Social Media Banks
With the accumulation of funds owned very large, perhaps only Google, Amazon, Facebook spread its wings into a bank, at least has a subsidiary specialized in banking that can support their business expansion. Globally, some people assume that the World is not in position to have one currency, walls are already there. Bitcoins have very little recognition. Euro has problems too. According to these people times are not ripe for global bank. But the future is all about tech. Therefore, the technology giants are going to dominate the financial landscape. Facebook just secured an e-money licence from the Central Bank of Ireland too in Dec 2016 that is. It will change everything from financial services companies going bust to banks closing down because big data is now more centralized with Facebook and Google. These corporations are almost certain to offer banking services in the near future. Personally, we think Apple has the best chance of being first and successful.
Anyone who says ‘privacy is overrated’ shouldn’t be taken seriously
Blockchain technologies offer up some huge potential in these areas to create new models that move profit margins from the big organisations to customers pockets. Regina went to FB for one big reason. That is centralization. In lots of ways it is singularity in motion. Facebook knows you better than your bank does. Doesn’t that mean that our information will be stored in other countries, from our understanding Google and Facebook will have to keep our information in Australia so how secure is that when these companies are global? We see it as a failure. Regina Dugan will have everyone eating their RFID passchip before you know it. Her DARPA background is perfect at her new home with Facebook! Bankbook! In Spain, Facebook has begun few days ago as financial company registered in Spanish Bank.
It’s not Scary, it’s just New
Client trends are changing and it is not a surprise that banks in the traditional sense need to reinvent themselves. There is really no need to have large banking offices, clients are using other methods to perform all their banking transactions. Google would be a good platform to run financial products, will Google become a bank? Not sure. However they have the technology and the client experience to launch a new idea of banking. The banks of the future do not required Debit or credit cards, you will paid with your phones or your finger print. We believe that Google has the human talent to be able to develop a more sound financial system to prevent fraud and detect unnecessary financial fees on the spot. The idea of thinking that clients need an office at every corner is obsolete. It is important that banks adapt quickly to the changes and think about the future. The future is going towards a cashless banking industry where one platform manages your home, your office, your finances and your personal life.
Related: Working Capital Management
Google bank is coming soon! We’ve been listenting this will occur for last 10 yrs. They are already entering (or have already entered) the payments space look for example the Google Merchant Account. Bank’s are so far behind the technology curve there is effectively no real way for them to catch up….only differentiate. EMMAR can associate Google banking. If Alphabet wanted to buy a bank, really….what would stop them?? After all, the systems are just being switched to fully online. (Rather than a physical place) Could this be the first line in the horizon for more commercial usage of Bitcoin? Why become banks, when you can become the ultimate authority. If you have a problem, just ask google. If you need something just ask Amazon, if you want to talk to someone, just go on Facebook. It’s not like communication existed before these companies. Why not have these corporations take over the world? There would be no unemployment.
Related: Top 35 Online E-Commerce Platforms
No Place for Conventional Banking in Future
What is the last innovation you remember a bank providing in terms of value to you? Internet banking? Now that’s a bit embarrassing isn’t it. As for Google and Facebook, they’re both social Networks. Networks like these 2 companies would gamble with your money and lose it all. Since banks don’t like losing money and are made up of people’s money, they also have no business becoming banks, especially Facebook. These corporations have more connect to people than banks do. Banks are hierarchical and non responsive to many general needs. Banks have to reinvent and even though it may or may not be good to have these companies now entering a potential banking space, its good compete and gives something for the banks to work on. To be honest, we really think that they already are … But they wont build “walls”. We believe these Social Media banks will choose selling more lucrative products and processes. These services will be convenient, cross channel and efficient. Existing banks will have a terrible time to compete. Credit unions ARE banks. Many insurance companies are banks (State Farm, AAA, etc.) So banks growing out of a “membership” such as Amazon and Facebook are actually more like the original CUs!!! They don’t have to be a traditional bank, maybe they add some much needed legitimacy to bitcoin by joining up with other tech companies to support it.
Related: Future Predictions on what Business Brands will do in 2017
The Answer is Yes and No
Yes they will operate banking services, probably through a partnership with either an established bank or the best of the start ups. The reason they wont become a bank (established themselves) is due to the regulation that’s involved. Google and specifically Apple want to own the front end experience, due to the marketing opportunity, and the potential to deepen the relationship with the customer. We cannot imagine both companies wanting to clear money and manage accounting based reporting. The real player that could make the biggest impact is Amazon. With links to a market place, and now in our home due to echo, they have huge reach. We see two possibilities in the next 2 years. Either a bank will be bought and staff retained, or as stated a partnership with a bank. Either way the tech giants will start to own more and more front end banking services until banking becomes invisible to us.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…. I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
Related: How to get out of the Cyber Trap?
Why do you say that social media is a free ecosystem? It is not “free” you just don’t pay with money and they all sell your data. The big corporate attached to these social platforms are the true Internet trolls! There is definitely a lot of complexities when it comes to banking and these tech companies taking over. This would obviously create disturbances with privacy issues, in which Americans value privacy heavily. Also, it would promote monopolies in many facets. This destroys the idea of fair markets and competitive, capitalistic ideology. We are truly unsure about this without getting into more depth but all in all, we believe that would be a horrible move for the tech companies and we also believe it would be a horrible move for citizens. Internationally, this could be effective.
First, they would have to be granted a banking license. Secondly, they would have to be regulated the way a bank is regulated. In a less regulated market though it could happen. Large technology companies as those mentioned upto this stage of the article will likely be better served to own a bank holding company, or partner with one that can carry the regulatory and infrastructure burdens while allowing the tech firms to expand services through their existing channels without the unnecessary weight of additional regulatory expertise. This can be compared to companies either owning their own property or leasing from a specialized company that owns and manages properties. If ownership is in your capital structure interest, then do it, but if it isn’t, let someone else own it so you can put your capital into what you’re good at. If Nuon is a bank, we are sure Google already is.
Time to bring back Glass-Steagall
Isn’t Microsoft vested in the same “technologies”? Interesting to see that a LinkedIn Editor would leave them out of the whole scheme of things, especially following Microsoft’s acquisition of LinkedIn. Perhaps a way of making Amazon/Facebook/Google “too big to fail”??…smells to high hell!! Commercial banks are not supposed to be high-risk ventures; they are supposed to manage other people’s money very conservatively. It is with this understanding that the government agrees to pick up the tab should they fail. Investment banks, on the other hand, have traditionally managed rich people’s money — people who can take bigger risks in order to get bigger returns… oligarchic deep state writ large… what a disgrace…
Wiki: Glass-Steagall Act
The plaque at the old Shakey’s pizza parlor said it all,
“Shakey’s doesn’t cash checks, the bank doesn’t make pizza.”
Owning the technology infrastructure and the “user experience” is extremely lucrative. On the other side, being a bank can be lucrative but it also requires that you maintain much of the “plumbing” of the banking process which is a) very cumbersome, b) heavily regulated, and c) becoming commoditized.
13 thoughts on “Social Media Banks”
Comments are closed.