The IoT Iceberg

The Internet of Things. A bit of a buzzword since it’s inception in the late 1990’s by a guy called Kevin Ashton (a Brit by the way). Almost every day we hear some companies hot take, hear about some start-up developing new hardware, hear about an incumbent building 'yet another IoT innovation lab’, and almost every time we dismiss it as nonsence that no-one would ever need. There’s good reason we’ve thought this. IoT products have largely been a bit pointless, security has almost completely been ignored, and lots of the backend systems haven’t been developed properly, if at all. There’s even a dedicated, and quite successful, Twitter account (@internetofshit) posting about the (mostly funny) failings of IoT. However, I think we’ve now reached an inflection point where the ‘usefulness’ of IoT is on the up.

You see, most of the IoT is actually behind the scenes, it’s under the water, it’s the bits that the average consumer doesn’t see, and it is recently started being developed at an astonishing rate.

Specific Internet of Things networks are going up all over the world. Countries such as South Korea and the Netherlands have country wide IoT networks based on LPWAN (Low Power Wide Area Network) technology such as LoRa and LoRaWAN. Additionally, nearly all of France, Spain and the Czech Republic have Sigfox coverage thanks to their private investment in those countries. Sigfox is another LPWAN based technology. In the UK we have a bit of piecemeal approach to IoT networks. For example, Sigfox is present in some of the larger cities such as London and Liverpool while rival LPMESH based technology such as ZigBee is present across Hampshire.

The Hampshire network is quite a good example of what I’m talking about actually. I’ve lived in Southampton, a city in Hampshire, for about 3 years and had no idea that the whole county was covered by a ZigBee network. It was not until I went to a conference in Berlin that I learnt about this network. It happens that since 2010 every one of the 150,000 or so street lights in Hampshire have been replaced by a ‘Smart Lighting’ system where each lamppost has a ZigBee sub-node on it allowing each street light to be centrally controlled and for new IoT sensors to be added. The main aim of this was originally to save money and its provided around a 40% reduction in lighting energy consumption so far which equates to about £2 million/year - in part due to more efficient lighting and in part due to smart control. Now though this network is being used to test and trial a whole host of other ideas such as monitoring available parking spaces and environmental monitoring. The point I’m making here is that this huge enabling network now exists and most people don’t know about it - it’s the part of the iceberg that’s under the water.

In the news recently was the huge £24 Billion acquisition of ARM by SoftBank. ARM are well known for being ahead of the field in terms of processors for mobile. Their processors are the most power efficient on the market which is a huge advantage for IoT devices where potentially years of battery life are required. It think it’s no coincidence that ARM have been purchased at this point in time.

So, all of this stuff that the consumer doesn’t see is starting to enable consumer facing products that actually offer some benefit. We’re starting to see a number of the big players get seriously in to IoT and actually develop useful products. I don’t normally have good things to say about Samsung but in IoT they’re probably leading the way with their SmartThings product line. One of the major advantages of this is that the SmartThings Hub works with a wide range of products other than those developed by Samsung. This means that your Philips Hue Lights, Bose SoundTouch, or your Yale Smartlock all work off of one hub and one smartphone app. One of the key pillars of IoT will be interoperability.

We have an interesting few years ahead of us as the IoT networks get rolled out behind the scenes and useful consumer products start to slowly enter the market. This is all even before the behemoth that is 5G comes our way by 2020.

I’ll leave you with this great tweet from @BenHammersley:

A Month with Mondo

UK FinTech (Financial Technology) is on fire at the moment and one of the start-ups at the forefront is a challenger bank called Mondo. Mondo is still a relatively small start-up with somewhere in the region of £7 million of Venture Capital funding with Eileen Burbidge's Passion Capital funding £6 million and the other £1 million being raised in a record breaking 96 seconds on Crowdcube earlier this year. Mondo is currently in Beta with apparently around 20,000 customers and a waiting list even longer. Now Mondo isn’t a bank just yet and as such gives customers what is essentially a pre-pay MasterCard but they say they aim to get their banking license (at least a restricted one) in a few months time. What the Mondo Beta has shown so far though is a glimpse in to the future of banking and I have to say it’s quite bright.

To understand why Mondo is great, oh and this isn’t in any way sponsored by the way, Mondo won’t know I’ve published this post unless they read it themselves here, you have to look at what is wrong with the traditional banks and it all ultimately boils down to the fact that they don’t understand mobile and they don’t understand UX (User Experience).

The traditional banks saw mobile as a way to simply provide a bank statement, in fact, if you look at your mobile banking app it’s pretty much the same as getting a paper statement in the post in that it’s just a list of transactions, search is limited if it exists at all, and if you want to do anything even mildly useful you generally have to logon to the desktop website or even phone them (what the?).

