Comment by sergiomattei | Hacker News Reader

Comment by sergiomattei | Hacker News Reader

This is what cryptocurrency is: an IP layer for a new digital economy, with open banking by default.

I felt the pain of the banking industry’s stagnation recently. My grandparents asked me to take a check for them to the local bank branch to do an intra-bank account transfer. I thought to myself: “bank branch? no way, I’ll just log into the bank website and transfer between accounts”. To my dismay and surprise, I couldn’t even do that.

In the 21st century... Where supercomputers are in our pockets... I couldn’t transfer a couple thousand bucks between accounts without going to a bank branch. For the market dominant bank in PR. Had they had Bitcoin, I could’ve done this in seconds, without them leaving the house.

Oh, and don’t get me started on the embarrassment that is ACH. In 2021 I can’t send money without it taking days to settle.

The banking industry needs to step up with open protocols, interoperability and digital money. Hopefully DeFi lights this fire.

In Europe, we can transfer money between any two bank accounts on any European country, and the transfer must complete in less than 90 seconds (from an account in bank A, in Spain to another account in bank B, in Italy, for example). And frequently those transfers are also free.

It's not a banking industry problem. It's an obsolete American banking industry problem.

It’s a banking industry problem. The government shouldn’t have to step in: the "free market" should be able to innovate, just like DeFi is doing now out of necessity.

Innovation without revenue streams don't get funded by profit seeking organizations.

EU didn't innovate their way, it was regulated into place.

From an ISP of the early 2000s, free top-quality email hosting didn't have an obvious revenue stream, yet Gmail noted that it was possible and, later, almost certainly found a way to make it profitable.

The trick with an unsexy thing like low-cost bank transfers is finding a way to make it attractive to consumers at the time they select a bank.

In today's world I think people might be more sensitive about their banking data being collected and sold or used for advertising. Most people still don't seem to give e-mail that kind of consideration, but banking is on a different level.

Nobody picks a checking account based on how efficient bank transfers are. It's not that people don't care; of course they do. It's just not something that is advertised, or relevant to you until you run into it, and so is completely overshadowed by what IS advertised, and will affect you immediately (cost of the account, availability of funds once deposited, easy of deposit, etc).

> Nobody picks a checking account based on how efficient bank transfers are

Few people, not nobody. I picked my bank because they don't charge for incoming and outgoing wires. (Downside: no Zelle.)

Banks are already free to innovate. There are just no incentives for them to do so, especially if it supports small retail customers.

This very same symptom can be seen in US and Canadian ISPs: there is just not enough money in certain markets for them to compete against each other, and they don't, so the government should definitely step in.

Yeah, it’s a market problem. We disagree on the solution but agree with the problem: there is no incentive to innovate.

Perhaps the government stepping in is better for the societal “greater good”, I’ll have to think about this and come to a personal conclusion.

> and the transfer must complete in less than 90 seconds […a]nd frequently those transfers are also free.

From what I hear in Germany, instant transfers always cost extra unless your bank account has a high fee. But that might just be us.

I have a different bank, but as you can see here, instant transfers are free for personal use: https://www.paysera.com/v2/en/blog/what-is-sepa

I have been reading about instant transfers and I think the banks don't have to pay for individual transfers, they pay a fee for being part of the SEPA system. If that is correct, then every cent you bank charges you for an instant transfer goes directly to their pockets.

Can we? My experience is the opposite, I live in Spain and fast transfers are definitely not free and not generally available in all banks. The regular case is transfers take about 24-48 hours to be settled between banks

I have a different bank, but as you can see here, instant transfers are free for personal use: https://www.paysera.com/v2/en/blog/what-is-sepa

I have been reading about instant transfers and I think the banks don't have to pay for individual transfers, they pay a fee for being part of the SEPA system. If that is correct, then every cent you bank charges you for an instant transfer goes directly to their pockets.

I can't wait to get all my money stolen with this new and exciting world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com