Pablo García Arabéhéty is an independent consultant who focuses on business model innovation in the mobile and environmental industries. He has previously worked at the Organization of American States and the Innovation Lab at the Inter-American Development Bank.
Last December, Starbucks announced that during 2011 it processed 26 million transactions in the US through its mobile payment application. While this news was anecdotal for traditional financial service providers such as banks and credit card companies, it showed mobile network operators (MNOs) the speed with which they can be left out of the business. Their only income in this case was the data traffic generated to complete the transactions. It is not news that the Average Revenue per User (ARPU) continues to decrease and mobile financial services are a great opportunity to reverse this trend. In mature markets such as Western Europe, the decline in ARPU has already led to a reduction of revenue. In Latin America the continued expansion of the subscriber base still enables revenue growth, but this trend will not last forever.
Source: Strategy Analytics 2012
I recently met with Tom Elliot from Strategy Analytics, a Boston-based consulting firm to discuss these issues. Tom stressed that nowadays it is hard to find an MNO that is not developing some kind of financial service, but that nonetheless the business model is still uncertain, and what works in certain contexts is hard to replicate successfully in other markets. Strategy Analytics’ forecasts for 2016 (see charts) do not show many signs of innovation in the industry. Their outlook is rather an inertial one where the aggregate income of the industry will flatten or decrease according to the region. These figures are more or less within the consensus of the mobile industry consulting world. However, the promise of financial service provision is enticing for MNOs when properly implemented. M-Pesa, Safaricom’s mobile money service in Kenya, contributes 17% of total ARPU, which represents 53% of non-voice ARPU. While Kenya has its own particular market characteristics, we can use this as a best case indicator of the potential of mobile financial services. A 17% increase in ARPU in 2016 in the case of Western Europe, for example, would push income levels above those of 2007.[1]
The threat to this promise is the model à la Starbucks, where MNOs become dumb pipes. The model for obtaining significant revenues must be one in which the carriers are efficient players of the ecosystem, beyond the mere provision of connectivity to mobile phones. Consequently, the construction of a model that avoids treating carriers as dumb pipes in the developing world requires important definitions of the core variables of the ecosystem. Depending on the definitions of these variables, very different business models can be shaped: from a scheduled savings product for house improvement targeting the unbanked, to the Starbucks model mentioned above. In each of these models, the players of the ecosystem have different roles: banks, MNOs, retailers, credit cards, etc. In Latin America, at the time of shaping this ecosystem of mobile financial services, carriers have decided to split the risk and the investments by partnering with banks, credit card companies or both. The two most significant initiatives in the region are Wanda, a joint venture between Telefónica and Mastercard and Transfer, another JV between America Móvil and Citibank, which officially launched in Mexico this past month.
Source: Strategy Analytics 2012
The uncertain viability of the different business models explains much of the reasoning behind this decision. However, these partnerships have direct implications when defining the basic variables mentioned above, which need to be negotiated and agreed with the partners. Banks for example, can be very good partners for cash management and identification of customers, but not so effective for other tasks. A report published this year by the World Bank, puts Latin American banks among the most expensive in the world. Expensive partners might be reluctant to embark in low margin/high volume business models. Experience shows that banks have yet to reach out with a value proposition to the 50% or 60% of unbanked households in Latin America. On the other hand, credit card companies can be great allies for mobile payments and short-term loans, but their record in offering other financial products such as savings products is lean.
There is still little evidence in LAC to establish the conditions under which these associations can be functional to the carriers’ need to supplement their declining ARPU. But already some points are clear. Carriers are those with the most to gain (and to lose) in this bet on mobile financial services. Their partners do not have as much at stake. Some results that would be catastrophic for MNOs, such as the Starbucks model, would leave their partners relatively well positioned. In an industry with the current volumes exhibited in Latin America, there is ample space for a wide array of players to explore the business opportunity to provide mobile financial services for the base of the pyramid, which will hopefully result in a more tailored provision of services to those who most need it.
We are also releasing today the four accompanying Country Notes which were distilled into the Focus Note. For much more detail on the link between social cash transfers and financial services in each of these countries, read the full reports on Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa.