Mondo, like most start-ups, have adopted a mobile first philosophy. They don’t have a banking website and they don’t have phone banking either and why would they? Everything you could ever need to do is or at least will be done through the app, and that is one of the major things missing from traditional banks. If you read some of the Mondo founder’s blog posts and listen to/watch some of his interviews then you’ll notice that the way they think about mobile is completely different to traditional banks, for example, using your mobile’s location services to determine whether or not transactions are fraudulent i.e. if your phone is in the same location as the transaction it probably isn’t fraudulent - particularly useful when you’re abroad. Mondo seem to realise that mobile allows them to overcome some of the biggest annoyances we have with consumer banking.

It’s not just their attitude to mobile that makes them great though, it’s their entire ethos to customer experience. A recent trip to Paris is a perfect example. My traditional bank charge a 2.75% fee for non-sterling transactions and another 2% fee for using a cashpoint abroad - crazy right? Mondo don’t charge a penny for either. This completely changed the way I travel. I used to search online for the best exchange rates, order currency online and then go to a physical store to get a big wod of cash - hundreds of Euros or Dollars. Now you’d never have £400 in cash when you’re at home (unless you want to be mistaken for a drug dealer perhaps) but somehow we do it when we're on holiday. Well as you can imagine with Mondo I didn’t need to do any of that, I behaved as I do at home and paid for 99% of things with my card and had about €20 in my wallet for those few times I needed cash. What’s more I could see immediately what the cost in both £ and € was straight on the app. You get none of this transparent experience with a traditional bank.

There’s a few other really good features of Mondo too. Merchant info is crowd sourced, you can see your entire history with a merchant including total and average expenditure in just a tap. If you misplace your card you can freeze it immediately from within the app. You get a breakdown of your monthly expenditure by category, and you can manually change the category of each transaction individually. Search though is one of the major features of the Mondo app for me. Search in Mondo seems to use somewhat of a natural language processing technique to allow search over time periods, locations, merchants, category and more just be typing. So, a search for ‘Lunch in London last month’ will show all transactions marked as ‘Lunch’ that happened in June and that look place in London.

Mondo also provide an API for 3rd party app developers to interact with the platform and develop new tools.

Now that I’ve banged on about all the good things I do of course have to discuss some of the improvements that need to happen. Something that’s missing but seems really simple is a low balance notification with an action to top-up the card. I’ve had multiple occasions where the card has declined due to insufficient funds. It would be great if there were a ‘suggested top-up amount’ based on previous spending habits and perhaps an auto top-up option.

Another major let down is the lack of Apple Pay. There’re a lot of things I don’t use Mondo for because I can’t use Apple Pay. For example, I use Deliveroo almost daily and pay on their using Apple Pay just because it’s the most convenient and secure method. Same with Uber, same with Tesco. Apple Pay is on the roadmap for Mondo but I’m amazed that such a mobile focussed company hasn’t supported Apple (and Android) Pay since the start.

Next up is London Transport payments, they’re confusing AF. For some reason Mondo shows all of Transport for London’s ‘active card checks’ and seemingly all sorts of other transactions that ultimately become you’re actual tube fare. This means that various transactions appear, disappear and change over the course of a couple of days. Please Mondo just show the actual fare.

User authentication is also missing which seems to be a bit strange. There’s no app login at all. This means if someone is using my phone, whether I’ve let them use it or otherwise they can just tap the app and see all of my transactions and freeze my card. You do need to know the card’s PIN to transfer money though. This isn’t necessarily a major issue as if I’ve let someone use my phone I probably trust them and if it got stolen they’d need to know my phone’s unlock code or have my fingerprint (if they had either of these I think them being able to see what I spent in Waitrose would be the least of my worries). It does just seem a little relaxed on the security/privacy side.

Just as I was about to post this they updated the app to include TouchID login.

Something I haven’t tried/need to use yet is the customer service side to Mondo. With what I’m presuming is a relatively small team I’m not sure how good it’d be in particularly urgent situations. In fact the app does say ‘… we try to get back to you within the hour, evenings and weekends may take a bit longer.’. I could see many people being put off by this and actually finding it quite concerning that they can’t speak to/message somebody immediately, particularly as Mondo is dealing with people’s personal finances.

So as I said at the start of this post Mondo has so far given a really good insight in to what the future of consumer banking should look like. I’ll certainly continue using it and I’m looking forward to seeing new and useful features.

Now I should also say that Mondo aren’t the only ones doing this. If you have a read of my previous post you’ll see there’s quite a few other. In fact, I’ve just received an invite for Atom Bank which I’ll to try out.

Have you tried Mondo or another Challenger Bank? What did you think? Comment below.

Should the High Street Banks be worried?

The internet, coupled with mobile, has been a force to be reckoned with for almost every industry. Travel Agents have been made obsolete by Expedia, SkyScanner, Kayak and a whole host of others. The traditional taxi business has been massively disrupted by Uber and Lyft. Retail is now a very different beast thanks to the likes of Amazon. Newspapers, TV, Fast Food, Music, Hotels, the list could go on and on. There are however a few industries that are yet to really feel mobile internet's effects and one of these is banking (automotive is another but that post is coming soon). For as long as I can remember there's been one constant on the British High Street - the 'Big Four'. The 'Big Four' is a term given to the four biggest banks in the UK, these are Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, RBS, and between them these banks own around 75% of the market [1]. This general lack of competition is bad for consumers as there's little incentive for any of these incumbents to change or do anything particularly different. In fact, if you look through their offerings not one of them stands out as giving anything above the rest.

