the impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

94
Maciej Chudziński Student’s ID No 30161 The impact of disruptive technologies on the shape of future banking MSc dissertation written under the supervision of PhD Aleksandra Przegalińska-Skierkowska Warsaw 2016

Upload: maciej-chudzinski

Post on 22-Jan-2017

332 views

Category:

Technology


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

Maciej Chudziński Student’s ID No 30161

The impact of disruptive technologies

on the shape of future banking

MSc dissertation

written under the supervision of

PhD Aleksandra Przegalińska-Skierkowska

Warsaw 2016

Page 2: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

2

Table of contents

Chapter I. Introduction .................................................................................................. 3 1.1. Definitions / Key concepts ................................................................................ 5 1.2. Main banking activities today ........................................................................... 7 1.3. Diagram of a bank and recent startup activity ................................................ 10 1.4. Crisis of 2008– the beginning of fintech boom .............................................. 14 1.5. Banking startups – introduction to disruptive technologies ............................ 18

Chapter II. Literature review ...................................................................................... 21

Chapter III. Methodology ............................................................................................ 23

Chapter IV. Field of possible disruption no. 1 – Foreign exchange ......................... 25 3.1. Remittances .......................................................................................................... 27 3.2. Bureau de change / currency exchange ................................................................ 31 3.3. Interview with a practitioner – Forex entrepreneur ............................................. 34

Chapter V. Field of possible disruption no. 2 – Payments system ............................ 37 4.1. Traditional payment methods .............................................................................. 37 4.2. Established Internet based payment methods ...................................................... 44

4.2.1 PayPal ............................................................................................................ 44 4.2.2. Peer-to-peer mobile payments ...................................................................... 45

4.3. Virtual currencies ................................................................................................. 46 4.3.1. Bitcoin ........................................................................................................... 48 4.3.2. Blockchain technology – a decentralized ledger .......................................... 52

4.4. Interview with a practitioner – Bitcoin entrepreneur ........................................... 54

Chapter VI. Field of possible disruption no. 3 – Lending ......................................... 58 5.1. Banks – traditional lenders ................................................................................... 58 5.2. Online lending ...................................................................................................... 61

5.2.1. Payday loans ................................................................................................. 61 5.2.2. Peer-to-peer lending ..................................................................................... 63

5.3. Interview with a practitioner – Lending entrepreneur ......................................... 70

Chapter VII. Summary ................................................................................................ 72

Appendix 1. Interview with a practitioner – Forex entrepreneur ............................ 75

Appendix 2. Interview with a practitioner – Bitcoin entrepreneur .......................... 76

Appendix 3. Interview with a practitioner – Lending entrepreneur ........................ 81

List of figures: ............................................................................................................... 83

List of illustrations: ....................................................................................................... 84

List of tables: ................................................................................................................. 84

Bibliography: ................................................................................................................. 84

Page 3: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

3

Chapter I. Introduction

“This is a time of huge opportunity in finance — as long as you are something other

than a bank." (The Economist, 2012)

The value of all global financial market assets reached nearly $300 trillion in the

beginning of 2015 (Business Insider, 2015), whereas the market capitalization of only the

10 largest banks worldwide currently accounts for an estimated $1.7 trillion, according

to Relbanks (Relbanks, 2016). However, “big banks are far too complicated. All their

branches and products and legacy systems are very inefficient” (Boden, 2015). This means

that banks are responsible for too many activities all at the same time. Moreover, “banks

and financial institutions often centralize things - capital, capabilities, credit,

underwriting, risk assessment” (Weissman, 2013). However, what would happen if those

competences were executed more effectively and in a separate decentralized fashion?

Would products and services improve from a customer perspective? Would these services

take up less time and cost less money to use? Therefore, startups focus on particular

products and/or services to attempt at accomplishing them in a smarter and obviously

more efficient way. To put it differently, they are attempting to re-invent the key

fundamentals that form the foundation of the banking sector.

Presently, the world is witnessing unlimited internet transformations and the pace of that

internet evolution is dumbfounding. What used to take days or even weeks is more simple

and quicker than ever, often resulting in certain services that now only take minutes.

According to eMarketer, the worldwide number of internet users has increased from

almost 1.2 billion in 2008 to more than 3 billion in 2015. Thereby, in these times of the

financial sector crisis, the importance of small financial technology companies has been

continually increasing. It is easy to observe how many new companies are established

each year, a tremendous number, indeed. Nevertheless, it is still problematic to pinpoint

the exact number. According to McKinsey, as of February 2016, the number of startups

offering traditional and new financial services exceeded 2,000, while more than a dozen

of them are valued at over $1 billion. New technologies are continually challenging the

conventional banking systems. “Technology is miraculous because it allows us to do

Page 4: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

4

more with less, ratcheting up our fundamental capabilities to a higher level” (Thiel, 2014).

Even though new players are often entering the market, with new channels and processes,

the online disruption is appearing at every level of the financial industry, leaving less

opportunities for the major players who very often are slow to adapt to new trends.

This thesis is mainly focused on European and American startup scenes which are

attempting to penetrate, disturb and change the current banking model. Each with diverse

means towards the same end. Today, traditional financial-service companies are not safe

anymore, due to the vast transformations delivered by innovative companies, and they

are growing at an unprecedented rate. Will the banks survive this attack from the startup

industry? Are the banks’ cake going to be fully eaten by new entrants within the next 10

years? In what way are disruptive technologies influencing the traditional banking

system? Those questions will be answered within this paper.

The objective of this dissertation is to show the interplay between banks and companies

serving similarly to them via the Internet as well as the changing role of banks that has

already occurred and will profoundly develop in the future due to technological based

companies. The main theme of the paper is to provide an insight into how new

technologies will shape the future banking system. According to Peter Thiel, the most

important question every entrepreneur should ask themselves is whether their business

will be still around in a decade from now. Therefore, this paper is going to analyze how

the financial industry landscape could look in the future.

The dissertation unfolds as follows:

Chapter I refers to the entire banking system. It defines all terms used, lists the main

banking activities and describes the crisis of 2008/2009. It also mentions the first financial

technology startups (fintech), in particular Number 26 and Simple.

Chapter III relates to the methodology of this paper.

Chapter IV discusses activities that are under threat from disruptive technologies – the

foreign exchange market.

Chapter V denotes payment systems as the next activity which is being destabilized by

fintech startups. Traditional payment methods, as well as already established online

payment methods are expanded upon.

Page 5: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

5

Chapter VI deliberates upon the core activity of banking– lending. It is mainly focused

on online payday loans and peer-to-peer lending

1.1. Definitions / Key concepts

a) Disruptive technology – in brief, this is a technology that significantly

modifies the system that organizations operate in. For any business,

innovations or disruptive technologies represent not only the capability to

grow but also the opportunity to meaningfully affect the way the industry is

developing. Therefore, disruptive technologies transform the rules of the

whole game. Under those changes, new market leaders are formed and the

traditional players are usually shattered or disappear from the market

completely. (Investopedia, 2016)

Figure 1. What is disruptive technology?

Source: CB Insights, 2015

b) Banking system – A banking system is an autonomous part of the country's

financial system. This term is determined by a set of all banking and financial

institutions in the country as well as by the network of interconnecting

relationships between them. (Patterson, 2015). Its backbone is the arrangement

Page 6: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

6

between the central bank and commercial banks, which has a fundamental

importance to operations in this market. (Jaworski, Zawadzka, 2003).

c) Fintech – “refers to the technology that is becoming increasingly important in

the world of financial services. This can include everything from mobile

banking to crowdfunding” (Emmerson, 2015)

d) Startup – “A startup is a human institution designed to create a new product

or service under conditions of extreme uncertainty.” (Ries, 2011). It is a young

company, primarily technological (in the sense of this paper), in the early

stages of its development, which was created in order to provide the market

for a new product, service, technology or process under conditions of high

uncertainty.

e) Peer-to-peer lending (social lending) – is an alternative to traditional bank

credit and loans. This term refers to financial transactions between lenders and

borrowers. In other words, people who want to invest and earn money, lend

to those, who suffer from the lack of capital. For investors, peer-to-peer

lending is usually more profitable and less complicated than traditional forms

of investment. For borrowers, it is also more convenient and provides lower

interest rates of loans as well. (Lendico, 2016)

f) Bitcoin – is an innovative Internet currency (cryptocurrency). Bitcoin is

decentralized, which means that there is no central issuing institution, bank or

any other independent institutions. Bitcoin is a currency, which can be

instantly sent to any place worldwide, avoiding the banking system altogether

and intermediaries and thus, costly commissions and limits. (Coindesk, 2016)

g) Big Data – it is one of many management tools. It is the process of collecting

and analyzing huge volumes of data, which cannot be processed in a

traditional manner. Big data analytics enhances decision making as well as

customer analysis. (Bain & Company, 2015).

Page 7: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

7

h) Venture Capital – is equity capital brought in by external investors to small

and medium enterprises for a limited period of time. (Antkiewicz, 2008)

Usually, those companies are characterized by an innovative product, method

of production or services that have not yet been verified by the market. Thus,

they create a high risk of investment failure, but also for the success of the

project. (Węcławski, 1997)

1.2. Main banking activities today

“Today, banks are under siege. The industry’s underlying economics are weak and

deteriorating. Credit losses are enormous and growing.” (Bryan, 1988). This quote is

almost 30 years old, but not so much has changed, has it? For centuries now, banks have

been responsible mainly for the same activities. Even so, how can the word bank be

defined? “Banks are financial institutions that accept deposits and make loans.” (Mishkin,

2013). They are organizations whose main objective is to offer financial products, banking

services and other financial instruments that are fraught with high risk. Thus, the aim of

banking activities is the purchase and sale of a risk and later managing this risk in order

to generate the bottom line and boost the value of the bank. However, there are only 3

main fields, banks are operating in: (Jaworski, Zawadzka, 2003)

1) participation in money creation – the creation of money by commercial banks is

caused by an increase in volume of loans granted by these banks, as well as by

increasing the purchase of foreign currencies.

2) participation in social division of labor – a bank is a company that operates with

an aim of taking over financial activities of businesses of individuals. They mainly

receive deposits and make loans, which makes it easier for entrepreneurs and

households not to look for an investor or a borrower.

3) allocating and transformation of money – banks fulfill the important role of being

transformational institutions, participating as an intermediary in reconciling of

differing structures of supply and demand. This is particularly relevant, in terms

of the transformation of information, the volume of demanded amount of money

and transformation of risk. The transformation of money is primarily associated

Page 8: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

8

with an existing lack of compliance between the sum offered by the holder and

the demanded sum of the person seeking capital.

However, moving on now to the main aspect of this chapter, here a few of the main

banking activities will be elaborated on. They are a specialized form of a service activities

carried out by the banks. Banking services and operations in a free market economy can

be defined as a "product". Below, the main banking activities are briefly explained.

1) CASH LOAN – it is a consumer banking product which offers clients a minor

amount of cash which has to be repaid on an instalment basis, typically over a

relatively short period (Patterson, 2015). In brief, this is the type of loan, where

interest is documented as earned when payments are collected.

2) TERM LOANS/INVESTMENT LOANS – loans which are intended to finance

the investment or long term assets. They are always granted for a period exceeding

four years, and the repayments can occur in two ways:

- annuities – fixed installments throughout the period of repaying,

- fixed installments, however reducing the amount of interest along with

decreasing the debt.

3) CURRENCY EXCHANGE – this activity is self-explanatory. Banks simply

provide a possibility to buy and sell in various currencies. They also operate as a

currency exchange for an uncountable number of enterprises (e.g. exporters and

importers).

4) PAYMENT SYSTEM – “Is a core component of the financial system, alongside

markets and institutions.” (The Payment System, 2010). Every transaction requires

a transfer of funds. For example, payment by using cash or deposits held with

banks. Therefore, a payment is a transfer of money which discharges an obligation

between a purchaser and a seller. Payments could also be classified by the quantity

of parties involved in a single transaction. For instance, a credit card transaction

in the US involves a minimum of four parties (the payer, the payee, the acquiring

bank and the issuing bank). “A payment system consists of a set of instruments,

Page 9: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

9

banking procedures and, typically, interbank funds transfer systems that ensure

the circulation of money.” (Bank for International Settlements, 2003).

5) FOREIGN EXCHANGE MARKET (ForEX) – is the largest international

financial market, distinguished by the highest liquidity and supreme dynamics. At

the origins of the Foreign Exchange Market lay a need to enhance international

trade. The FX Market enables trading by day and night, which means that the

market reacts to new information and events from the world’s economy and

politics. Trading on the Forex market consists essentially of speculation the value

of one currency in relation to the other. The highest volume of currency is traded

in the interbank market. This is the network of international banks carrying out

their operations in financial centers scattered around the world. Those banks carry

out proprietary trading and provide such services to their customers. They

facilitate Forex operations for customers and conduct analytical trades from their

own offices. “When banks act as dealers for clients, the bid-ask spread represents

the bank’s profit.” (Investopedia, 2016). All trades are performed to benefit on

currency fluctuations.

Page 10: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

10

1.3. Diagram of a bank and recent startup activity

Figure 2: Diagram of a bank

Source: Pease, 2014

Alexander Pease, a former analyst at Union Square Ventures, released a truly interesting

and thought-provoking presentation about banks function presently and modeled what is

happening with them, in terms of startups activities. He called it the disaggregation of

banks and named a few of the existing startups which are undermining and unbundling

these core functions of banks. A few of those activities have already been clarified

previously, and a few of these startups mentioned in his presentation will also be

explained further in the next chapters.

As already said, figure 2. presents how a modern bank is constructed. Big traditional retail

banks propose a miscellaneous portfolio of services and products (also the ones disclosed

in the previous point of the thesis). They try to take advantage of their knowledge of

clients throughout those products, however very little of that data is used to create more

customized and satisfying products. Due to that, a multitude of European and American

Page 11: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

11

startups are attacking old traditional banking system with disruptive technologies and

innovative products. (see: Figure 3)

Figure 3: Recent startup activity

Source: Pease, 2014

Here are just few examples of companies: Zopa, Funding Circle, Kreditech, Bitbond,

Cinkciarz, PayPal, Kokos, Wonga, Simple, Transferwise, Coinbase, LendingClub, and

Kickstarter. Those startups cover retail banking, payday loans, business lending, money

transfers, payments, social lending, you name it. They all do what a traditional bank

would do and should do, nevertheless in a specified area, focusing mainly on only one

activity, not on a few at the same time (Weissman, 2013). Those companies are

continuously using big data and technology to design and develop superior products

Page 12: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

12

Figure 4: Expected impact of start-ups on banking

source: The Financial Brand, 2015; based on EFMA report Innovation in Retail Banking, 2015

According to EFMA research (2015), payments, lending and savings and investments are

the sectors where banks expect small companies to have the most impact. “In Payments,

71% of banks believe the impact will be high or very high (EFMA, 2015).” 31% of banks

consider lending as a product with potentially high impact on banking.

Moreover, an important question arises. Do banks presently still need their expensive

branches? “Branch offices consume 30-35% of most banks’ total operational

expenditure”. (Moldow, 2014). Customers need people who can aid them, not necessarily

physically. It does not matter whether those people are on the phone, online or in a

physical branch location. The only thing they have to perform is to aid their customers.

Page 13: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

13

Of course, branches acquire new customers. However, it is not necessary in many cases

anymore. Moreover, certain banks are even expanding innovative branches, trying to

keep up with new technologies. Within the next 10 years the retail bank branch model

will be obsolete and no longer alive. "Bank branches will most be gone ... this decade.”