In our last post, Chris Bold discussed the second of three questions that our new paper on G2P tried to tackle, namely:
For governments: Is building inclusive financial services into social cash transfer programs affordable for the social programs?
For recipients: Will poor recipients use financial services if these are offered to them?
For providers: Can financial institutions offer financially inclusive services to G2P payment recipients on a profitable basis?
Today, I will finish off the discussion by focusing on the final question regarding the business case for providers to offer financial services to social cash transfer recipients.
The biggest challenge when it comes to the business case for banks is that the amount per grant payment is small, and as client research has shown, very little of each payment is left behind in the form of savings. However, compared with other small value accounts, G2P recipient accounts have a regular dependable cash inflow ensuring that they stay active. And there is usually a government agency that is willing to pay for the service. But these anecdotal observations alone do not make or break the business case: it all depends on how the financial institution defines a business case.
To introduce greater precision to this discussion, we identify five different levels of the business case, as the figure below shows. The first level is each individual account. Small balance bank accounts are notoriously difficult to make profitable at the individual account level. But a business case may be sustained at this basic level for G2P payments if governments are willing to pay a regular fee to the banks, as they do in the four countries from our research. Without this fee, the account-level business case would be much harder to sustain. This is rather like the case for basic bank accounts which are considered loss leaders at this level by many banks, but which are nonetheless offered for strategic reasons (other profitable government business may be sold as a result of a good record) or to satisfy regulatory requirements (without regulatory support and forbearance, the bank may struggle to obtain approval for what it considers core business).
Chris Bold spent two years on secondment from DFID to CGAP where he worked on G2P-related issues, among other things. He has since returned to DFID where he is an Adviser on Private Sector Development in Fragile Countries. This is the second blog in a series on G2P and financial inclusion, based on CGAP’s new Focus Note Social Cash Transfers and Financial Inclusion: Evidence from Four Countries. Read the first post here.
Our recently released Focus Note on Social Cash Transfers and Financial Inclusion looks at the evidence from four large and well established programs in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa to attempt to answer three broad questions that are relevant to different stakeholder groups:
For governments: Is building inclusive financial services into social cash transfer programs affordable for the social programs?
For recipients: Will poor recipients use financial services if these are offered to them?
For providers: Can financial institutions offer financially inclusive services to G2P payment recipients on a profitable basis?
In the first post, Sarah Rotman looked at the costs to government. Today, I am going to expand on what we found about the recipient experience of receiving payments electronically and into “mainstream financial accounts”. David Porteous will look next at whether there is a business case for providers to offer financial services to social cash transfer recipients.
Last week, Sarah explained our characterization of payment approach into three categories: (i) physical cash, (ii) limited purpose instrument and (iii) mainstream financial accounts. We set the bar quite high for what we deemed to be fully “financially inclusive” – to earn the title of a mainstream financial account it must allow a recipient to store funds indefinitely, access them through the mainstream financial infrastructure (think ATMs and POS devices) and deposit additional funds. Some schemes only enable some of these features and while we recognize the steps that they are taking toward being fully financially inclusive we label these accounts “limited purpose”.
The data show a very clear trend over the past few years away from recipients receiving their payments in physical cash and toward electronic payments. Three of the four countries also showed increases in the number of customers receiving their transfers into a mainstream financial account with South Africa leading the way by paying 59% of transfers paid into mainstream accounts.
While I was in West Africa a few weeks ago, there was a recurring theme running through all our meetings. Whether we were meeting with MFIs, commercial banks, mobile network operators or third-party e-money issuers, they all came back saying about the same thing: their branchless banking business viability depended on capturing more flows of money to turn into consistent, revenue-generating transactions.
Branchless banking is, fundamentally, a business built on high-volume, low-value transactions. Over two years ago, colleagues and I published a Focus Note on the potential for government-to-person (G2P) payments to bring banking to the poor by leveraging the consistent flow of money that goes from governments to its citizens. In particular, social cash transfer programs were just beginning to make innovative changes to the way payments were made, mostly by transitioning from cash to electronic delivery. We wondered about the extent to which electronic payments could go even further by landing directly into the newly opened bank accounts of the beneficiaries.
