Having said that I do not think it would be so hard. Banks could lever SWIFT, or other common utilities such as Symcor in Canada.

In any event this is one of the things that will leave banks open to disruption unless they look at it.

Card purchases are not so quick though and the money seems to be in the banks hands for a day or so.

http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2012/05/the-big-secret-banks-are-banks.html

There can be one of two issues:

1) Ongoing changes to allow credit unions to operate inter-provincially and or federally.
2) Bringing payment providers who are presently unregulated (think Paypal) or with differing regulatory rules under the same set of regulations.

Second is more likely given the recent release of the Mobile Payments Task Force Final Report.

That being said, in some respects, Apple is already a bank. Many people effectively use Apple as a bank by keeping money in their iTunes account to pay for things.

Nice comment from a previous diehard qwerty user! ………

Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Pinterest are all tremendous tools when used correctly but with so much information at a consumer’s fingertips, it’s not enough to say you’re the best because consumers just don’t like being talked to. Social is here for engagement and if you’re not engaging correctly, then you can’t expect improved conversion rates.

I see the boys from JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs fully embedded in the thinking of FaceBook and Twitter for example. I view FaceBook and Twitter as the latest AOL ‘walled garden’ iteration of attempting to control a large group of users in a defined environment. Thats why we are seeing comments such as Costolo referring to the promoted tweet as “the atomic unit of our ad strategy”.

Its not clear to me if a promoted tweet is a paid retweet or what, but it doesn’t matter. These companies and the investment banking crowd are all about demonstrating control over the marketing message and the purchasing power the message creates. They hold out the promise of these companies as specially controlled environments.

They can only sell millions of high priced shares in these companies if they convince everyone that they have broken the seal on the promise of a better marketing model. Or maybe I should say the market for those shares will only be sustained based on that promise (I have no doubt the shares will be sold at IPO).

We see Costolo and the ‘atomic unit’ and Groupon excluding the costs of marketing when defining ‘profit’ – these are all symptomatic of the underlying problem these companies are attempting to display as solved.

I go back to your piece at “http://snarketing2dot0.com/2010/12/06/the-2010-marketing-tea-party-awards/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+MarketingTeaParty+(Marketing+Tea+Party)/

and the two quotes I took from there were:
- Twitter won’t ever succeed as an advertising channel.
- Bottom line is that Groupon was crazy for declining a $6 billion offer.

So yes I want Google to know what I have with them, so they appreciate my reliance on their free and aid services and so that they maintain their uptime … an uptime which btw exceeds the uptime at my previous corporate full size bank organisation.

I would challenge your statement that the promise of internet marketing is to get “beyond sub 0.5% conversion rates.”

The reason that conversion rate is so important in traditional marketing is that the cost of the message is relatively high. With a high cost of message dissemination, response and conversion rates are critical.

But in internet marketing — and by using the word “marketing” I’m going beyond just “advertising” (which is just one aspect of marketing) to include SEO, email marketing, social media marketing, etc,. the “promise” (although I’m not sure many agree w/ me) is one of efficiency, not effectiveness.

The Internet radically reduces the cost of message dissemination, and (theoretically, and ideally) enables a wider range of personalization and customization available through traditional marketing.

In this context — in a world where the cost of an incremental message is near zero — response and conversion rates are far less important.

When I can only send 100 messages, conversion rate is critical. If I achieve 1% conversion, I get 1 customer. When I can send 100,000 messages for what it used to cost me to send 100, if get a 0.1% conversion, I get 100 customers.

Having said all that, I can tell you that, at least in the world of financial services, banks and credit unions have a long way to go to become competent in digital marketing. Please take a look at this: http://snarketing2dot0.com/2011/11/28/how-good-are-banks-at-marketing-online/

Thanks, Ron

Interesting about how you can’t game Amazon based on your own purchasing behaviour. But what about Google choosing your search results based on your previous activities?

I know it’s supposed to be for our presumed benefit – but still find it creepy.

Great post.

I am surprised and suspicious when the mere mention of ‘independence’ creates such a stir amongst Tory’s and other progeny of the original Norman Knights. A blizzard of reasons why it can’t work – legal, nuclear, defence, debt, cost, social, travel etc – rather than a proper analysis of possible outcomes. A bit like the anti- greens/renewables/global warming/socialist/evolution camps

Scots are not Anglo-Saxon and have no genetic allegiance to Westminster or the remnants of the Norman ruling aristocracy. There is however tolerance for the monarchy even with the Hanover dislocation to the line of succession.
.
For Scots to feel comfortable in their own country they need to have control over the extent of autonomy under the Queen and be responsible for their own successes and failures. The same applies to Wales and Northern Ireland who also have completely separate genetic evolutions.

Testing the population’s views seems sensible given the complete lack of ruling party representation in Scotland.

Whatever path forward results from the referendum and subsequent political/legal battles – Status co, Devo-Max, Independance or something else – trying to destroy the debate or influence the referendum will only produce unintended consequences.

DC (that inflatable doll pumped up by invisible tory investors) is no match for Windbag’s eloquence, negotiation and cliché management skills, DC has already conceded that Scotland can go it alone but that the UK is stronger together than apart. He needs to work on his spin doctors scripts.

PS ……….. Mum is 91 years old

Excellent! It suits the independence cause perfectly to have dumb unionists underestimate Salmond and his team.

Just a couple of ideas off the top of my head. I am certain there are more.