(Diamandis, 2015). The real question that needs to be asked is why? How is it possible and

do people believe it? The number of market players which went online and which are

anticipated to come online soon, is the principal reason. "The biggest banks in the world

in 2025 will be technology companies, and banks that grew through branch acquisitions

in the '80s and '90s, that grew by physical bank presence, will have a real problem." (King,

2015).

The main point of this, is that in 10 years, all new banking customers that will enter the

market are not in a global economy today. They do not know how the whole industry

looks like now and how it looked 20-30 years ago. They will enter a financial market,

only with the knowledge about new technologies and the world of the internet. Banks

should really understand that, and soon. “No one can predict future exactly, but we know

two things; it’s going to be different, and it must be rooted in today’s world.” (Thiel, 2014).

It is certain that the primary market players will be huge fintech companies (at that time)

focusing on specified areas of products and services, operating on a huge, international

scale. Banks are going to be more specialized and operating more on a local scale.

Figure 5: Shift in consumer banking behavior

Source: TransferWise, 2016

Page 14: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

14

According to a report conducted by Transferwise, 68% of the population has never used

a technology provider. However, in the next 5 years this will change, 32% of surveyed

respondents, are expected to use a FinTech provider for more than 50% of their financial

needs. These statistics highlight the importance of the revolution which is being held at

this time. Furthermore, 1 out of 5 individuals worldwide, will trust technology providers

for all of their financial needs within the next 10 years.

1.4. Crisis of 2008– the beginning of fintech boom

“The financial crisis was extremely important in ushering in the current wave of fintech

innovation”. (Harris, Bain Capital Ventures)

The 2008 Global Financial Crisis in the United States of America has outlined a new age

for the financial industry all around the globe. “In 2007-2008 the world faced a huge

financial crisis, which resulted in major losses in wealth and employment which imposed

great burdens on the public finances of developed countries.” (The Future of Finance, 2010)

Let’s call this period the beginning of the fintech boom, because it is credited largely in

part with an unexpected increase in this industry. This uptick in fintech is primarily in the

United States, but it also becoming clearly visible in Europe (see: figure 6).

“From 2008 to 2014, deal flow in the sector has increased at a compound annual growth

rate of 27 percent, with the value of deals having increased by 26 percent.” (Darc Matter,

2015)”. Below is a chart presenting global fintech financing activity.

Page 15: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

15

Figure 6: Global Fintech Financing Activity

Source: Accenture and CB insights

The crisis has definitely shaken the industry. First and foremost, it has undermined and

weakened the trust and reliance people once had towards the banking status quo. “Without

trust, institutions don’t work, societies falter and people lose faith in their leaders”

(Edelman, 2015). In general, the crisis highlighted the disorganization and inefficiency of

the banking system. The anger of the people at the established banking system has caused

them to start looking for alternatives. At that time, the technology industry understood

that the financial world was offering immense chances and opportunities. Startups began

a battle of being something more than a bank, but at the same time, still fulfilling

responsibilities and activities of this institution. Simply saying, the business models they

started providing tries to avoid the structural formalities of a traditional bank. However,

continuously providing and satisfying customer needs.

After the Great Recession of 2008/2009, lending dropped significantly. Many

conventional banks stopped offering loans. “Two out of every five small and medium

sized enterprises (SMEs) saw their credit lines threatened between 2008-2012. (Moldow,

2014). The volume of commercial loans declined from approximately $200 billion to

roughly $165 billion in 2012. The downslide is significantly noticeable (see: Figure 7).

It was a clear opportunity for nonbanks to enter the market and disaggregate banks.

Page 16: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

16

Figure 7: The number of sub-$250K loans since 2008

Source: Moldow, 2014

Another reason which allowed the fintech industry to start achieving exponential growth

were the regulations for banks which followed the credit crisis. Banks have encountered

new and numerous regulations. They obviously had to deal with a variety of penalties for

disobedience and non-compliance. Controllers imposed new compensation rules on

banks. Moreover, more liquid assets were required (Forbes, 2015). As a result, the banks

had to spend more funds on compliance and risk management plans. This contributed to

less emphasis and focus on innovation. “This brain drain, lack of innovation by banks

and low cost of technology platform development has resulted in the FinTech startup

boom that is much talked about today.” (Forbes, 2015). These traditional banks are less

willing to take risk and to invest in customer-focused innovations. On the other hand, so

called non-banks are facing only little or even no regulations at all, “further driving down

costs and freeing them to test new products.” (Antonakes, 2015).

Furthermore, internet usage and penetration has been growing constantly. According to

eMarketer, the worldwide number of internet users increased from almost 1.2 billion in

2008 to more than 3 billion in 2015 worldwide. Moreover, they assume that in the next 2

Page 17: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

17

years (by 2018), the figure will reach more than 3.5 billion, approximately 50% of the

entire world’s population

Figure 8: Internet Users and Penetration Worldwide, 2013-2018

source: eMarketer, 2014

It visibly signifies all of the online opportunities. Financial startups have already taken

advantage of this and have developed finance services built on the growth and evolution

of the internet. The assumption that the internet usage has grown after the crisis is

unquestionably justified. It has caused people to begin expecting possibilities of

performing activities remotely, and in a faster and more convenient way.

Moreover, the banking methods to acquire customers have always been relatively

expensive (already explained in the previous point). Therefore, they have always been

trying to do much toward cross-selling missions. Moreover, most of the banks operate

within their home country and they try to build the brand and scale in their domestic

markets. However, the internet has also changed it, because nowadays banks try to hone

in more on selling one particular service, consequently, increasing the quality.

To sum up, the 2008 crisis has definitely caused a breakdown of trust in the banking

system among people. It almost collapsed the traditional financial system worldwide,

Page 18: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

18

which gave opportunity to many FinTech startups we see now in the markets. It has also

caused a situation, where banks from all around the world are trying to catch up with the

online industry in terms of technology and products they provide. “Fintechs are setting

the benchmark high” (The Rise of Fintech in Finance, 2014), which means that the

competition is huge and interesting. “They (startups) believe technology can make

inroads into this complex, heavily regulated, and most conservative of industries.”

(Mackenzie, 2015).

1.5. Banking startups – introduction to disruptive technologies

“Banking is necessary; banks are not” (Bill Gates)

People all around the world struggle to manage their money. However, as already

mentioned, we are living in the age of the internet. You cannot deny it. Hence, free access

to information, online communication, exchange of concepts and know-how are the order

of the day. Primarily, it reduces time. Therefore, all startups nowadays want to reduce the

time of its customers and make their services as convenient as possible. The newcomers

improve the whole market as well. This is how it works. The more competitors, the more

innovations occur. Self-explanatory, indeed.

Traditional banks have always been middlemen between borrowers and savers. They are

paying interests for deposits and make loans to private and institutional clients. They have

always played a part in the whole community. Therefore, banks have been always

charging additional cost of borrowing and lending. This is the price a customer needs to

pay for the ability to be on a market. It has been like this for centuries. However,

nowadays “the future of high-street banking is not on the high street at all, but on mobile-

only platforms.” (Boden, 2015). The quote undoubtedly invokes to what is happening.

There are more and more small enterprises which want to create banks from scratch. As

Peter Thiel stated in his book “Zero to One”, those startups want to create new banks by

going from 0 to 1. It is this so-called “vertical progress”, since it forces people and

companies to do things that has never been done before. In a single word, it can be called

Technology. “The financial services industry is one of the biggest spenders on

technology”. (Boden, 2015). Thus, the internet is an appropriate medium for banks and

Page 19: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

19

other financial services. It has raised more trust among the society after the Financial

Crisis in 2008, due to its full accessibility all over the world and obviously its speed.

According to a Transferwise report, there are five main factors that are encouraging

consumers to use fintech providers for services they usually use their banks for:

• a more secure service than banks,

• a better cost than banks,

• a more convenient service than banks,

• a quicker service than banks,

better customer service than banks

There are already a few companies which try to undermine the function of banks. Let’s

call them mobile banking startups. What are they doing and how are they doing it? Why

are they better than traditional banks? Below, there are 2 examples of those kinds of

startups with a brief explanation of their role.

NUMBER 26

It is a German company aiming to create the bank account of the future. They intend to

transform the traditional banking industry and how people spend, save and transfer their

funds. Their goal is to “offer a borderless banking experience across Europe”. (Number26,

2016). Currently, the company is available for its clients from Germany, Austria, France,

Ireland, Italy, Spain, Slovakia and Greece. Equally with traditional banks, Number26

issues a bank card (MasterCard), which can be used to obtain items or withdraw money

from ATMs globally.

So why is it better than a conventional bank? Nowadays it still takes at least 1-2 days to

make a money transfer with a traditional bank (if international, even more!). You want to

open a bank account? In most cases you still have to make an appointment with a bank’s

local branch. In terms of the discussed mobile banking startups, the whole process is being

held online, without sending any physical documentation. Moreover, it takes only 5

minutes (as they claim). Is this the only reason for being better than a traditional bank?

Yes. Why? Because it is faster, fully accessible, trustworthy and does not require any

bureaucracy.

Page 20: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

20

SIMPLE

The next virtual bank which is worth mentioning. The first assumption of the company

was to eliminate many of the extreme and unnecessary fees that conventional banks

charge. They have managed to do so, because currently, they do not charge their

customers any fees. However, it is not a pure bank. According to Josh Reich of Simple,

the customers get from the company a Visa Card, they a gain access to the largest ATM

network in America, they put their paychecks into a Simple account, they pay their bills

and they have a really good mobile and web experience among others facilities. However,

the company works with partner banks, which take their customers deposits, and hold

them in FDIC (The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) insured accounts (as of

beginning of 2013). Therefore, in the end, the banks are the ones taking care of the money,

and Simple is the one taking care of the people and technology. So, to be honest, the most

important things in today’s world, people. They want to provide the best UX (User

Experience) they can. What is also interesting, and worth mentioning, Simple was

acquired in 2014 by Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBVA), a Spanish Bank, for

almost $120 Million, which indicates that enormous banks are fearful of the fintech

industry and do not want to become obsolete. As Kartik Ramakrishnan, senior vice-

president at Capgemini, claims: “There is an urgent need for the traditional players to

acknowledge the presence of new digital challengers”. It simply means that banks need

to adjust to the surrounding environment, which BBVA has accomplished. The Spanish

banking giant, has acquired yet the next online banking startup called Holvi, however the

price was undisclosed. If you cannot beat them, buy them.

Page 21: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

21

Chapter II. Literature review Due to limited traditional literature sources, mainly online reports, articles and blog posts

have been used to research the topic of disruptive financial technologies more in depth.

Nevertheless, since the main purpose of this dissertation is to present the interplay

between banks and financial technology startups, the topic has been theoretically analyzed

from two perspectives:

• from a banking perspective

• from a startup perspective

The aim behind this approach is to gain more traditional knowledge on how these two

entities operate separately and what their culture of work is. This is useful for the further

research in terms on how they affect each other – which is the main area of concern of

this dissertation.

In terms of banks, mainly interpretive literature, both in Polish and English, was used to

analyze the core competences of traditional financial institutions. “Breaking Up the Bank:

Rethinking Industry Under Siege” (1988) by Lowell Bryan and “The Economics of

Money, Banking & Financial Markets” (2013) by Frederic Mishkin provided

comprehensive insights into the functions of banks. It was helpful in order to notice and

outline the main bank activities which are affected by today’s online companies. Hence,

traditional literature has given a broad overview on how Foreign Exchange, Payments and

Lending are executed by conventional institutions.

Regarding disruptive technologies and new trends on the financial market, many

international journals and scientific literature were used in order to assimilate the broad

outline of the topic which has been elaborated on in the last several years. “A Reflective

Review of Disruptive Innovation Theory” (2010) by Dan Yu and Chang Chief Hang

simplifies the concept behind disruptive technologies. Additionally, the authors evolved

the predictive use of it in the future, which was useful for the foresight study of this

dissertation and subsequently to come to conclusions regarding the outlook of the future

in the financial markets. Furthermore, concerning intermediaries which perform a

significant role in finances worldwide, “Emergence of Financial Intermediaries in

Electronic Markets: The Case of Online P2P Lending” (2014) by Sven Berger was

Page 22: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

22

uplifting in the analysis of the role of intermediaries in online markets. The key takeaway

of this business research is that online lending marketplaces will replace banks in the

upcoming future.

Additionally, “The Lean Startup” (2011) by Eric Ries and “From Zero to One” (2014) by

Peter Thiel were inspiring in order to profoundly comprehend how small technologies

work and how they perceive the market they operate in. Both of the authors have been

online entrepreneurs for many years and therefore the topic has been approached primarily

based on their experiences and own observations and theories.

However, the main contribution to this research was online articles, reports and blog posts

which are up to date and give truly in-depth industry knowledge which touches the subject

of increasing importance of fintech startups in regards to banks. Therefore, to analyze the

role of financial technology startups in today’s financial world, online sources have been

the most helpful.

Page 23: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

23

Chapter III. Methodology

The overarching purpose of this study is to discover how disruptive technologies

influence the current banking model and how they are posing threats to specific areas.

The research mainly aims to explore and discuss the financial technology revolution and

to answer the following questions:

• In what way are disruptive technologies influencing the banking system?

• Will the fintech startups make banks obsolete?

• What bank activities are under the greatest threat from startups and why?

The thesis focuses on 3 main banking activities.

1) Foreign exchange

2) Payments

3) Lending

Each of these is elaborated in a separate chapter. Firstly, traditional banking performance

is elaborated, subsequently the fintech disruption is analyzed and in the end interviews

with corresponding entrepreneurs are analyzed.

An interpretive research methodology was used for this study, which means that it is

based on observations, explorations and field work. Financial startups are the main focus

of interest in this study. How are they dealing with the current industry and markets?

What kind of problems and opportunities do they encounter? Due to limited traditional

literature sources, mainly online reports, news and blog posts have been used to discover

this topic more profoundly. This paper also bears feature of the foresight study, since it

is looking at how disruptive technologies can help design the financial future.

To answer all the questions mentioned above, different methods have been used. First

and foremost, three in-depth, partially structured interviews have been conducted.

1) Radoslav Albrecht, CEO & founder of Bitbond – on payment system and lending,

digital banking and fintech industry

2) Sebastian Diemer – former CEO & co-founder of Kreditech, on payday loans,

digital banking and fintech industry

Page 24: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

24

3) Michał Czekalski – CEO & co-founder of Currency One, on foreign exchange,

digital banking and fintech industry

The interviews were used to obtain data about different point of views from the people

who are in touch with this industry on a daily basis. It aids to comprehend how they do

perceive this revolution and which direction it is heading towards.

Moreover, to approach the research better, a multitude of quantitative data has been

analyzed. This data has been gathered from different statistical websites, blog posts,

information news and directly from the websites of selected startups.

Page 25: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

25

Chapter IV. Field of possible disruption no. 1 – Foreign

exchange The foreign exchange market is a general term for a global currency market which is

usually denoted to “Forex” or “FX”. It is the largest financial market, renowned by its

high liquidity and dynamics. The global foreign exchange market volume reached $ 5.5

trillion USD per day in 2014. Moreover, “Aite Group estimates FX volumes to near $8

trillion a day in 2019.” (Finance Magnets, 2016)

Illustration 1: FX volume trading per day

source: Daily FX, 2014

Those numbers point out a clear opportunity for all the FX players. However, who is

creating FX nowadays? The participants of the market can be divided into:

1) interbank market - covers foreign exchange transactions concluded between

central banks, commercial banks and financial institutions.