But the evidence base at the time was sparse because these transitions were just getting started. Our paper was largely forward-looking by presenting the potential of this space, while posing still unanswered questions around three main topics:
For governments: Is building inclusive financial services into social cash transfer programs affordable for the social programs?
For recipients: Will poor recipients use financial services if these are offered to them?
For providers: Can financial institutions offer financially inclusive services to G2P payment recipients on a profitable basis?
A lot has changed over the past two years. Our new Focus Note “Social Cash Transfers and Financial Inclusion: Evidence from Four Countries” attempts to answer these questions by building off of the evidence base from four large social cash transfer programs: Bolsa Familia in Brazil, Familias en Accion in Colombia, Oportunidades in Mexico, and Child Care Grants and Old Age Pensions in South Africa. We selected these countries because they are the few that have pursued the twin objectives of electronic government payments and financial inclusion at scale. Admittedly, these countries are all large, middle-income countries with relatively well-developed financial infrastructure. But unfortunately, and quite telling I think, the evidence base does not yet allow us to speak to the situation of low-income countries because G2P-linked financial inclusion is only happening at a pilot level in these countries, if at all.
Over the coming weeks on this blog, my two co-authors, Chris Bold (DFID), David Porteous (Bankable Frontier Associates) and I will provide an overview of the answers to the three questions posed above. Today, I tackle the first question regarding the cost to governments. I have found this question in particular to be asked quite often by social protection practitioners, for good reason. But before I get to that, I first need to frame the discussion with an updated categorization of payment approaches that our paper presents.
“The improvement of data on financial inclusion is undoubtedly the most immediate challenge to overcome. This must be accompanied by the analysis of the needs and expectations of the population.”
We recently spoke with Elvira Cruvinel, head of a new Brazilian Central Bank team coordinating financial inclusion efforts. Only a handful of countries globally have created such financial inclusion teams at central banks. Elvira is part of this small pioneering group of leaders looking to effect major changes to the financial access landscape.
1. What is the Brazilian Central Bank’s vision of financial inclusion?
In recent years, the Central Bank of Brazil has determined that the promotion of financial inclusion is a strategic contribution to the development of the Brazilian economy. We believe that adequate financial inclusion helps reduce poverty, since meeting the demand for financial services can improve quality of life and the development of the financial industry can spur economic growth. We also believe that financial inclusion is beneficial to economic stability, financial system efficiency and the effectiveness of monetary policy instruments.
2. Your team was created in 2009. What have you been able to do since then?
In 2009, we created the Financial Inclusion Project at the Central Bank, after realizing that it was necessary to integrate various stakeholders to develop effective policies for financial inclusion. This required a great deal of interdepartmental coordination and collaboration with other institutions, both national and international. Another major part of our effort was the collection, organization and analysis of data and research on various issues related to the subject. At the end of that first year, we published the book “Perspectives and Challenges for Financial Inclusion in Brazil: a view of different actors.”
Through our efforts that first year, we were able to solidify the Central Bank’s role on this issue in Brazil. In my opinion, our role in pulling stakeholders together showed clearly in Brazil’s first Forum on Financial Inclusion in 2009, which was organized by the Central Bank but involved multiple ministries and hundreds of participants across industry and policy circles. The second Forum, held in 2010, also shed light on regulatory issues, allowing for the definition of a financial inclusion agenda in Brazil. The third Forum, carried out in November 2011, shed light on ways to measure financial access, the quality of inclusion and products.
We’ve done a lot of thinking at CGAP about the different business models and partnerships that exist in branchless banking. What I find interesting is that rarely do you find two models that look exactly alike. Once you begin to really dig beneath the surface, you realize that even among those businesses that we might simplistically call “telco-led” or “bank-led”, there are significant differences. For example, Orange’s partnership with BNP Paribas in Cote d’Ivoire (the local subsidiary BICICI) is slightly different than MTN’s partnership with Societe Generale (local subsidiary SGBCI) also in Cote d’Ivoire. Similarly, when we did our comparative agent research in Kenya, Brazil and India, we learned that while many banks in Brazil use agents extensively in their outreach strategy, they each manage their agent networks quite differently.
