So the European Parliament has now agreed on the cap on interchange fees, and subject to final agreement by the Council of Ministers, it will soon hit the statute books throughout Europe. Among those in the know—Europe’s large retailers, banks, and payment service providers—reactions are suitably mixed, ranging from grudging resignation (banks) to “sniffing out an opportunity” (merchant acquirers), to a degree of smug satisfaction (large retailers).
You are here
What is it about that “Ghostbusters” song that stays in your head 30 years later? The song came to mind while thinking about the governance, risk, and compliance technology market. (Yes, those things happen to an analyst.)
The talk around the globe is faster payments, also known as near-real-time or immediate payments. Australia, Canada, and the United States are catching up with many other countries that implemented such payments solutions some time ago, while a number of countries are working on their next version of such payments. Each of these solutions is developed for domestic payments, not cross-border ones. Nonetheless, businesses of all sizes increasingly have trading partners in other countries and transact cross-border payments, which are growing in number every year.
Schwab’s much-anticipated Intelligent Portfolios solution went live on March 9 and is now available to Schwab and non-Schwab customers. While the primary features and functions of the solution have been known for a while (see my latest report on the digital wealth management market), Schwab’s announcement includes a clearer picture of how its solution stands out in the new digital wealth management marketplace.
Talking to wealth management executives through the years, they have all been at pains to say how they know their clients, how these clients have been with them for years, and how the client is at the heart of everything they do. Sounds very client-centric, doesn't it? Except, in almost everything else, discussions nearly always turn to an institution-centric view. The firm does this, likes that, has a problem here, and so on. The client is almost forgotten as the conversation focuses on the internal-out (institution-centric) view, not the external-in (client-centric) one.