2) retail market - covers transactions by diminutive speculators and investors. The

transactions are carried out through brokers in the Forex market who act as

mediators between the retail market and the interbank. The participants of the

retail market are Hedge Funds, corporations and individual players.

According to a survey conducted by Greenwich Associates (2015), there are only 5 main

actors on the global FX market – all of them are banks. Citi, Deutsche Bank, UBS,

Page 26: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

26

Barclays and J.P. Morgan together capture 50.9% of global top-tier customer trading

volume.

Dealer Market Share Statistical Rank Citi 11.7 % 1T Deutsche Bank 11.6 % 1T UBS 10.2 % 3T Barclays 10.0 % 3T J.P. Morgan 7.4 % 5

Table 1: Main actors on the global FX market

Source: Greenwich Associates, 2015

“In the current environment, a less concentrated FX market might actually be welcomed

by some of the world’s biggest FX dealers. These banks have been under intense

regulatory pressure, first from the fallout of the financial crisis and more recently from

the FX rate-rigging scandal”. (Greenwich Associates, 2015)

However, people nowadays are complaining more and more about pricing of the banks

and the transparency. It makes a huge opportunity for small financial technology

companies which are entering the global FX market at many levels. The topic of this

chapter will mainly be focused on money transfers/remittances and on bureaux de

change/currency exchange. These companies are growing at a fast pace due to selling

currencies and providing the same service cheaper than most banks.

According to Michal Czekalski (CEO, Currency One), the trend is clearly

disadvantageous for banks. At a slow pace, of few percent per annum, banks are

constantly losing its FX customers for the benefit of independent providers. These

providers are fintech companies.

Page 27: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

27

3.1. Remittances

Figure 9: Global Cross-Border Remittance Volume

Source: Business Insider, 2015

Remittances are primarily money transfers sent by a foreign worker to relatives back to

their home country. It is an enormous global industry that is also being disrupted by

fintech players. Why? Because, according to the World Bank, more than $580 billion was

remitted globally in 2014, and moreover, the number is supposed to increase to more than

$600 billion in 2016. The compounded annual growth rate is estimated at 3.75%, which

evidently means that the international market is expanding. That increasing trend, creates

a lot of opportunities and encourages financial technology startups to enter the market to

become significant players. The first newcomers are already emerging and leveraging

online platforms to compete with financial institutions on scale and fees.

Page 28: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

28

Figure 10: Top 10 Remittance-Sending Countries

Source: World Bank, 2014

It is easy to notice, that the United States is the top country in terms of sending funds.

People from the US sent around 22% of global remittance volume in 2014. On the other

hand, for example India along with China, received together 23% of this volume (Business

Insider, 2015). In the matter of continents, it is Asia, as the biggest beneficiary in the

remittance market.

What about remittance players? Presently, as almost in every financial sector, banks

actually still dominate the remittance market. Nevertheless, money-transfer operators

(MTOs), for instance Western Union and MoneyGram, take about half of the market

share.

The appearance of new fintech players along with MTOs has already caused a slight

decrease in costs of sending the funds. According to the World Bank, “the average global

cost of sending remittances fell to 7.37% as of December 2015, from 7.52% in the

previous quarter”. (World Bank, 2015). Moreover, “it’s possible to send money for the

average cost of 10% or less in 80% of the world’s country corridors. For comparison, six

years ago, only 50% of the corridors had the cost of 10% or less.” (Let’s Talk Payments,

Page 29: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

29

2016). As mentioned before, those number are caused by the threat of new, young market

players.

Regarding fees, let’s take an example of sending $200 from Germany to China.

Source: Remittance Prices Worldwide, 2016

The table above, signifies that the cheapest choice is provided, surprisingly, by an online

Postbank service. The remittance cost is barely $2. However, the duration takes from 3

to 5 days which makes it fairly undesirable. Taking into account fintech players, Azimo

and WorldRemit provide the cheapest options and the funds can be delivered within 24

hours. WesternUnion and MoneyGram, the mature players, are also prudent possibilities

and take less than 1 hour to deliver money. As it is clearly noticeable, German banks,

such as Commerzbank AG or Deutsche Bank are not a satisfying preference anymore.

The remittance takes 6 days or more and the cost is genuinely discouraging. The bank

average cost of transferring $200 is nearly $50, whereas the same transfer cost by using

MTOs is on average less than $20.

Firm Availability Fee

(USD)

Exchange

Rate

Margin (%)

Total Cost

Percent

(%)

Total Cost

(USD) Transfer Speed

Azimo online $4,27 3,59% 5,73% $11,46 next day

WorldRemit online $8,56 1,58% 5,86% $11,71 next day

WesternUnion online $9,86 1,92% 6,85% $13,70 less than 1 hour

WesternUnion at branch $17,14 1,84% 10,41% $20,81 less than 1 hour

MoneyGram at branch $25,71 0,00% 12,86% $25,71 less than 1 hour

Commerzbank

AG at branch $41,43 1,29% 22,01% $44,01 6 days or more

Postbank online $2,14 0,00% 1,07% $2,14 3-5 days

Postbank at branch $12,14 0,00% 6,07% $12,14 3-5 days

Deutsche Bank online $50,00 0,00% 25,00% $50,00 6 days or more

Deutsche Bank at branch $54,29 0,00% 27,14% $54,29 6 days or more

Table 2: The cost of sending remittances

Page 30: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

30

Figure 11: Remittance providers in terms of Market Capitalization or Last Round Valuation

source: own elaboration

The chart shows the market capitalization or last round valuation of main actors of the

remittance market worldwide. The numbers are enormous. Western Union, which went

public in 2006 has reached a valuation of nearly $9.5 billion. The younger startups, such

as TransferWise, Xoom or WorldRemit create together the value of almost $2.5 billion.

According to TransferWise, the monthly turnover is around 200 million Euro and the total

revenue of the company in 2015 was 9 million Euro.

However, it is important to highlight, that there is a fine line between fintech and non-

fintech players. Everything depends on the companies, how they define themselves.

Nevertheless, all of those companies and non-banks organizations which are threating

banks at a large scale.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Western Union

TransferWise Xoom WorldRemit MoneyGram Azimo

Mar

ket C

ap o

r Las

t Rou

nd V

alua

tion

($B

)

Page 31: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

31

Illustration 2: Estimated costs of transferring money

source: World Bank, 2015

The bottom line is that online products are the cheapest ways to send money. It has

already been proven above in this chapter. TransferWise, WorldRemit, Xoom and Azimo

are most promising startups in this industry. The opportunity is huge – roughly $0.6

trillion market which is still growing. Will it make bank remittances obsolete in the next

10 years? There is no doubt that quick and much cheaper online remittances will become

more popular. It is alluring, how the high street money transfer operators, such as banks,

will take up this challenge.

3.2. Bureau de change / currency exchange

Bureau de change or simply currency exchange is a place where people can exchange one

currency for another. Although, while observing the rate of growth of sales services, it is

easy to notice bringing the business models online. Hence, as mentioned already few

times, the internet provides numerous cheaper possibilities to acquire customers.

However, every customer needs to be convinced to use an online service as well.

Page 32: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

32

Therefore, I would like to cite a few advantages arising out of online currency exchange:

(NF - Nowoczesna Firma, 2016) 1) Convenience – making a transaction without leaving your desk makes it more

easy than going to a stationary bank branch. Simple as it is.

2) Favorable conditions of exchange – equals also to saving.

3) Very competitive, narrow spreads.

4) Security – the same regulations apply to startups as to banks.

5) Internet reach - this topic has already been discussed ad nauseam. No need for

explaining.

In terms of online currency exchange market, Poland is a very good example to focus on.

Why Poland? Poland’s market in terms of online currency exchange is huge. According

to Currency One (the biggest company of Polish online currency exchange sector), 20%

of money which was exchanged in Poland’s stationary currency exchange places is

already taking place online. The turnovers of online currency exchange startups in 2016,

are expected to continuously grow and to increase by roughly 20% in comparison to 2015.

Therefore, the whole online currency exchange sector is expected to be worth 38 billion

zł. (approx. 9 billion euro). Year by year, the turnovers are increasing. The newcomers

are still entering the market; however, the top of the industry is already too strong to be

threatened. Currently, there are around 50 online bureau de change in Poland.

Nevertheless, the online currency exchange market is really competitive. Barriers to entry

are very low, and the concept of high commissions of billions of turnovers is very

appealing. Still, “if there is money to be made, new firms will enter the market, increase

supply, drive prices down, and thereby eliminate the profits that attracted them in the first

place” (Thiel, 2014). This is how a perfect competition works. However, in the end, “all

failed companies are the same: they failed to escape competition.” (Thiel, 2014).

Regarding online currency exchange in Poland, the competition is very often too strong

to survive, and operating costs too small to fold. The other factor is that most of them are

not scalable.

The numbers speak for themselves. In 2010, the first online currency exchange platforms

arose in Poland, and the turnovers already reached almost 1bn zł. The following year, it

significantly increased to more than 3 billion zł. Year by year the number of transactions

Page 33: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

33

have been constantly growing at a very rapid pace. “In 2014 it was estimated that the

Polish online FX platforms exchanged currency worth a total of ca. PLN 25bn,

approximately 21bn of which can be attributed to non-bank platforms.” (Currency One,

2015). (PLN 25bn is equal roughly to EUR 6bn)

Figure 12: Value of currency exchanged with the use of FX platforms 2010-2014 [PLN bn]

Source: Currency One, 2015

However, why the market is growing so fast and why is it expected to expand even more?

This sectors’ future stability and opportunity is supported by the postponed introduction

of the Euro as an official currency in Poland. It forces Polish people to exchange much

more, than other, more developed countries, like Germany. Moreover, spreads are one of

the most important deciding factors. The difference between the sales price and the

purchase price of a currency. The lower it is; the transaction is more favorable for us.

Regarding spreads, banks earn a lot of money on conversions, using high, individual

margins. Thus, it creates a good opportunity to non-banks to enter the market and try to

narrow the spreads. The next factor, which is driving the market is Polish labor migration.

Since Poland entered European Union (2004), more than 2 million Polish people left the

country for the purpose of employment, which makes 10% of people professionally active

in the whole country. It also creates more opportunities to FX players. The other factors

are increasing balance of trade or cross-border SME activity in Poland.

REACTION OF POLISH BANKS

Due to rapidly growing online currency exchange market, large Polish banks are trying

to defend themselves against losing its customers and offering similar, convenient

exchange currency services. Their profits are decreasing and they are constantly looking

Page 34: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

34

for an appropriate way to recover the eroded client base. Few examples will be introduced

and briefly explained below.

1) Bank Zachodni WBK – a Polish universal bank has introduced a new online

service which permits customers to perform transactions at attractive exchange

rates. Additionally, they have conducted a dynamic operation orientated on churn

customers.

2) Alior Bank has created its own online bureau de change – the exchange rates are

good, however, they do not hide, that a cheap FX service is a good opportunity to

acquire new banking clients – both individual and corporate.

3) mBank has followed Alior’s path and opened a new online exchange currency

called mKantor

4) Raiffeisen Bank – the have presented a new online exchange currency but based

on an external company – Rkantor.com. In terms of banks, the decision seems to

be reasonable, because it is a good opportunity to recoup clients to a non-bank

platform.

3.3. Interview with a practitioner – Forex entrepreneur

Michał Czekalski is a co-founder of Currency One – the biggest player on Polish online

currency exchange market. The company’s turnovers in 2015 reached 13 bn. zł (approx.

3 bn. Euro). One of their core platforms is Walutomat, which was created in 2009. It is

the first Polish website which enabled currency exchange using a peer-to-peer

marketplace model. The users exchange currencies with one another and manually agree

on a rate they want to conduct their transaction with. Therefore, the company does not

earn any money on spreads. The source of profits is mainly a diminutive fee, which is

deducted from the exchanged amount, after a transaction is performed. The commission

ranges from 0.06% to 0.2%. As of January 2016, the customers of Walutomat exchanged

a sum of 25bn zł within the website. The number of clients have significantly increased

in 2015 by 34% in comparison to 2014. The same applies to the turnovers, which

increased from 6.2bn zł in 2014 to 8.4bn zł in 2015. I had the pleasure of interviewing

Michal, asking about the financial sector and the FX sector.

Page 35: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

35

Illustration 3: Key statistics of Walutomat

Source: Walutomat, 2016

Michał believes that lending fintechs pose the biggest threat to banks, and lending is the

banking activity which can be eaten up really fast, primarily due to lower pricing of online

companies as a predominant aspect. Furthermore, he anticipates peer-to-peer models as a

financial game changer, both in foreign exchange and lending. According to Czekalski, a

key trend within the FX market is that the companies become multinational and customers

gain more trust in the platforms. He also signifies cheaper transfers with friendly user

experiences and safety promises as a main value proposition provided to customers by

FX startups. “That was a blue ocean for currency exchange. Prices on the market were

way too high and people needed that. This sector is huge so it grew up fast.” (Czekalski,

2016)

Regarding the financial market and startup activities, he thinks that some fintech actors

will end up becoming banks, mostly throughout banks’ acquisitions. However, currently,

the trend is clearly harmful for banks. “Banks are afraid of new entrants, however when

they start fighting back, the cost of customer acquisition (CAC) will go up and bank prices

will have to be lower so they will still dominate but with lower margins.” (Czekalski,

2016). They are starting to notice competition, but still do not know how to react to the

Page 36: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

36

situation. Therefore, at a slow pace, of a few percent per annum, traditional services are

constantly losing their FX customers because of the benefits from independent, fintech

providers. “The main factor is price. Other than that, I would say also hatred towards

banks, faster transfers and usability.” (Czekalski, 2016). Michal also admits that the

financial market is so differential, that it is very difficult to indicate which fintech area

will register the most growth over the next 5-10 years.

Page 37: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

37

Chapter V. Field of possible disruption no. 2 – Payments

system

4.1. Traditional payment methods “A modern market economy depends on an effective and efficient payment system”

(Summers, 1994). Therefore, a payment system is a core component of the financial

system. Therefore, it is clear that banks around the globe need to respond to the challenge

posed by emerging fintech players in terms of the payments market as well. The report

on global payments conducted by McKinsey, shows that in 2014, payment revenues

represented 40% of shares of total banking. Therefore, as presented in the first chapter,

payments are the sector where banks expect start-ups to have the highest impact on

banking. Why? Because the essence of the payment system is efficient and quickly

functioning operational facilities, which fintech players can provide. Since the volume of

payment transactions is enormous, computerized systems using disruptive technologies

are required.

Payments are crucial sources of income regarding banks. The global payment industry

reached revenues of $1.7 trillion in 2014, according to McKinsey. Moreover, the

company expects annual global payments revenues to increase at a fixed rate of 6% within

the next 5 years, surpassing $2 trillion by 2020 (see: Figure 13). Asia & Pacific is

constantly a major player on the market, adding about $70 billion in payment revenues

which represents about 55% of the worldwide revenue growth.

Page 38: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

38

Figure 13: Payments revenue 2009-2019

Source: McKinsey, 2015

The traditional payment instruments include cash, checks, credit cards, debit cards and

wire transfers. Figure 14. shows the shares of transactions by payment method.

Nowadays, cash is still a dominant and the most convenient method of payment, followed

by debit cards, credit cards and checks (cashless methods).

Page 39: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

39

Figure 14: Shares of transactions by payment instrument

Source: Financial Brand, 2015

CASH

The most conventional and direct means of transferring money is cash. It is “legal tender

that can be used to exchange goods, debt or services”. (Investopedia, 2016). Cash money

refers to the physical form of a currency, thus to coins and banknotes, which are emitted

either by the central bank or government bodies. Cash cannot be exchanged in real time,

however at the moment it still dominates all forms of payments. (see: Figure 14). In

comparison to other methods of payments, consumers choose cash for the following

reasons: (Financial Brand, 2014)

“-cash plays a dominant role for small-value transactions,

- cash is the leading payment instrument for specific types of purchases,

- cash is the key alternative when other options are not available,

- cash is the leading payment alternative for Gen Y,

- cash is a primary payment option for lower income segments,

- cash cannot be hacked.”

CHECK

A debit instrument in the form of written, unconditional order of payment. For years,

checks have been the most commonly used cashless payment method. Checks can be

drawn to be paid a specified sum on demand to a certain individual or company. A check

Page 40: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

40

clearance is the process of moving money from one account to another. As checks take

the physical form of documents and it takes some time to clear, those paying by check

enjoy the benefit of floats. However, just like cash, checks cannot be exchanged in real

time.

BANK CARDS

Bank cards enable funds withdrawal and purchases. The main types of cards include:

a) credit card – the standard for making payments. Credit cards enable purchases with an

option to borrow funds. Therefore, it indicates that the card holder has been granted a line

of credit. (Summers, 1994). They are used typically for short-term financing and

additionally the issuer collects a percentage of the transaction when the clients use the

card. Additionally, interest is charged when the customer doesn’t pay the full balance on

the due date.

b) debit card – enables purchases by deducting funds directly from a consumer’s current

checking account. It eases cash withdrawals with ATM’s, shopping in stores or shopping

on the internet.

WIRE TRANSFER

Usually an electronic transfer of funds from one person to another. We can also consider

wire transfers as remittances.

Over the last few years, the development of payment technology has accelerated without

any doubts. Non-traditional payment providers entering the payment industry that take

advantage of new technologies, are aiming to disrupt traditional services. Furthermore,

the boundaries between those providers and the product lines are blurring. There are

plenty of enterprises circling around electronic payments. Technology companies (like

Facebook, Amazon), mobile carriers, OEM’s or even merchants who fundamentally see

digital and mobile payments as a redefinition of commerce. All of them create new value

propositions to use mobile and software, to get closer to their customers.

The fast-moving change has aroused fear among banks, because the virtual entrants

evolve rapidly and continue to restructure how people live. The variety of possibilities

Page 41: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

41

nowadays is truly broad and diverse. However, the success will mainly depend on

forming shifts in consumer and merchant behavior. (L.E.K, 2015)

Figure 15: Expected impact of startups on payments

Source: EFMA, 2015

Within the payment sector, the main sections, where banks expect the major threats from

non-bank players are mobile P2P payments, mobile wallets and remittances. The last

section has already been covered as a part of FX. However, later in this chapter the

payments breakdown will be focused mainly on P2P mobile payments, as well as a

Bitcoin and Blockchain as a new mean of transferring value.

According to L.E.K Consulting, there are 5 main trends driving opportunities for

payments revolution nowadays:

1) THE MOVE AWAY FROM CASH – the gradually progressing shift of

electronic payments adoption. Both in terms of customers, as well as of

merchants. There is a significant movement towards a “post-cash” economy.

According to John Cryan from Deutsche Bank, within the next 10 years, cash

will disappear, because there is no need for it and moreover it is “terribly

inefficient and expensive”.

2) INCREASE IN “CONSUMER-NOT-PRESENT” TRANSACTIONS – the

constant growth of mobile devices usage is shaping greater volumes of

consumer-not-present virtual transactions for commerce.

Page 42: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

42

3) DEMAND FOR MULI-CHANNEL SOLUTIONS – “Merchants are

increasingly sophisticated about payments and require multichannel solutions

that provide seamless online check-outs.” (L.E.K, 2015)

4) GROWING CROSS-BORDER COMMERCE -– the growth in cross-border

transactions due to increase flow of people and international trade.

5) DISRUPTION OF EXISTING BUSINESS MODELS – new technologies and

in general the rising number of players disrupting traditional financial

services.

Page 43: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

43

Figure 16: Landscape of the payment system

source: Wonglimpiyarat, 2015

Page 44: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

44

After all, what is the main aim of all the electronic payment providers? First and foremost,

providing the best customer experience using new technologies. “By integrating

payments into commerce, nonbank attackers have created more seamless, personalized

and interactive experiences, contributing to increased conversion rates” (McKinsey, 2015).

Since customer expectations are changing rapidly, newcomers need to adjust to them as

well. Thus, all of those 5 trends mentioned above are equally important. Speed, multi-

channel accessibility, efficiency and convenience – these are the main important factors

new entrants are focusing on, in order to take the payment sector to the next level. (BNY

Mellon, 2015)

4.2. Established Internet based payment methods

4.2.1 PayPal

Nowadays, PayPal is the biggest and the most famous alternative online payment

provider. However, the initial idea of the co-founders was to create a new digital currency

and replace the US dollar. Their first product was called PalmPilot, but unfortunately the

product market fit had not been achieved and later on it was announced as one of the 10

worst business ideas of 1999. Nevertheless, the company has been constantly developing

and coming up with new concepts. An e-mail payment product was the next innovation

which allowed customers to transfer funds in the easiest way at that time. However, it

was still tough to attract the attention of users. As a solution, the company had applied an

affiliate marketing program which boosted the PayPal’s customers acquisition and started

off an exponential growth rate. In 2000, in the fear of the dot-com crash, PayPal merged

with Elon Musk’s X.com. It was a breakthrough moment of the company’s history

because it allowed PayPal to endure the bubble and subsequently build a company which

went public in 2002 and, as of March 2016, was valued at almost $47 billon.

Today, the company constantly grows at roughly 15% annually. Apparently, as believed

by Peter Thiel, most of PayPal’s value will come from 2020 and beyond. According to

PayPal, as of December, 31 2015, the business had 179 million active customer accounts

which included 13 million merchants, and in the previous year the company

processed $282 billion worth of total payment volume. The main revenue stream of the

Page 45: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

45

company comes from charging fees for providing transaction processing as well as other

payment-related services.

4.2.2. Peer-to-peer mobile payments

According to Business Insider, the volume of peer-to-peer (P2P) payments, which allows

people to transfer money to one another instantly, is over $1 trillion globally. Nowadays,

the market has a huge variety of providers. Ranging from fintech startups to even huge

established non-payment operators, such as Facebook, Apple or even Snapchat. All of

them, see a strong opportunity in the market and evidently are seeking a new stream of

revenues. Most likely, constantly increasing competition will reduce margins on domestic

transactions in upcoming years, however the volume growth in electronic payments,

including P2P and mobile, will definitely increase.

The dynamic development of P2P payments system is the outcome of low cost fund

transfers and no additional requirements on the side of the payer or recipient (for example

a bank account or credit cards is not required). Furthermore, the rapid development of

mobile usage, both in terms of technology and user base, made it possible to use the

smartphone as a tool for making payments. Thus, a mobile P2P payment, is a transfer of

funds between mobile devices

According to Statista, as of 2015, worldwide mobile phone internet user penetration was

52.7%, which means that the number of phone users surpassed 4.4 billion. In 2017,

numbers imply that more than 63.4% of mobile phone users will access online content

through their devices. It means, that the demand for P2P mobile services will be growing

probably at the same pace as mobile internet penetration. So far, the evolution of the

internet has gradually migrated consumers to electronic P2P mechanisms for the last

several years.

On the other hand, the evolution of P2P payments or even more general, electronic

payments system, is based on demand and supply. On the demand side, customers always

want to have control and monitor different payments that they conduct. Presently, this is

supported with technological advancements, which belongs to the supply side. As

consumers worldwide are already familiar with the benefits of using technology, their

Page 46: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

46

expectations are big. Especially in emerging markets, where a lack of access to traditional

payment instruments among other financial services availability, is evidently visible,

there is a massive potential for P2P mobile payments. However, the unbanked population

will be elaborated more in the next chapter.

Moreover, in terms of P2P mobile payments, banks are competing not only with fintech

entrants, but also with the world’s most valuable companies: (McKinsey, 2015)

1) Facebook entered the sector by offering the users free peer-to-peer payments

via its Messenger app.

2) Snapchat launched Snapcash, which basically works the same way as feature

introduced by Facebook

3) Samsung unveiled Samsung Pay

4) Apple introduced Apple Pay

5) Google offered Android Pay

The significant advantage of these companies, even over strictly financial companies, is

the established customer base and also other revenue streams beyond payments. It allows

them to offer the service either for free or for prices significantly below-market.

(McKinsey, 2015). Hence, “payments are attractive to these players because they offer

control over the customer purchase experience and ownership of a rich seam of

transactional data – from which the new entrants have a proven capability to use new

technology and analytics to extract value.” (Deloitte, 2014).

4.3. Virtual currencies

„I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large [Bitcoin] transaction volume

or no volume.” (Satoshi Nakamoto)

According to the European Central Bank, a virtual currency is "a type of

unregulated, digital money, which is issued and usually controlled by its developers, and

used and accepted among the members of a specific virtual community.” As of March

2016, the current total market value of virtual currencies was roughly $8 billion USD,

whereas, the USD currency in circulation (banknotes and coins) was worth $1.4 trillion.

Therefore, virtual currencies are still a diminutive compartment of total currencies all

Page 47: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

47

around the world. However, they are still in the early stages of development, with a great

perspective future.

The emergence of virtual currencies has been an important development in terms of the

global economy, including financial services. According to Christine Lagard from IMF,

virtual currencies are foremost beneficial for customers. They bring better value, reduce

overheads, provide financial inclusion, provide versatility and reach out to places where

unbanked people live – where technology is beginning to make huge entries.

Still, at the same time, it is important to mention the shortcomings and considerable risks

of virtual currencies. No central control, no central bank, no supervision and no

regulations – these are the main factors leading virtual currencies to become a great

instrument of crime. Illicit transactions, terrorist financing or money laundering are easily

available with the use of cryptocurrencies. However, as believed by Christine Lagard,

this scene is going forward and going to change massively in the near future. There are

already startups like Chainalysis, which “create tools that respect user privacy and prevent

abuse of the financial system.” (Chainalysis, 2016) They provide a software which aids

financial institutions to identify malicious actors in the bitcoin network. It is a necessary

step to eliminate all illicit movements around cryptocurrencies.

Illustration 4: Taxonomy of Virtual Currencies

Source: IMF, 2016

Page 48: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

48

4.3.1. Bitcoin

Nowadays, new electronic currencies provide an alternative to conventional fiat

currencies (declared as money by government regulation or law, legal tender) as a

transmitter of value. Bitcoin - the trendsetter of virtual currencies was launched in 2009

and is the first decentralized digital currency. It is used as a representative example of

cryptocurrencies, since it is so recognizable, Bitcoin has had principal influence on the

development of cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin, which is based on a peer-to-peer structure

enables payments options independent of government control and without the need for a

middleman. Due to the lack of an intermediary, this latest innovation in the payment

industry is becoming extremely disruptive. Furthermore, Bitcoin is an open source

software which means that the source code is accessible for anyone to use, review or

modify.

I would say, that Bitcoin for the world of finance is the same as email is for the traditional

postal service. However, the question arises whether Bitcoin will bring the same

revolution as email has brought. Currently, it is mainly gaining popularity among those

who hope for a cashless society. According to Fisher and Pry (1971), when an innovation

reaches the threshold of about 5% penetration of a potential market, it provides a

fundamental base for forecasting the speed and ultimate penetration achievable. At the

moment, unfortunately the adaption of Bitcoin regarding the market penetration is below

5%. Hence, it is still hard to predict its potential use in the future.

Nevertheless, the Bitcoin market capitalization as of March 2016 was nearly $6.5 billion

USD, which makes it more than 80% of decentralized virtual currencies market value

(CoinMarketCap, 2016). Also, as I type this (8th of March 2016) its value is roughly $411.

However, it fluctuates a lot and hence this is a part of the reason why this currency is not

ready to overtake PayPal, yet. (Coindesk, 2016). At the moment, there are three major uses

of bitcoin:

1) DIGITAL CURRENCY, as a form of online payment - however, currently, it is

not fully prepared to scale to the level of for instance main credit card networks.

Bitcoin payment processing is conducted through a private network of computers.

2) PROTCOL, as a technology – “Bitcoin is a remarkable cryptographic

achievement and the ability to create something that is not duplicable in the digital

Page 49: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

49

world has enormous value”. (Schmidt, 2014). The technology behind Bitcoin can

transfer any digital assets, is not restricted only to money. Hence, it is cheaper and

faster than the alternatives.

3) ASSET, as a digital asset – analogical to gold holding or trading foreign

currencies.

In theory, Bitcoin could serve as money since it satisfies all the official properties of

money. “It is durable, divisible, fungible, easy to transport and impossible to counterfeit.”

(Franco, 2015).

THE BENEFITS OF BITCOIN FOR USERS

According to Jon Matonis, Founding Director at Bitcoin Foundation, major advantages

of Bitcoin are as follows:

- payment freedom - bitcoins are transferred directly from person to person via internet

without a third party at any given time,

- transaction fees are much lower (range from 0.01% to 0.05%)

- unrestricted cross-borders transactions - useable in every country,

- accounts cannot be frozen

- no prerequisites or arbitrary limits

- fixed supply of $21 million makes Bitcoin deflationary

Moreover, he believes that key benefits of adopting Bitcoin as a method of payment for

merchants are:

- extending acceptance to countries not reached by Visa, MasterCard, PayPal

- providing a payment method for the unbanked people

- no disallowed merchant categories codes (MCCs)

- not subject to payments embargo

- eliminating chargeback and fraud risk

- processing fees approaching zero

- near immediacy of settlement

Page 50: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

50

THE RISKS AND DISADVATAGES OF BITCOIN FOR USERS

Advantages of Bitcoin have already been discussed, but what about the downsides of this

cryptocurrency?

1) LACK OF AWARNESS AND LIMTED ACCEPTANCE

Many people are still unaware of cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin. Every day, more and more

merchants are beginning to accept bitcoins (see: Figure 17), because they want to

contribute to the development of the currency and also want the benefit of doing so.

However, the list remains fairly short compared to physical currency and must continue

to grow in order to benefit from network effects.

Figure 17: Bitcoin acceptance among merchants

Source. Coindesk, 2016

2) VOLATILITY AND RISK

The volatility of Bitcoin is mainly due to the fact of limited bitcoin supply and the

increasing interest every day. Moreover, regulatory uncertainty, relatively low market

capitalization, low liquidity or limited market access contribute to the volatility even

more. The total value of bitcoins in circulation (nearly $15,300,000 as of March 2016)

Page 51: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

51

and the number of businesses using Bitcoin is still very small compared to what it could

be. Nevertheless, the instability of the currency is anticipated to decrease as time goes on

and the markets and technologies become more mature.

3) CURRENT DEVELOPMENT

Bitcoin software is still in its beta stage with many of it incomplete and are still in

development. Developing new tools, features and services aiming to make Bitcoin safer

and more accessible to the masses. Furthermore, speculation of the currency value could

affect overall financial stability.

4) WELL-SUITED FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY

Since the currency is not issued or controlled by the government, legality concerns arise.

“By largely eliminating intermediaries, bitcoin allows individuals to conduct transactions

without being subject to anti-money laundering controls, which makes it an attractive

currency to criminals — particularly those who prey on the weak.” (Fagan, 2013).

BITCOIN AS AN ASSET

Figure 18: Bitcoin Price Index

Source: Coindesk, 2016

Figure 18. shows the Bitcoin price index since its very first day on the market. It is clearly

noticeable that it is not stable yet, and the fluctuations are really high. The initial price of

Page 52: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

52

the currency was basically 0 in 2009. There were no exchanges or market. The first users

were mainly Bitcoin enthusiasts sending coins for very low or even no value. On the other

side, the all-time high price of Bitcoin was reached in the end of 2013. At this time, we

could have bought 1 BTC for almost $1125.

The bottom line is that Bitcoin is definitely a hot topic in the payments and financial

industry. The transaction fees are much lower than in terms of traditional payment

instruments. It can change the future of banking mainly in developing countries, with

internet access but with an undeveloped banking infrastructure. (Wonglimpiyarat, 2015).

The main concerns about this cryptocurrency are still its illicit possibilities and security

infrastructure. These two factors must be overcome in order to achieve a widespread

adoption of Bitcoin, create a real revolution in the area of payment industry and

forethought, become mainstream.

4.3.2. Blockchain technology – a decentralized ledger

“A Blockchain is a public and distributed ledger of all bitcoin transactions that have ever

been executed.” (Hansen, 2016). This is the technology that empowers and assists

cryptocurrencies and is based on cryptography, peer-to-peer networking and game theory.

It is also a method to secure the Bitcoin database. Nowadays the technology is used by

an increasing number of companies and even banks, and is expected to fundamentally

change the financial industry in the upcoming years, since all transactions using

Blockchain could be authorized and conducted using any fiat currency.

Whereas Bitcoin is a relatively new topic, Blockchain has its beginnings dating back to

the 1990’s. However, Bitcoin was the first phenomenon which started off using this great

potential of blockchain technology. Surprisingly, blockchain technology provides a

useful and interesting regulatory analysis tool. Hence a public key can be linked to a

certain individual, it makes possible to follow particular transactions and gain more

visibility about them. It retains a secure list of all the transactions.

The blockchain key features are the absence of a central authority for transaction

authentication and double-entry book keeping. This is executed by a peer-to-peer

Page 53: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

53

network throughout a consensus process. “A blockchain system is composed by two types

of entities:” (UniCredit, 2016)

• A peer-to-peer network of nodes – used to validate and authorize transactions

and to take part in the consensus process.

• Participants – execute transactions protected by means of cryptographic

signatures.

In term of payments, blockchain platforms could be either used as a form of decentralized

interaction or as a service for the customers. For instance, according to The Wall Street

Journal, JPMorgan has already been testing blockchain technology on its 2,200 clients.

Reportedly, the trial is a prelude to use the technology on a large scale. Moreover,

“Blockchain is ready to take center stage”, says a report by the banking giant Goldman

Sachs, which is self-explanatory that also banks see the opportunity to seize and catch up

with fintech players. In February 2016, UniCredit bank published a white paper that

investigates how banks could include blockchain-based services.

Possible solutions based on blockchain technology: (UniCredit, 2016)

• Blockchain as ledger of payments between banks from the same group. In this

situation, every bank is a private blockchain network contributor and is able to

execute transactions and participate in consensus. This solution aids to avoid

intermediaries and in consequence to eliminate related fees. The transaction itself

is performed in near-real time due to peer-to-peer solutions.

Illustration 5: Decentralized payment architecture

Source: UniCredit, 2016

• Blockchain as a ledger of payments between banks either from different groups

or cross border payment system. The main benefit is associated with the absence

of correspondent banks and consequently reducing capital requirements related to

Page 54: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

54

middlemen. The constraint in this solution to become attractive is the participation

of a large number of banks.

Illustration 6: Interbank payments scheme with single reserve

Source: UniCredit, 2016

The breakthrough technology behind Bitcoin is a new kind of database and has a massive

potential to entirely reshape the current fundamentals of the financial industry. I believe

that the key advantages of blockchain technology is the elimination of middlemen and

the removal of asking for permission. Within the adaptation of the technology by the

global financial markets, the scope of decentralized technologies will increase

significantly. It is a win-win situation, since banks’ and financial institutions’ operating

costs will drop significantly, and consequently, the efficiency and abilities will increase.

On the other hand, for customers it means instant transfers, the ability to control their

resources and significant commission cost reduction. These movements will have a

positive impact on the global economy hence the number of transactions will increase, so

the market will be more liquid.

4.4. Interview with a practitioner – Bitcoin entrepreneur

Radoslav Albrecht is a founder and CEO of Bitbond – a global peer-to-peer lending

platform for small business loans, based on Bitcoin technology. The company was

founded in 2013 and its mission is to make cross-border borrowing and lending

accessible. The key feature of the marketplace is that with the help of digital currency,

users do not need a bank account in order to either borrow funds or invest in the loans. I

Page 55: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

55

had the pleasure to interview Radoslav and to gain fascinating insights about fintech

market and payments sector.

According to Albrecht, there are 3 main areas where startups pose the greatest threat to

the financial market and are able the take away the highest level of market share from

banks. These are:

a) Lending – the main advantages of fintech lending startups are mainly the speed

and cost effectiveness. Albrecht also anticipates lending as the sector with the

most growth in the next 5-10 years.

b) Asset management – banks charge fees that are too high asset management and

therefore new fintech entrants have automated the process and cut down heavily

on the fees which drew the customer’s attention.

c) Payments – similarly as in those other areas, disruptors or even mature companies

like PayPal make the payment process faster and more cost effective. Payments

in the banking sector is always a long process and the conventional financial

institutions charge exorbitant fees.

The CEO of Bitbond believes that fintech disruptors will not make the banks fully

obsolete however a lot of traditional players are losing customer relationships nowadays,

which is ultimately driving down their margins. “Likely, for the next decade, there will

still be banks in the background running core banking processes, but I think they will be

losing the customer relationship which ultimately will drive down their margins.”

(Albrecht, 2016). He thinks that there are many startups worldwide that still use banks in

the background processes and it will remain like this for the next couple of years. Yet,

fintech startups are mainly focused usually on customer acquisition and providing a good

user interface to them. Nevertheless, it is likely that in 10-20 years, banks will not be

needed anymore. Radoslav emphasizes that the main drivers that convince customers to

switch to fintechs are the convenience, the speed and the lower costs. “I really think that

the convenience, the speed and the lower costs are the main reasons why customers are

switching to fintechs. Startups are much quicker in making decisions and they can also

react much quicker to customer demand.” (Albrecht, 2016).

Radoslav also thinks that at the present moment banks do not fear fintechs, however, they

are aware of them and do keep an extremely close eye on the market. Comparing to banks,

Page 56: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

56

online players have still too small of market share to trigger an alarm among banks. As

believed by Albrecht, small financial technology companies can compete only in specific

types of services and that is the reason banks are still able to outdistance them. “In my

opinion when you look at a universal bank which provides all the services that a typical

commercial bank would provide, then I think it is relatively clear that we observe the

fintech startups always just picking one specific service and provide just that one service.”

(Albrecht, 2016). However, once banks start to get worried, they might not be fast enough

to catch up to fintechs due to their large legacy system.

Regarding the payments sector, he thinks that there are already a few companies with a

large and established customer base, like PayPal, TransferWise or Azimo which are

shaping the online payment market today. According to Albrecht, these companies will

continue to grow and capture the majority of market share. “I do see a lot of growth in

the payments sector, but I think in the next 10 years it will be more on the corporate sector

than in the consumer sector, because in the consumer sector there are already solutions

like PayPal and comparable services”. Albrecht, 2016). The questionable issue regarding

this area is mobile payments because currently it is more of a problem of merchants, not

payment providers. Therefore, one of the reasons why mobile payments have not really

gained traction yet is because of the fact that it requires additional investments and

infrastructure on the point of sale. He also believes that a completely cashless society is

a possible concept; however, it is not going to happen in the next 10-20 years. Since, the

share of all payment transactions conducted in cash is still 40% worldwide, it is not

possible that it will drop to 0 within 20 years from now. It has a few unique features, for

instance no need for technology, that other methods cannot offer and this is a reason why

cash will be still there in the future. “I think cash has a lot of advantages, for example

there is no need for technology in order to use it. Even though smartphone adoption is

growing rapidly, there will still be a lot of cash.” (Albrecht, 2016).

In terms of Bitcoin and the blockchain technology, Radoslav Albrecht believes that there

are a lot of advantages of the cryptocurrency however it requires consumer to change

their behaviors and approach. “Obviously the advantages of Bitcoin are still there, but it

requires people to change their behavior. There are still not enough people who know

about it and have the willingness to try technologies and services that are based on top of

Bitcoin.” (Albrecht, 2016). He also hopes that Bitcoin will play a huge role in payments

Page 57: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

57

and presented a very interesting idea of 2 scenarios which are very likely to happen in the

future:

1) “The Windows scenario” – in this concept, Bitcoin will become a much more

stable currency with significantly less foreign exchange risk for the users. Its

market capitalization will go up to 60 billion dollars or even more.

2) “The Linux scenario” – Bitcoin will become mostly unnoticed by the users. It will

still be used in order to transfer payments efficiently and quickly, but mainly in

the background, so the consumers will not even notice it. He compared it to the

Linux operating system, since a lot of consumers are using it without being aware

of it.

Page 58: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

58

Chapter VI. Field of possible disruption no. 3 – Lending 5.1. Banks – traditional lenders

“The traditional role of banks has been to take deposits and make loans.” (Hull, 2012). In

terms of lending, banks have remained basically unchanged for centuries. They play a

major role as an intermediary between savers and borrowers. Savers get interest for

making deposits, and loans are made to private individuals and businesses. From the

banks perspective, the business is working very well. In the 2000’s, in the US alone,

consumers paid $1 trillion dollars of interest to banks. (Moldow, 2014). However,

regulatory modifications and new technologies are transforming this traditional lending

area. Since the worldwide scale of bank lending is so enormous, even the reduction of

banking activities by a few percentage points, will create and open a significant market

for fintech startups.

Lending is a very important revenue stream for banks. According to Goldman Sachs, in

2014, banks earned approximately $150 billion from lending activities. Furthermore, it is

estimated that 7% of annual profit from lending, could be under threat from new actors

entering the market within the next 5+ years. Nevertheless, the 2008 financial crisis has

caused lending to drop sharply. The volume of commercial loans has declined from

approximately $200 billion to roughly $165 billion in 2012. However, while the volumes

have declined, at the same time the profits remained the same. Why is that? Massive and

growing interest spreads are the answer. “The difference between the yield banks receive

from money they loan and the rate they pay on money they borrow” (Moldow, 2014).

Figure 19. points out that the spread has skyrocketed over the last years. “Banks are

borrowing treasury bonds at historically low interest rates – as low as 0.5 percent. They

turn around and lend at as much as 10 to 25 percent interest”. It clearly explains why their

profits have not declined.

Page 59: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

59

Figure 19: Bank borrowing costs

Source: Moldow, 2014

By 2025, as believed by Moldow, $1 trillion in loans will be originated globally. This

creates an opportunity for the non-traditional actors. The combination of big data scoring

and new distribution channels allow start-ups to enter traditional lending area. Since

people are not satisfied with the banking lending services and cannot stand such high

interests anymore, lower cost bases than banks and consequently loans at lower interest

rates are the major benefits of these entrants.

Figure 20. points out that the industry generated more than $870 billion in annual

revenues in 2013, of which $420 billion was generated in the consumer lending area, $70

billion in the SME sector and $22 billion in the Pay Day loans sector. This is barely 2%

of the almost $1 trillion lending market that is being captured by online players.

Page 60: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

60

Figure 20: Annual lending revenues in 2013 (US $B)

Source: Moldow, 2014

What factors are driving and leading to a rapid development in non-bank lending?

1) Regulations – conventional lenders continue to be controlled by tighter

regulations, along with increased capital requirements. This provides new entrants

a possibility to provide lending services with less documentation and in a more

convenient, automated way.

2) Technology – big data, new distribution channels like blockchain technology or

bitcoin and new marketing possibilities allow fintech companies to provide the

best customer experience. Since the new players are more technology focused,

than finance focused, they provide better customer satisfaction and convenient

transaction possibilities.

3) Borrowers attitude – nowadays, customers prefer not to go to a bank’s branch.

According to Viacom Media Networks, 71% of Millenials (a generation born

between 1981-2000) would rather go to the dentist than listen to what banks are

saying. It simply means people do not need personal interaction anymore. The

process should be quick to apply and the application should be easy to fill in. Even

if the interest rates might be higher.

Page 61: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

61

5.2. Online lending

5.2.1. Payday loans

“A payday loan is a type of short-term borrowing where an individual borrows a small

amount at a very high rate of interest.” (Investopedia, 2016). Most of the borrowers use

payday loans in order to cover ordinary or unexpected living expenses. Therefore, the

amount of such a loan is always small and issued for relatively short period of time. A

business model based on providing payday loans has created a new category in the

lending landscape and currently is experiencing fast development. “Revenue for online

payday lenders has more than doubled since 2006, from $1.5 billion to $4 billion” (Yahoo

Finance, 2015). These short-term loans usually target financially-disadvantaged

borrowers. According to World Bank, as of April 2015, the world’s “unbanked”

population stood at 2 billion adults. Hence, new market players make lending fair and

transparent for the population without access to traditional financial services.

„Technology can create efficiencies that allow for solutions to serving low and middle

income consumers.” (Schütte, 2014). Moreover, according to Thomvest Ventures, recently

banks have been exiting the short-term loans business due to more severe regulations.

Also they claim that 27% of payday loan customers use online platforms to get a loan.

Thus, online payday lending has emerged and gained substantial traction in just a few

years.

The main objective of fintech entrants is to reinvent banking activities in terms of short-

term lending. The process should be faster, cheaper and what is most important in this

case – automated by algorithms and data. Nowadays it is possible to assess and score

individuals worldwide in the matter of seconds without any credit check. All of the data

accessible online aids to evaluate the creditworthiness of a customer instantly. Fintech

startups therefore use credit scoring based mainly on worldwide available data, providing

loans that banks cannot. Shortly saying, the sole analysis of credit histories has been fully

replaced by current and real-time data.

PEW Charitable Trusts (2012) finds that instead of taking a payday loan, borrowers are

more likely to choose options that do not connect them to a formal institution, such as

borrowing from family or even cutting back on expenses. It indicates that the need for

Page 62: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

62

small and quick loans is high, and there are no trustworthy alternative borrowers can

choose.

Figure 21: Alternatives if payday loans were unavailable

Source: PEW Charitable Trusts, 2012

BIG DATA AS THE MAIN TOOL TO RATE BORROWERS

“Big Data Analytics enables the rapid extraction, transformation, loading, search,

analysis and sharing of massive data sets.” (Bain & Company, 2015). Startups providing

payday loans have changed the entire set of banking processes by using algorithms and

data. Social media, e-commerce transactions, location data and even the way somebody

expresses themselves in emails is analyzed. All of these little data points are enough to

state and provide information on how creditworthy an individual is, what his pricing

should be and what product he is interested in. This process is called machine learning.

The method uses data that everybody generates, even unconsciously. Even though no

company discloses too much detail on how they exactly use big data, I can assume that

most of them make similar uses of it. According to Sebastian Diemer of Kreditech, “Big

Data means an infrastructure to process large amounts of data in a fast way parallelized

over a cluster of machines. It is the enabler to work with a large amount of data which

previously was not possible, but does not bring any smartness in itself.” Therefore,

enterprises start by recognizing substantial opportunities that may be improved by

Page 63: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

63

superior data and then determine the exact way how to use them.

With the information obtained for instance on social media or through cookies, lending

platforms are able to adjust their product to a specific person. It makes it also possible to

evaluate the risk associated with a particular customer. Also, several companies are

testing new approaches with regards to credit scoring. “Ranging from looking at college

attended and majors for international students with thin or no credit files to trust scores

based on social-network data.” (McKinsey, 2016). According to Bernard Marr, by the year

2020, roughly 1.7 megabytes of new data will be generated every second for every human

being on the planet. To highlight the exponential growth of data volumes worldwide, in

the past 2 years, more data has been produced than in human history. It denotes the

opportunity for companies from every industry to make a huge use of big data. Increasing

uses of alternative data will make the financial system, including lending, more inclusive

and affordable for many people who lack access to the traditional financial services.

5.2.2. Peer-to-peer lending

“Our mission is to transform the banking system to make credit more affordable and

investing more rewarding.” (Lending Club)

Peer-to-peer (marketplace) lending is the new system which quickly and automatically

matches lenders directly to borrowers. It is a practice of borrowing funds from unrelated

individuals, without using a conventional intermediary such as a bank. It means that P2P

platforms do not lend their own funds but just serve as a connecting platform. “Since the

global financial crisis, the banking sector across the globe has been undergoing a major

overhaul at all levels of operation.” (Barnes, 2016). Therefore, banks, due to regulatory

pressure have been forced to cut back their lending activities. It has caused difficulties

for people to get access to credit, both for individuals and small businesses. Hence, P2P

lending started taking off in the last few years in line with the increasing use of digital

financial services. As an outcome, investors and people seeking credit can now interact

with each other without the involvement of traditional banks. The model is simple –

lenders invest in a small portion of loans and afterwards receive their principal plus

interest. Currently, improved analytics enables online services to identify borrowers and

perform quick lending decisions. (Morgan Stanley, 2015).

Page 64: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

64

As marketplaces are exclusively online platforms and technology models drive cost

down, these companies can charge borrowers less and offer higher yields to lenders, due

to less overheads. On the other side, banks charge borrowers more to cover the costs of

their branch infrastructure and reserve requirements (see: Illustration 7) and it is not

completely clear who investors are lending to. According to Peter Renton of Lend

Academy, lending has already changed forever and the models nowadays are much more

efficient. Going to a local branch, sitting with a bank officer and going through paperwork

is becoming outdated.

Illustration 7: Operating Expense: LendingClub vs. Traditional Lender

source: Lending Club, 2016

Figure 22. pictures the difference between traditional bank lenders and P2P lending

platforms in terms of rates (example of Lending Club).

Page 65: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

65

Figure 22: Value for borrower and lenders

Source: Lending Club, 2016

To provide a better picture of how P2P lending looks like, illustration 8. presents a brief

comparison of traditional, retail lending with marketplace, social lending. The

conventional process is much more complex, including a lot of bureaucracy and bank

involvement, whereas P2P lending simply connects both interested sides, with the use of

the internet and social networks so the whole process can be even anonymized. (Goldman

Sachs, 2015).

Page 66: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

66

Illustration 8: Marketplace lending vs retail lending

Source: Moldow, 2014

P2P online platforms, like payday lenders, “leveraged low operating costs, minimal

regulations, Big Data and technology streamlined for a mobile generation to mediate

terms between everyday borrowers who want quick access to cash and the lender-

next-door starved for yield.” (Morgan Stanley, 2015).

MARKET SIZE AND VOLUME

The peer-to-peer lending industry is recording a substantial and rapid growth over the last

few years. According to Charles Moldow, the industry will do $1 trillion in origination

by 2025. Figure 23. shows the value of marketplace lending worldwide from 2012 to

2015 and a prediction for 2025. However, compared to the value of $3.5 billion in 2013

to the value of $870 billion in annual lending revenues in general, it is still a tiny fragment

of total lending. However, the rapid growth and the vast potential is evident.

Page 67: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

67

Figure 23: Value of global P2P lending from 2012 to 2025 (in billion U.S. dollars)

Source: Statista, 2014

Figure 24. presents global P2P marketplace loan issuance, excluding Europe. The US

market is still noticeably the largest; however, China has started keeping pace with the

leaders. “In the US, marketplace loan origination has doubled every year since 2010, to

$12 billion in 2014.” (Morgan Stanley, 2015). Regarding the US market, the two principal

P2P market leaders are Lending Club and Prosper. “In fact since 4Q 2009 Lending Club and

Prosper have collectively grown originations from $26mn per quarter in 4Q 2009 to $1.66bn in

3Q 2014, a 129% compound annual growth rate” (Goldman Sachs, 2015). As of December

2015, Lending Clubs’ total loan issuance has reached a tremendous number of nearly

$16bn and as I type this (12th April 2016), the market capitalization of the company stands

at $2.93bn. (Yahoo Finance, 2016)

Page 68: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

68

Figure 24: Global Marketplace Loan Issuance ($ billions)

Source: Morgan Stanley, 2015

In Europe, the peer-to-peer lending market is growing at an exceptional rate as well.

According to Morgan Stanley, the European leader – the UK market accounts for 80% of

all European marketplace loans. As stated in the EY report, the European alternative

finance market size grew by 146% between 2012 and 2014. Among other alternative

models, P2P consumer lending grew by 113%, whereas P2P business lending increased

by 272% in 2014 compared with 2012. Peer-to-peer lending market in Europe reached

roughly $4 billion in 2014, according to Business Insider.

Even though the industry poses challenges, P2P platforms are gaining traction nowadays,

both in terms of investors and borrowers. Banks are sometimes even eager to collaborate

with these platforms, as a way to save their customer base. As long as investors are made

aware of the risks, online marketplaces can become a viable alternative to mainstream

bank lending, and even further looking - to mainstream financial services.

Page 69: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

69

BITCOIN PEER-TO-PEER LENDING AS A GAME CHANGER?

I would like to start with a statement that P2P lending platforms commonly operate only

in one country, due to the time and costs of money transfers. Since bitcoin technology

has been described as a significant disruptor in terms of payment, it is also worth looking

at the currency in terms of P2P lending. How is that possible? Bitcoin is the first

phenomenon which started off using the unlimited potential of blockchain technology.

Using a blockchain technology means instant access to any place in the world within

seconds (it was already elaborated in the previous chapter). Consequently, bitcoin based

marketplace lending, allows cross-border lending without any additional, substantial

costs – it simply can operate globally. “The good news is that with bitcoin we have a

technology and payment network at hand that solves exactly this problem.” (Bitbond,

2016). The big concern may come up now – what about the Bitcoin volatility? It has

already been solved - the loans can be denominated in US dollars in order to diminish

currency instability. Therefore, payments are conducted in bitcoin only so that the

advantages of bitcoin as a technology and payment network are gained.

Regarding the market, currently, there are only 3 main bitcoin P2P lending platforms.

Bitbond, BTCJam and Loanbase. All three companies, since the foundation in 2013, have

together originated nearly $25 million in loans. On the one hand is just a sliver of the total

P2P lending worldwide, however on the other hand, it provides solid reasons to expect

the market to skyrocket in the next few years. Figure 25. shows the growing trend of

Bitbond, which as of today (13th April 2016) has serviced roughly 440,000 USD in the

issued loans.

Page 70: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

70

Figure 25: Loan origination in USD ‘000 - Bitbond

Source: Bitbond, 2016

To sum up, Bitcoin P2P lending is still in its early days and is experiencing many hurdles.

I wanted to provide a quick overview of this attractive market, since the potential is

massive. “Returns can be huge but so can volatility and defaults, especially if you are

used to the stability of the USD peer lending world.” (Lend Academy, 2014). It clearly

signifies that the industry is still uncertain and there is still a long way ahead to improve.

However, the crucial issue is to understand the risks that come with bitcoin lending and

realize that the model is different than lending in fiat currencies. However, these are

differences we can take advantage of to achieve well above average market returns. (Lend

Academy, 2014). 5.3. Interview with a practitioner – Lending entrepreneur

Kreditech was founded in 2012 by Sebastian Diemer and Alexander Graubner-Müller. It

is a technology company providing a range of financial services, including consumer

loans, so-called payday loans. The main aim of Kreditech is to serve the unbanked society

worldwide, by combining proprietary big data credit technology and machine learning.

They perform a precise and detailed credit rating in order to offer loan at reasonable and

risk weighed conditions. “Credit processes at Kreditech are based on machine learning

Page 71: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

71

and unbiased (no credit score pre filtering) data signals. Observation only, no

hypotheses.” (Diemer, 2016). The company processes up to 20,000 data points in real-time,

however the number is constantly changing, based on newly identified patterns (Kreditech,

2016). This makes the service faster and less cost intensive. The credit decision takes up

to 35 seconds and the loan is granted within 15 minutes. They use data-driven approach

in all business processes they perform, starting with scoring and ending with debt

collections. Until now, Kreditech has raised around $150 million in total and its valuation

is estimated at between $279 million - $335 million, according to TechCrunch.

(TechCrunch, 2016). As stated by Kreditech’s CFO, 2015 revenues of the company

accounted for €41.3 million, performing growth of 100% compared to the prior year. I

had a pleasure to conduct an interview with Sebastian Diemer, the co-founder of

Kreditech.

According to Sebastian, standardized procedures like credit rating, remittance savings or

investment decisions are under the greatest siege from startups nowadays. The co-founder

of Kreditech also anticipates automated bots is where the finance is going in the next 10

years. He also believes that banks are afraid of new financial entrants only in some areas,

however in general the scale of online players is still too marginal compared to banks. “In

some areas definitely yes, but overall no, as the scale of even the biggest players is

marginal compared to banks volume of operations.” (Diemer, 2016). Moreover, he thinks

that the trend on the financial market is going towards synergetic collaborations, since

online disruptors realized that they need more time to build trust among the society and

they have also started undergoing licensing and regulatory procedures. “The trend is

going from replacement to synergetic collaboration as fintechs need much longer to build

necessary trust.” (Diemer, 2016).

Sebastian also admits that banks have failed to deal with customer information and are

now struggling to make a use of it. Nowadays, data is a very important feature for startups,

especially from the lending area in order to adjust a product to customer needs. Moreover,

even though the world’s “unbanked” population stands at roughly 2 billion adults

nowadays, he doubts if this is the key reason why the startups have decided to use big

data in credit scoring. “I am not sure if it is the key reason but clearly alternative data is

the only way to include individuals with no traditional credit scores that banks require.”

(Diemer, 2016).

Page 72: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

72

Chapter VII. Summary The paper has raised the topic of disruptive technologies and how they started

transforming the banking sector. For the last few years, financial technology companies

have started using great opportunities to reduce the time spent and to improve cost

effectiveness of customers. New services, from various areas, provide quick, simple and

transparent processes by bringing traditional banking products completely online. I

believe that this situation has its roots in the 2008 Financial Crisis which shook the

industry. It destabilized and weakened the trust and reliance towards banks which

consequently has caused a slow but gradual shift from traditional players to online

entrants. People noticed that there are also non-bank financial services which are able to

satisfy their needs – even in a more convenient, cheaper and quicker way. These are the

three factors I believe are the most convincing. On the other hand, investors have also

noticed a vast opportunity in the financial world which is being re-shaped by disruptive

technologies like peer-to-peer models or instant payments. “Globally in 2015, venture-

capital-backed fintech companies raised $13.8 billion across 653 deals, compared to $6.7

billion across 587 deals in 2014.” (Haojie, 2016). It clearly suggests that the financial

revolution is here.

In the dissertation, I broke up the fintech industry into three main areas where I see the

most startup activity and where I anticipate the most growth over the next 5-10 years – in

Foreign Exchange, Payments and Lending. Each of them was analyzed from a different

perspective. I believe that the key takeaway from the study and conducted interviews is

that fintech is playing a huge role in todays’ financial world, however at the moment,

banks are too big to be threatened and to be afraid of the disruptors. Nevertheless, the

financial institutions are observing how the market is reshaping and attempting to adjust

to customer needs. Also, as explained in the introduction, startups focus on particular

products or services and try to accomplish them better and more efficient – this gives

them a big advantage over the banks. Therefore, I believe that over the next 10 years there

are two possible scenarios in the financial market:

1) Constant competition between fintech startups and banks – traditional banks have

to eventually react. At the moment, the reaction is slow, however luckily for them,

the market share of online players is still very low (2%). Hence, the competition

Page 73: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

73

is small. Nevertheless, once banks notice the important impact of financial

technology services, it might be too late and they will ultimately start losing their

customer base and relationships, and subsequently margins will go down.

(Albrecht, 2016). Therefore, in this case, I anticipate the situation to remain as it is

nowadays. The number of online players will gradually increase and disrupt the

financial world, however their scale will endure marginal comparing to banks

volume of operations. (Diemer, 2016). What is also relevant in this scenario, is the

worldwide, unbanked population which stands at roughly 2 billion people.

Especially in third world countries, where technology is making huge entries,

consequently fintech companies provide versatility and accessibility to financial

services, which banks cannot do.

2) Synergetic collaboration between fintech startups and banks – “Banks and

established financial firms are increasingly looking to work with fintech startups

to help them keep up with the pace of change.” (Business Insider, 2015). More and

more online companies, along with banks, are starting to understand the

advantages of collaborating together in order to deliver disruptive solutions. A

good example in this case are peer-to-peer lending platforms which still use banks

to process their transactions. “Fintech firms see the advantages of leveraging

banking’s large and loyal customer bases, experience with risk and regulations, a

broad product set, established trust and the deep financial pockets of incumbent

banking organizations.” (The Financial Brand, 2015).

To sum up, I do not think that fintech startups will make banks obsolete in the next decade

however their role will become more significant, compared to what we can observe today.

“No one can predict future exactly, but we know two things; it’s going to be different,

and it must be rooted in today’s world.” (Thiel, 2014). Therefore, I believe that in 10 years

from now, the most significant market players will be huge fintech companies (at that

time) focusing on specified areas of products and services, operating on a huge,

international scale. Banks are going to be more specialized and operating more on a local

scale. I also assume that banks nowadays are too big to change, however they definitely

need to adjust. “The only way to win is learn faster than anyone else.” (Ries, 2012). “They

(startups) believe technology can make inroads into this complex, heavily regulated and

Page 74: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

74

most conservative of industries.” (Mackenzie, 2015). The benchmark has been therefore

set very high by fintechs, which makes the financial market really interesting and worth

observing in the coming next years. Nevertheless, there is still a lot to improve in terms

of consumer conviction and awareness and this is the reason to be excited about financial

technology.

Page 75: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

75

Appendix 1. Interview with a practitioner – Forex

entrepreneur Michał Czekalski – CEO & co-founder of Currency One, on foreign exchange,

digital banking and fintech industry

1) What bank activities are under the greatest siege from startups and why?

I think that lending fintechs are the biggest threat to banks. There is no trust issue,

comparing to any deposit-based services and it is the main revenue leg which can get

eaten up really fast.

2) Will the fintech disruptors make banks obsolete or will they maybe become

complimentary instruments to banks in the future? What has caused many

customers to shift from conventional banks to online companies?

I think that some companies will end up being banks (mostly acquired by them). Others

that do meta-bank/geography activity will become strong independent players. In my

opinion the shift is mostly due to lower pricing.

3) Do you think that banks are afraid of new financial entrants? Are the new

technology-driven companies are able to compete equally with banks?

Banks are afraid of new entrants, however when they start fighting back, CAC (the cost

of customer acquisition) will go up and bank prices will have to be lower so they will still

dominate but with lower margins.

4) Do do you agree with the quote of Bill Gates - “We always overestimate the change

that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur

in the next ten”? Where do you see finance going in the next 10 years?