Instead of playing to the same tune, I’d say that branchless banking actors are playing variations on a theme. Here we share a couple videos that describe two particular variations out of the many that exist.
1st Variation: One of the largest Brazilian commercial banks Bradesco has been targeting the mass market since its beginning, going so far as to build branches without doors to encourage anyone to enter. It’s no surprise then that Bradesco has always been trying to be as close as possible to its customers (which currently number 62 million) and to future customers. In this video, Marcos Bader, General Director at Bradesco, explains how technology and new business models based on the use of agent networks have helped the bank reach this goal. He explains many interesting aspects of their business, but what I find quite remarkable in particular is that 90% of all transactions at the bank go through alternative distribution channels. Marcos also lives up to the Brazilian stereotype by somehow finding a way to draw a parallel between branchless banking and soccer!
2nd Variation: Regulation usually defines what branchless banking players can and cannot do. Roar Bjaerum, Head of easypaisa at Telenor Pakistan explains in this video how the regulation in Pakistan was clear in its “bank-led” approach. But regulation also allowed telcos to take ownership in banks. In 2008, this is exactly what Telenor Pakistan did in partnership with Tameer Microfinance Bank, paving the way for a truly innovative business model in branchless banking. As Roar explains, the market has since taken off in many different directions, with some banks leading their own branchless banking business and some telcos acquiring microfinance licenses. We’ve written about and discussed the Pakistan market a lot, but here Roar describes the market from the perspective of someone working on the day to day business of mobile money.
In these two particular “variations on a business model theme” and in the many others that exist around the world, the challenge, as Marcos puts it, is “to define the boundary between cooperation and competition.” This is indeed the task at hand in order to produce a wonderful melody instead of discordant chords in our objective to reach the unbanked.
Watch the two videos we posted last week on OXXO and DD-DEDO here.
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.
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?
This is a guest post by Peter Goldstein and Caldwell Bishop of InterMedia. Peter is Director of Communications for InterMedia and Project Director of AudienceScapes, an African research program and online knowledge center for the global development field funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Caldwell is a communications intern at InterMedia and is currently pursuing a Masters in International Development at George Washington University.
We all remember the devastating 7.0 earthquake that struck Haiti in January 2010 reportedly destroying about one-third of the country’s bricks-and-mortar bank branches, limiting Haitians’ ability to send and receive money transfers, cash checks, or simply access much-needed cash resources.
In June 2010, the Financial Services for the Poor initiative at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation partnered with USAID on the Haiti Mobile Money Initiative (HMMI), featuring a $10 million fund to provide incentives to mobile service providers to quickly launch and expand m-money services. Notably, Digicel, Haiti’s leading mobile provider, won the first-to-market prize of $2.5 million in January 2011 after launching its Tcho Tcho Mobile service. Soon thereafter, Voila, Haiti’s second largest mobile provider, released its T-Cash m-money service and received a $1.5 million USD second-to-market award. The CGAP Technology Blog has had several posts on this initiative (here, here, here, here, and here).
To help monitor the impact of the HMMI as well as m-money service use and financial access in general, the Gates Foundation commissioned InterMedia to design and conduct a series of household surveys of Haitian adults (aged 18+). The first Haiti Mobile Money Tracker (HMMT) survey was conducted in March 2011, in the early days of m-money usage, and sampled all ten Haitian administrative departments based on figures from the latest census in 2003. Follow-up surveys will be conducted to establish usage trends – hopefully based on a more up-to-date 2011 census.
InterMedia’s HMMT Online Data Analysis Tool allows financial access practitioners and stakeholders to dive into the survey data themselves in a user-friendly way. The combinations of financial, mobile and demographic data are easily cross-referenced to support project planning and analysis.
Meanwhile, the first survey yielded some helpful insights and provided rare baseline data for a mobile money deployment. Here are some of the highlights:
