts on the mobile money sector that has emerged over the last two years in Haiti. Today’s post is written by two colleagues at USAID.
Charley Johnson is a Presidential Management Fellow at USAID. Priya Jaisinghani is a Senior Advisor to the Administrator and Director of the Mobile Solutions team. Prior to her work at USAID, Priya helped launch the Gates Foundation’s work in financial services from 2005-2009.
Two years after the earthquake, Haiti is rebuilding not just brick by brick, but click by click.
The earthquake left behind a government in rubble, an economy in shambles, and a people living in makeshift camps, coping with enormous loss. Against this backdrop, the possibility of progress lives not just in the resilient spirit of the Haitian people, but also in the simple power of their mobile phones.
In June 2010, USAID and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation launched the Haiti Mobile Money Initiative (HMMI). This program leveraged the private sector and the ubiquity of mobile phones to bring financial services to Haitians, 90% of whom didn’t have access to a bank account before the earthquake destroyed nearly one-third of the country’s bank branches, ATMs, and money transfer stations. Put simply, mobile money gives Haitians access to banking without building a single bank.
It worked. In January 2011, one year after the earthquake, HMMI awarded Digicel and its partner bank, Scotiabank, a “First to Market” Award of $2.5 million for “Tcho Tcho Mobile.” Five months ago, HMMI awarded mobile operator Voila and their bank partner, Unibank, $1.5 million for “T-Cash.” While verification is still underway, data reported by the industry indicate that there are nearly 800,000 registered users. Moreover, there are over 800 agent locations now available to serve clients. In a country where there are fewer than two bank branches per 100,000 people, this represents a near doubling of accessible financial services.
These numbers are significant, but what do they mean for the people of Haiti? Why should we care about the growth of mobile money in Haiti and the rest of the developing world?
Read the rest of this page »
In our first post in this series on interoperability, we introduced a three-level interoperability framework focusing on (i) platform interconnection, (ii) agent exclusivity, and (iii) customer-level interoperability. You can see the full framework in this presentation. In today’s post, we delve deeper into the first level–interconnection of mobile money platforms.
Platform-level interconnection is what most people have in mind when they think of interoperability in branchless banking. When we speak of interoperable platforms, we are referring to platforms that permit the transfer of funds from one mobile account to the mobile account of another service provider. This is similar to being able to send money from your bank account to your sister’s account at another bank. Or it is similar to being able to send a text message from your phone with your mobile network operator to your friend’s phone on the network of a different mobile network operator.
These “cross network” transactions should not be confused with “off-network” transactions which many mobile network operators claim to be platform interoperability. Off-network transactions make it possible for account holders to send money to anyone, whether they hold an account or not. For example, you send money from your mobile account to your friend, who doesn’t have an account, and your friend cashes out at your service provider’s agent. While off-network transactions can be beneficial for low-income users, we believe they are not as financially inclusive as cross network transactions. Off-network transactions require recipients to cash out, whereas cross network transactions make it possible for recipients to store received funds, on-send them or use them to make payments.
We identify different ways platforms can interconnect. In basic terms, platforms can interconnect: (1) directly (as the two ATM networks, 1Link and MNet, did in Pakistan) or (2) indirectly where a third-party entity which is either owned by providers, owned independently, or owned by the government interconnects platforms (as POS networks are currently doing in Brazil). The way in which platforms interconnect impacts pricing and efficiency of the payment system and potentially the ultimate value to customers.
Read the rest of this page »
Today we post a guest blog by Ignacio Mas and David Porteous, both of whom need no introduction. But just in case…Ignacio is an independent consultant, associated with Bankable Frontier Associates. He is former Senior Advisor with the Financial Services for the Poor team at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and at the Technology and Business Model Innovation Program at CGAP. David is Managing Director of Bankable Frontier Associates.
Sarah Rotman blogged recently about yet another breathless announcement about the imminent arrival of the cashless society. She said and we agree that “cashless seems a bit naïve; cash lite seems more realistic although still a big challenge.” The very first part of the challenge is actually to visualize what a “cash lite” world looks like. Is it simply an ill-defined way station on the road to cashlessness, or is there a meaningful state or goal that goes with it?
We think the latter, and for us the defining characteristic is not the amount of cash (let cash do what it will!), but the availability of alternatives for the bulk of the population. It’s freedom from cash, not absence of cash. We have coined a word which encapsulates key elements of a cash lite society: LiFi (see baptismal paper here). Like WiFi, which provides retail connectivity at the edge of the internet cloud, LiFi is about connecting people to an electronic payments grid which provides Liquidity with Fidelity. WiFi is open, general-purpose broadband; LiFi is secure, special-purpose narrowband.
A LiFi world is therefore one in which every person has an electronic store of value which they can easily use to make and receive payments in real time. Just like in places with reliable on-grid electricity, we can turn on a light on-demand, knowing that it will work and that the cost of flicking the switch will be small in relation to the benefits.
Because there is no precedent for cashlessness by fiat and cash can be counted on to still be an option for a long time to come, the key challenge of LiFi is getting people to trust and want to use the LiFi payment mechanism…because it is robust, because it is safe and because it is useful. All these attributes take time to demonstrate to the satisfaction of risk- (and change-) averse users. A LiFi approach recognizes that in two ways.
Read the rest of this page »
Mention the word interoperability in branchless banking and mobile money circles and watch people react in very different ways. For some, the word means something positive – efficient services and lower prices for consumers. For others, it means something negative – more costs, threats to competitive advantage and less profitability. For still others, the word means a reality that is inevitable but far in the distant future. Some don’t want you to say the word at all.
At the end of the day, we suspect interoperable systems will accelerate financial inclusion by allowing customers to use the infrastructure of multiple service providers to access their accounts. The question is how best do we get there?
A discussion on interoperating branchless banking and mobile money services that have yet to reach critical mass appears premature. But businesses and policy makers are already grappling with these issues in a number of markets where CGAP is heavily involved. In Ghana, the government is trying to understand its role in promoting interoperable branchless banking. In Pakistan, where Central Bank regulations permit a “many-to-many” model, there are questions about how the market will evolve into interoperable systems. In India, interoperability at the agent level is part of the financial inclusion vision painted by the Unique Identification Authority of India.
In general, governments are struggling to understand a regulatory approach that will balance the interest of customers with those of market players. They do not always adequately consider the state of the market or fully understand the implications of their approaches.
Read the rest of this page »
by Sarah Rotman : Wednesday, January 4, 2012
One of the exciting and yet challenging aspects of the branchless banking industry is how fast things change. Topics discussed just 3 months ago can seem out of date today. That’s why it’s fun to look back over the topics we blogged about in 2011 starting from last January to see how the discussion has evolved over the last 12 months. Here are just a few of the blogs you may have missed or you may be interested in reading again:
|
 |
|