I do agree. I expect peer-to-peer models will be very important game changers (in terms

of FX, lending, factoring, etc.)

5) Which areas within fintech do you anticipate the most growth over the next 5-10

years?

Page 76: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

76

Honestly don't know

6) What trends within the FX sector can you observe? Regarding both, startups and

banks.

Banks start to notice competition, but at the moment have completely no idea how to

answer that. Customers gain trust to bank independent operators. FX companies get

multi-national.

7) What is so special about FX startups that encourage customers to shift from

conventional banking to online players’ services?

The main factor is price. Other than that, I would say also hatred towards banks, faster

transfers and usability.

8) The sector of bureau de change or simply currency exchange has skyrocketed over

the last years. Is there any substantial reason why it happened?

That was a blue ocean for currency exchange. Prices on the market were way too high

and people needed that. This sector is huge so it grew up fast.

9) How would you describe the main value proposition foreign exchange startups

provide to customers?

I think cheaper foreign exchange and transfers with friendly UX and safety promise.

Appendix 2. Interview with a practitioner – Bitcoin

entrepreneur Radoslav Albrecht, CEO & founder of Bitbond – on payment system and lending,

digital banking and fintech industry

1) What bank activities are under the greatest siege from startups and why?

I would say there are 3 main areas where I can see the most startups and fintech activity

and also the biggest chance that these companies will take away the highest level of

market share from banks. In my opinion when you look at a universal bank which

Page 77: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

77

provides all the services that a typical commercial bank would provide, then I think it is

relatively clear that we observe the fintech startups always just picking one specific

service and provide just that one service.

Regarding the activities that are under the greatest threat and the most technologically

advanced, I would say:

a) lending – peer-to-peer lending platforms like Lending Club and Prosper and

online lending platforms like Kabbage. In this case banks typically take a long

time to approve somebody for a loan. One of the reasons why fintechs can take

away market share from banks is simply the speed and also cost effectiveness.

However, the speed is the biggest driver behind this.

b) asset management – banks would often take pretty high fees for asset management

and advisory services. When you look at startups like Wealthfront or Betterment,

they automate the process and cut down quite heavily on the fees versus a

traditional asset manager.

c) payments – when you send payments internationally and also within one country,

banks typically take a long time to process these payments and when we look at

alternatives, like PayPal which is already a mature company, but also startups like

TransferWise or Azimo, they provide a lot of innovation in the payment space,

make the payments quicker and make them much more cost effective (lower fees

for the customers)

2) Will the fintech disruptors make banks obsolete or will they maybe become

complimentary instruments to banks in the future? What has caused many

customers to shift from conventional banks to online companies?

I don’t think that banks will go away entirely, but nowadays a lot of banks lose the

customer relationships. Let’s take an example of P2P lending platform Lending Club -

they are the ones who own the customer relationship and they still have a bank in the

background processing the payment transactions for them. Even though they are big

enough that they could set up a bank themselves to do the payments, it is not their core

business. Therefore, they do need a bank, because their core business is for instance a

customer acquisition or providing a good user interface to the customers. Likely, for the

next decade, there will still be banks in the background running core banking processes,

Page 78: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

78

but I think they will be losing the customer relationship which ultimately will drive down

their margins. However, on the other hand, there are already startups like Bitbond, where

they do not even need a banking partner to provide the services because the technology

that they use is bank independent. I think this will come more and more, but it will

probably take 10-20 years until banks will not be needed anymore.

I really think that the convenience, the speed and the lower costs are the main reasons

why customers are switching to fintechs. Startups are much quicker in making decisions

and they can also react much quicker to customer demand. They do not have a big legacy

organization that has to consider a lot of departments when they want to implement a

change.

3) Do you think that banks are afraid of new financial entrants? Are the new

technology-driven companies are able to compete equally with banks?

I am not sure if banks are afraid but they are watching the space. I think fintechs can

compete only in the specific types of services where they are active and as for today,

fintechs have such a small market share compared to banks that they are not really

worried. However, I think the moment they start to get worried, they will not be fast

enough to react, due to large legacy organizations.

4) Do do you agree with the quote of Bill Gates - “We always overestimate the

change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change

that will occur in the next ten”? Where do you see finance going in the next

10 years?

Yes, I do agree with that quote. When a new technology appears or gets developed, then

often people do see the opportunity and they think it will be implemented quickly.

However, what often gets underestimated are the costs of change. Time it takes to

implement technologies and the time it takes to market new technologies to a big

audience. Bitcoin is a good example. There are a lot of people who do see the opportunity,

but if you look 2 years back to 2014, a lot of people would have thought that by 2016,

Bitcoin would have a much wider adoption and would be much a bigger mass

phenomenon.

Page 79: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

79

I think that since the 70’s or 80’s, the finance sector has already been a technology sector.

One of the first applications in the web that people have been using is online banking.

However, since people have access to online banking in the 90’s, it hasn’t changed a lot.

Therefore, a lot of fintechs are starting to offer services that have never been offered in a

bank branch and it will continue to evolve this way.

5) Which areas within fintech do you anticipate the most growth over the next

5-10 years?

I expect to see the most growth in the credit sector, which is one of the largest in the world

financial services. Including all segments from credit – payday loans, consumer loans,

small business loans, corporate loans, mortgages, even up to more complex credit

products, like swaps or bonds trading.

6) How do you see the payment sector evolving in the next 10 years?

I think that the payments sector has already done a big step with PayPal specifically. It

has started to move away from the traditional transfers provided by banks. However, there

are still a lot of people using services like MoneyGram or Western Union, which are

typically expensive and take a long time. I do see a lot of growth in payments sector, but

I think in the next 10 years it will be more in the corporate sector than in the consumer

sector, because in the consumer sector there are already solutions like PayPal and

comparable services. Regarding the corporate world, payment evolution hasn’t really

started to move. If you look at the business volume that you can generate, most of it is in

the corporate world. Even corporations could take a lot of advantages from faster and

cheaper payments and I think we are going to see a lot of innovation and growth

specifically in the corporate payments sector.

7) The payments sector appears to be performing the most disruption in the

financial world. Which of the established online payment methods do you

consider as the most crucial? Why?

I think it is probably PayPal and then services like TransferWise and Azimo, which will

continue to grow. There are already a lot of good technology companies that are active in

the payments sector and it is likely that some of those companies will continue to capture

the growth. Regarding mobile payments, it is more question of the merchants, if the

Page 80: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

80

grocery or department stores will start to implement the infrastructure that is necessary to

accept mobile payments. I think it is not a problem for PayPal to enable a user to make a

mobile payment. It is a problem on the receiver side, because different companies would

have to agree on a technology that gets accepted. Therefore, one of the reasons why

mobile payments has not yet really taken off is because of the fact that it requires

additional investment and infrastructure on the point of sale.

8) What is your vision for Bitcoin and blockchain technology within the

payments sector?

There are 2 scenarios that are possible or a combination of both:

1) “The Windows scenario” - Bitcoin will go to a market cap to 30-60 or even more

billion dollars which would mean that Bitcoin would become a significantly more

stable currency (less foreign exchange risk for the user). In this scenario Bitcoin

could really take off and be a consumer orientated currency. I call it ‘the Windows

scenario’, because everybody knows Windows and a lot of people own a computer

where Windows is the operating system.

2) “The Linux scenario” - Bitcoin will be used in the background in order to transfer

payments between different entities in a very efficient and quick way and where

the consumer would not notice it. Linux is an operating system which maximum

2% of consumers are using, but it is embedded in a lot of systems where we do

not notice it. Many devices that we use multiple times a day, but we are not aware

of the fact that the technology is a Linux based system.

Obviously the advantages of Bitcoin are still there, but it requires people to change their

behavior. There are still not enough people who know about it and have the willingness

to try technologies and services that are based on top of Bitcoin. However, if the

technology really is better and is more efficient, then in the time frame of 5-10 years, it

is very likely that it will take over most of the legacy issues. I believe that Bitcoin will

play a huge role in payments, however I am not sure whether it is going to be visible or

not.

9) Even though cash is still a dominant and the most convenient payment

method, it is easy to observe ‘the move away from cash’ trend. What is your

opinion on that? Is the idea behind a completely cashless society possible?

Page 81: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

81

I do think that the idea behind a completely cashless society is possible; however, I do

not think it is going to happen in the 10-20 years. I think cash has a lot of advantages, for

example there is no need for technology in order to use it. Even though smartphone

adoption is growing rapidly, there will still be a lot of cash. The share of all payment

transactions that are being conducted in cash is a really significant number and if you

look in 20 years from now, it is certainly going to go down. However, I do not think it

will go to 0 within that period. Cash has a couple of unique features that other payment

methods cannot have and this is the main reason why cash is not going to go away entirely

in the next couple of years.

Appendix 3. Interview with a practitioner – Lending

entrepreneur

Sebastian Diemer – former CEO & co-founder of Kreditech, on payday loans,

digital banking and fintech industry

1) What bank activities are under the greatest siege from startups and why?

I would say that standardized procedures (credit rating, remittance saving / investment

decisions, etc.) are much more under the threat from startups than complex transactions

or loans.

2) Will the fintech disruptors make banks obsolete or will they maybe become

complimentary instruments to banks in the future? What has caused many

customers to shift from conventional banks to online companies?

The trend is going from replacement to synergetic collaboration as fintechs need much

longer to build necessary trust. Moreover, fintech players are starting to undergo the same

licensing and regulatory procedures as banks, which means that both converge to a similar

endgame with traditional banks building digital lean banks and closing branches.

3) Do you think that banks are afraid of new financial entrants? Are the new

technology-driven companies are able to compete equally with banks?

Page 82: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

82

In some areas definitely yes, but overall no, as the scale of even the biggest players is

marginal compared to banks volume of operations.

4) Do do you agree with the quote of Bill Gates - “We always overestimate the

change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change

that will occur in the next ten”? Where do you see finance going in the next

10 years?

I do agree with the quote and I expect automated bots as a huge part of finance in the

future.

5) Which areas within fintech do you anticipate the most growth over the next

5-10 years?

I believe that retail as cost saving has a much bigger impact.

6) Lending has been a core banking activity for centuries. Why do people

nowadays tend to use non-bank companies instead of traditional banks in

terms of lending?

I would say that lending requires less trust. It simply means that whoever gives you the

money, you take it from a consumers’ point of view.

7) Could you please shortly explain the credit processes at Kreditech?

Credit processes at Kreditech are based on machine learning and unbiased (no credit score

pre filtering) data signals. Observation only, no hypotheses.

8) When it comes to big data, I assume that banks have failed to deal with

customer information properly and are now struggling to make a use of it.

Do you agree that data is an important feature for startups (especially from

lending area) to adjust a product to a customers needs?

Yes.

9) The world’s ‘unbanked’ population stands at roughly 2 billion adults

nowadays. Is it the key reason why startups have decided to use big data as

Page 83: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

83

the main factor in credit scoring? Is it more efficient than credit bureau data?

I am not sure if it is the key reason but clearly alternative data is the only way to include

individuals with no traditional credit scores that banks require.

10) I know that until now, Kreditech has raised around $150 million in total.

Why do you think investors, including mainly Venture Capital funds, believe

in fintech companies?

It is a huge opportunity. Banking is about non physical goods, so very massive impact of

disruption.

List of figures: Figure 1. What is disruptive technology? ......................................................................... 5

Figure 2: Diagram of a bank ........................................................................................... 10

Figure 3: Recent startup activity ..................................................................................... 11

Figure 4: Expected impact of start-ups on banking ........................................................ 12

Figure 5: Shift in consumer banking behaviour .............................................................. 13

Figure 6: Global Fintech Financing Activity .................................................................. 15

Figure 7: The number of sub-$250K loans since 2008 ................................................... 16

Figure 8: Internet Users and Penetration Worldwide, 2013-2018 .................................. 17

Figure 9: Global Cross-Border Remittance Volume ...................................................... 27

Figure 10: Top 10 Remittance-Sending Countries ......................................................... 28

Figure 11: Remittance providers in terms of Market Capitalization or Last Round

Valuation ................................................................................................................. 30

Figure 12: Value of currency exchanged with the use of FX platforms 2010-2014 [PLN

bn] ........................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 13: Payments revenue 2009-2019 ....................................................................... 38

Figure 14: Shares of transactions by payment instrument .............................................. 39

Figure 15: Expected impact of startups on payments ..................................................... 41

Figure 16: Landscape of the payment system ................................................................. 43

Figure 17: Bitcoin acceptance among merchants ........................................................... 50

Figure 18: Bitcoin Price Index ........................................................................................ 51

Figure 19: Bank borrowing costs .................................................................................... 59

Page 84: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

84

Figure 20: Annual lending revenues in 2013 (US $B) ................................................... 60

Figure 21: Alternatives if payday loans were unavailable .............................................. 62

Figure 22: Value for borrower and lenders ..................................................................... 65

Figure 23: Value of global P2P lending from 2012 to 2025 (in billion U.S. dollars) ..... 67

Figure 24: Global Marketplace Loan Issuance ($ billions) ............................................ 68

Figure 25: Loan origination in USD ‘000 - Bitbond ....................................................... 70

List of illustrations: Illustration 1: FX volume trading per day ....................................................................... 25

Illustration 2: Estimated costs of transfering money ...................................................... 31

Illustration 3: Key statistics of Walutomat ..................................................................... 35

Illustration 4: Taxonomy of Virtual Currencies .............................................................. 47

Illustration 5: Decentralized payment architecture ......................................................... 53

Illustration 6: Interbank payments scheme with single reserve ...................................... 54

Illustration 7: Operating Expense: LendingClub vs. Traditional Lender ....................... 64

Illustration 8: Marketplace lending vs retail lending ...................................................... 66

List of tables: Table 1: Main actors on the global FX market ............................................................... 26

Table 2: The cost of sending remittances ....................................................................... 29

Bibliography:

1. (Antkiewicz, 2008) Sławomir Antkiewicz. (2008). Fundusze wysokiego

rzyka w Polsce na przykładzie Narodowych Funduszy

Inwestycyjnych.

2. (Antonakes, 2015) Steven Antonakes. (2015, November 24). Fintech

Threatens Small Banks More than Crisis Ever Did.

Retrieved from

http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/fintech-

threatens-small-banks-more-than-crisis-ever-did-

1077964-1.html

Page 85: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

85

3. (Bain & Company, 2015)

Darrell K. Rigby. (2015, June 10). Management Tools

2015. An executive’s guide. Retrieved from

http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN_GUIDE_Managem

ent_Tools_2015_executives_guide.pdf

4. (Bank for International

Settlements, 2003)

Bank for International Settlements. (2003). A glossary

of terms used in payments and settlement systems.

Retrieved from

http://www.bis.org/cpmi/glossary_030301.pdf

5. (Barnes, 2016) Samantha Barnes. (2015, February 9). Peer-to-Peer

Lending – Disruption for the Banking Sector? Retrieved

from http://internationalbanker.com/banking/peer-peer-

lending-disruption-banking-sector/

6. (Bitbond, 2016) Bitcoin Powered Marketplace Lending – 3 Key

Opportunities. (2016). Retrieved from

https://www.bitbond.com/resources/bitcoin-powered-

marketplace-lending-3-key-opportunities/

7. (BNY Mellon, 2015) BNY Mellon. (2015). Innovation in Payments: The

Future is Fintech. Retrieved from

https://www.bnymellon.com/_global-assets/pdf/our-

thinking/innovation-in-payments-the-future-is-

fintech.pdf

8. (Boden, 2015) Patrick Jenkins. (2015, October 14). Start-up threat to

creaking banks. Retrieved from

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/481671a4-61ca-11e5-

9846-de406ccb37f2.html#axzz49f88IsBP

9. (Bryan, 1988) Lowell L. Bryan. (1988). Breaking Up the Bank:

Rethinking Industry Under Siege.

10. (Business Insider, 2015) Sam Ro. (2015, February 11). Here’s what the $294

trillion market of global financial assets looks like.

Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/global-

financial-assets-2015-2

11. (Business Insider, 2015) The Remittances Explainer. (2015). Retrieved from

http://www.businessinsider.com/intelligence/research-

Page 86: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

86

store?IR=T#!/THE-REMITTANCES-

EXPLAINER/p/52522288/category=11987295

12. (Business Insider, 2015) Evan Bakker. (2015, June 17). Peer-to-peer lending

markets: The leading countries for alternative finance

and the next high-growth markets. Retrieved from

http://www.businessinsider.com/peer-to-peer-lending-

markets-the-leading-countries-for-alternative-finance-

and-the-next-high-growth-markets-2015-5

13. (Business Insider, 2015) Oscar Williams-Grut. (2015, October 12). This is how a

new crop of companies is trying to reinvent banking.

Retrieved from http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-

fintech-transforming-finance-2015-9

14. (CB Insights, 2015) CB Insights. (2015, November 10). Startups and

Accelerating Corporate Innovation. Retrieved from

http://www.slideshare.net/NikunjSanghvi/cb-insights-

live-startups-and-accelerating-corporate-innovation

15. (Chainalysis, 2016) Chainalysis. (2016). Retrieved from

https://www.chainalysis.com/

16. (Coindesk, 2016) Richard MacManus. (2016, February 6). Bitcoin,

Online Payments and the Scourge of PayPal. Retrieved

from http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-online-

payments-paypal/

17. (Coindesk, 2016) What is Bitcoin? (2015, March 20). Retrieved from

http://www.coindesk.com/information/what-is-bitcoin/

18. (Coindesk, 2016) Bitcoin Price Index. (2016). Retrieved from

http://www.coindesk.com/price/

19. (CoinMarketCap, 2016)

20. (Schmidt, 2014)

Crypto-Currency Market Capitalizations. (2016).

Retrieved from https://coinmarketcap.com/

Jonathan Millet. (2014, March 16). Google Chairman

Eric Schmidt: Bitcoin Architecture an Amazing

Advancement. Retrieved from

http://www.newsbtc.com/2014/03/16/google-chairman-

Page 87: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

87

21. (Franco, 2015)

22. (Fagan, 2013)

eric-schmidt-bitcoin-architecture-amazing-

advancement/

Pedro Franco. (2015). Understanding Bitcoin

E.J. Fagan. (2013, November 25). Bitcoin and

international crime. Retrieved from

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-11-25/news/bs-

ed-bitcoin-20131125_1_bitcoin-transactions-law-

enforcement

23. (Currency One, 2015) Currency One report. (2015).

24. (Daily FX, 2014) Gregory McLeod. (2015, January 24). Forex Market

Size: A Traders Advantage. Retrieved from

https://www.dailyfx.com/forex/education/trading_tips/d

aily_trading_lesson/2014/01/24/FX_Market_Size.html

25. (Darc Matter, 2015)

The Rise of Fintech and Factors Behind This Growth.

(2015, June 8). Retrieved from

https://www.darcmatter.com/blog/rise-of-fintech-and-

factors-behind-this-growth/

26. (Deloitte, 2014) Deloitte. (2014). Banking disrupted. How technology is

threatening the traditional European retail banking

model. Retrieved from

http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/pt/Docu

ments/financial-services/dttl-fsi-uk-Banking-Disrupted-

2014-06.pdf

27. (Diamandis, 2015) Eric Rosenbaum. (2015, June 2). Retail bank branch is

doomed, and banks don’t know it. Retrieved from

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/02/retail-bank-branch-is-

doomed-and-banks-dont-know-it.html

28. (Edelman, 2015) Richard Edelman. (2015, November 2). A crisis of trust.

Retrieved from

http://www.theworldin.com/article/10508/crisis-trust

29. (EFMA, 2015) EFMA. (2015). Innovation in Retail Banking. Retrieved

from https://www.efma.com/ressources/studies/2015/1-

1KO9PB_E_study.pdf

Page 88: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

88

30. (eMarketer, 2014) Internet to Hit 3 Billion Users in 2015. (2014,

November 20). Retrieved from

http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Internet-Hit-3-

Billion-Users-2015/1011602

31. (Emmerson, 2015) Louis Emmerson. (2015, April 29). What is ‘FinTech’?

How is it disrupting finance? Retrieved from

http://blog.symbid.com/2015/trends/what-is-fintech-

how-disrupting-finance/

32. (EY, 2015) Moving Mainstream. The European Alternative Finance

Benchmarking Report. (2015). Retrieved from

http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/EY-and-

university-of-cambridge/$FILE/EY-cambridge-

alternative-finance-report.pdf

33. (Finance Magnets, 2016) Ron Finberg. (2014, December 18). Global FX Average

Daily Volumes in 2014 to Reach $5.5 Trillion: Report.

Retrieved from

http://www.financemagnates.com/forex/analysis/aite-

group-expects-global-fx-average-daily-volumes-2014-

reach-5-5-trillion/

34. (Financial Brand, 2014) 6 Reasons Why Cash is Still the King of Payments.

(2014, May 6). Retrieved from

http://thefinancialbrand.com/39408/consumer-cash-

usage-banking-payment-research/

35. (Financial Brand, 2015) Banking and Fintech: An uncommon Partnership.

(2015, November 30). Retrieved from

http://thefinancialbrand.com/55543/partnership-

competition-fintech-banking-disruption/

36. (Financial Brand, 2015)

Fintech Start-Ups: Threat of Innovation Partners?

(2015, November 4). Retrieved from

http://thefinancialbrand.com/55117/fintech-start-ups-

banking-innovation/

37. (Forbes, 2015) Falguni Desai. (2015, December 14). The Fintech

Boom And Bank Innovation. Retrieved from

Page 89: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

89

http://www.forbes.com/sites/falgunidesai/2015/12/14/th

e-fintech-revolution/#1c035a5136da

38. (Forbes, 2015) Bernard Marr. (2015, September 30). Big Data: 20

Mind Boggling Facts Everyone Must Read. Retrieved

from

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2015/09/30/bi

g-data-20-mind-boggling-facts-everyone-must-

read/#4bd4835a6c1d

39. (Goldman Sachs, 2015) The Future of Finance. The rise of the new Shadow

Bank. (2015, March 3). Retrieved from

http://www.betandbetter.com/photos_forum/142558541

7.pdf?PHPSESSID=7406416a94128a8eca87ec315399c

75c

40. (Greenwich Associates,

2015)

Greenwich Associates. (2015). Leading Foreign

Exchange Dealers Cede Market Share.

41. (Hansen, 2016) Roy Urrico. (2016, January 31). Blockchain Brings

Hopes and Fears. Retrieved from

http://www.cutimes.com/2016/01/31/blockchain-brings-

hopes-and-fears

42. (Haojie, 2016) Ye Haojie. (2016, April 26). Fintech Doubles VC

Investment Value to Over $13.8 Billion. Retrieved from

http://cointelegraph.com/news/fintech-doubles-vc-

investment-value-to-over-138-billion

43. (Hull, 2012) John C. Hull. (2012). Risk Management and Financial

Institutions.

44. (IMF, 2016) Virtual Currencies and Beyond: Initial Considerations.

(2016). Retrieved from

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2016/sdn1603.

pdf

45. (Investopedia, 2016) Investopedia. (2016). Retrieved from

http://www.investopedia.com/

46. (Jaworski, Zawadzka, 2003) Władysław Jaworski, Zofia Zawadzka (2003).

Bankowość: zagadnienia podstawowe.

Page 90: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

90

47. (King, 2015) Eric Rosenbaum. (2015, June 2). Retail bank branch is

doomed, and banks don’t know it. Retrieved from

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/02/retail-bank-branch-is-

doomed-and-banks-dont-know-it.html

48. (Kreditech, 2016) Kreditech. (2016). Retrieved from

https://www.kreditech.com/

49. (L.E.K, 2015) L.E.K. Consulting. (2015). The Accelerating Payments

Revolution: How to Manage Risks and Still Enjoy the

Rewards. Retrieved from

http://www.lek.com/sites/default/files/Accelerating-

Payments-Revolution_5-Key-Trends_PE-

Investment_LEK-ExecutiveInsights-1725_2.pdf

50. (Lend Academy, 2014) Peter Renton. (2014, December 30). Introduction to

Marketplace Lending With Bitcoin – Part 2. Retrieved

from http://www.lendacademy.com/introduction-

marketplace-lending-bitcoin-part-2/

51. (Lendico, 2016) Lendico, Retrieved from https://www.lendico.com/

52. (Lending Club, 2016) Lending Club - Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2015

Results. (2016, February 11).

53. (Let’s Talk Payments, 2016) FinTech Is Pushing Banks out of the Remittance

Business. (2016, February 10). Retrieved from

https://letstalkpayments.com/fintech-is-pushing-banks-

out-of-the-remittance-business/

54. (Mackenzie, 2015) Annette Mackenzie. (2015). The Fintech Revolution.

Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/2057-

1615.12059/epdf

55. (McKinsey, 2015) McKinsey & Company. (2015). Global Payments 2015:

A Healthy Industry Confronts Disruption

56. (McKinsey, 2016) Cutting through the noise around financial technology.

(2016, February). Retrieved from

http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-

Page 91: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

91

services/our-insights/cutting-through-the-noise-around-

financial-technology

57. (Mishkin, 2013)

Frederic Mishkin. (2013). The Economics of Money,

Banking & Financial Markets.

58. (Moldow, 2014) Charles Moldow. (2014). The Next Big Ideas in

Financial Technology. Where to Look & What to Look

For. Retrieved from

https://foundationcapital.com/assets/whitepapers/BigIde

asFinTech_whitepaper.pdf

59. (Moldow, 2014) Charles Moldow. (2014). A Trillion Dollar Market By

the People, For the People. How Marketplace Lending

Will Remake Banking As We Know It. Retrieved from

https://foundationcapital.com/assets/whitepapers/TDMF

inTech_whitepaper.pdf

60. (Morgan Stanley, 2015) Can P2P Lending Reinvent Banking? (2015, June 17).

Retrieved from

http://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/p2p-marketplace-

lending

61. (NF - Nowoczesna Firma,

2016)

Platforma wymiany walut, czyli internetowy kantor.

(2016). Retrieved from

http://nf.pl/przedsiebiorca/platforma-wymiany-walut-

czyli-internetowy-kantor,,48267,213

62. (Number26, 2016) Number26. (2015). Retrieved from

https://number26.eu/wp-

content/uploads/2015/12/NUMBER26_PressRelease_In

ternationalization.pdf

63. (Patterson, 2015) Robert Patterson. (2015). Compendium of Banking in

Polish & English.

64. (Pease, 2014) Alexander Pease. (2014, January 7). Disaggregation of

a Bank.

Page 92: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

92

65. (PEW Charitable Trusts,

2012)

The PEW Charitable Trusts. (2012). Payday Lending in

America: Who borrows, Where They Borrow and Why.

Retrieved from

http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles

/pcs_assets/2012/pewpaydaylendingreportpdf.pdf

66. (Relbanks, 2016) World’s Largest Banks. (2016). Retrieved from

http://www.relbanks.com/worlds-top-banks/market-cap

67. (Remittance Prices

Worldwide, 2016)

Remittance Prices Worldwide. (2016). Retrieved from

https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en

68. (Ries, 2011) Eric Ries. (2011). The Lean Startup: How Today’s

Entrepreneurs User Continuous Innovation to Created

Radically Successful Business.

69. (Schütte, 2014) Jessica Pothering. (2014, August 30). Progreso

Financiero: Banking on the Unbanked. Retrieved from

http://impactalpha.com/progreso-financiero-banking-

on-the-unbanked-2/

70. (Statista, 2014) Statista. (2014). Value of global peer to peer lending

from 2012 to 2025 (in billions U.S. dollars). Retrieved

from http://www.statista.com/statistics/325902/global-

p2p-lending/

71. (Summers, 1994) Bruce J. Summers. (1994). The Payment System.

Design, Management and Supervision.

72. (TechCrunch, 2016) Ingrid Lunden. (2016, March 23). Online lender

Kreditech closes out Series C at $103M after getting

$11M from the IFC. Retrieved from

http://techcrunch.com/2016/03/23/online-lender-

kreditech-closes-out-series-c-at-103m-after-getting-

11m-from-the-ifc/

73. (The Economist, 2012) Filling the bank-shaped hole. (2012, December 15).

Retrieved from

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21568365-

Page 93: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

93

europes-banks-are-shrinking-what-will-take-their-place-

filling-bank-shaped-hole

74. (The Future of Finance,

2010)

The LSE Report. (2010). The Future of Finance.

Retrieved from

https://harr123et.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/futureoffi

nance5.pdf

75. (The Payment System,

2010)

European Central Bank. (2010). The Payment System.

Retrieved from

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/paymentsyste

m201009en.pdf

76. (The Rise of Fintech in

Finance, 2014)

Kantox. (2014). The Rise of Fintech in Finance.

Retrieved from http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/310641/file-

1445626583-

pdf/Rise_of_Fintech_in_Finance/Fintech_DEF.pdf?t=1

413451665739

77. (Thiel, 2014)

Peter Thiel. (2014). From Zero to One: Notes on

Startups, or how to Build the Future.

78. (TransferWise, 2016) TransferWise. (2016). The Future of Finance. Retrieved

from https://transferwise.com/guides/global-

finance/future-of-finance

79. (UniCredit, 2016) UniCredit. (2016, February 26). Blockchain

Technology and Applications from a Financial

Perspective. Retrieved from

https://www.weusecoins.com/assets/pdf/library/UNICR

EDIT%20-%20Blockchain-Technology-and-

Applications-from-a-Financial-Perspective.pdf

80. (Walutomat, 2016)

81. (Weissman, 2013)

Walutomat. (2016). Retrieved from

https://www.walutomat.pl/

Andrew Weissman. (2013, January 2). Banking and

Unbundling. Retrieved from

http://blog.aweissman.com/2013/01/banking-and-

unbundling.html

Page 94: The impact of disruptive technology on the shape of future banking

94

82. (Węcławski, 1997) Jerzy Węcławski. (1997). Venture Capital : nowy

instrument finansowania przedsiębiorstw.

83. (Wonglimpiyarat, 2015) Jarunee Wonglimpiyarat. (2015). Bitcoin: The

revolution of the payment system.

84. (World Bank, 2014) US, Saudi, UAE Top 3 Remittance-Sending Countries;

Digital Poised to Disrupt the Century-Old Industry.

Retrieved from http://pkonweb.com/2015/08/us-saudi-

uae-top-3-remittance-sending-countries-digital-poised-

to-disrupt-century-old-industry/

85. (World Bank, 2015)

The Cost of Sending Remittances December 2015 Data.

(2015). Retrieved from

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/paymentsystemsre

mittances/publication/the-cost-of-sending-remittances-

december-2015-data

86. (Yahoo Finance, 2015) Mandi Woodruff. (2015, February 10). The $46 billion

payday lending industry is in for big blow. Retrieved

from http://finance.yahoo.com/news/CFPB-payday-

lending-rules-explained-192558796.html

87. (Yahoo Finance, 2016)

Lending Club Corporation (2015, April 12). Retrieved

from http://finance.yahoo.com/