Thankfully this might be about to change. There's a big, and quickly growing appetite by young and innovative start-ups to disrupt the old and traditional banking industry. These start-ups under the umbrella term of 'Fintech' are being built from the ground up with large investment from Venture Capitalists. They have none of the baggage that the incumbents have such as large overheads and legacy systems.

This new breed of financial business understands the frustrations and annoyances that a generation who have grown up with technology at their fingertips have. Companies such as Monese, Mondo and Atom are building banks made for the smartphone. They don't have branches, they don't even have website banking, everything is done from your smartphone. The sign-up process is made so simple, you sign-up on your mobile and scan your ID for verification which means you don't have to go into a branch to set-up your account as you would now with the legacy banks. Transfers abroad? No problem, all done from your phone and with zero fees. Going on holiday? No need to get foreign currency, just use your card as you normally would and pay no fees for foreign transactions.

It is this ease of use and transparency that the smartphone generation really understands and wants from everything they use, and why shouldn't they?

Unfortunately though this isn't something the high street bank seems to understand, and those that do can't do anything about it due to their legacy systems and costs and risks associated with building new ones at their scale [2].

"Replacing that tech is just so risky that no one else is going to try to do it. It is a multi, multi billion pound project that is going to take five to ten years, and even then risk failure." - Tom Blomfield, Monese CEO.

I recently switched to a bank that is supposedly 'different from the rest'. Except it isn't really. The app is horrible to use - it's design is terrible and if I want to do anything more than view my balance or transfer money to an existing payee I have to login to their website which takes about a million hours to get through the security (seriously, it's ridiculous). To set-up Apple Pay I had to phone them, yes actually speak to a human being who asked for my every intimate detail just to complete an action that should be so simple.

As I mentioned earlier, it is these annoyances that the start-ups understand and can use technology to do something about.

It's not just the high street bank that's being disrupted either. A whole range of financial services are being switched to mobile. Take Curve for example. Curve is a service that puts all of your cards in to one and guess what, it's all controlled from your mobile. Just scan all of your cards including Visa, MasterCard and American Express and set one as your default. Then just use your Curve card (which is a MasterCard) anywhere. If you want to use a different card just select it in the app. You can even use your American Express in places that don't accept it, and importantly get the same rewards and protections. It even lets you get cash from your credit card without paying fees.

Investments and stock market trading are another financial services area being disrupted. Take a look at Nutmeg or Robinhood who are offering free or very low rate investment and trading platforms all built around simple and easy to use mobile apps.

So, back to the exam question, should the high street banks be worried? Absolutely.

 

What do you think of the current banking industry, can it change and keep-up? Leave your comments below.

If you enjoyed this article or found it useful please do hit like and share :)

 

 

Sources:

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11212515/Full-investigation-into-the-dominance-of-big-four-UK-banks-confirmed.html

[2] http://www.techworld.com/mobile/mondo-ceo-tom-blomfield-explains-how-build-next-generation-digital-bank-3618866/3/

 

Everything as a Subscription

We're all well aware of the popular business model that is 'X as a Service' (XaaS) where by, typically a business, will pay for something like Software but it is delivered remotely, in the case of Software via a Thin Client rather than via Download or a CD (whatever those are). This means that users always have the latest version and resource intensive applications can be run on less resourceful devices. This is great for services where a physical product is not required but what about when there is? Well, now there's a business model that is growing massively in popularity and that is the 'subscription economy' or maybe it should be EaaSub (Everything as a Subscription)? There's now hundreds, probably even thousands of businesses offering products via subscription and there's really no limit as to what you can get. We all know about the usual ones like Netflix and Magazines/Newspapers but here's some you may not know about:

It's even spawned new support businesses such as Zuora who now provide subscription management software to businesses.

For businesses this model has a lot of positives, it provides a predictable revenue stream and by encouraging customers to pay upfront it gives the cash flow required to support operations. In high competition industries it also locks in the consumer and stops them heading for the competition. For the consumer it's a hassle free way to get the consumable products they require often.

It's important though that there's some flexibility as consumers don't want to think they're paying for something that they don't need e.g. if they get a toothbrush monthly but only really need one every two months then they're likely to cancel.

So what's next for the subscription model, could we see typically service orientated businesses offering subscriptions, maybe something like unlimited Uber rides for £X/month? Subscription Hotel rooms? Could we see Apple expand it's iPhone Upgrade Program to it's other products, could Samsung start offering TVs and other large consumer electricals by Subscription?

How will self-driving cars affect the insurance industry?

As we all know autonomous cars will arrive in the next 10-20 years (if you don’t have a read of my previous post here. The effects on you or I will be extraordinary and the affect on businesses in all industries will profound with one in particular - the insurance industry.
A recent KPMG study [1] found that the majority of insurance companies thought that autonomous cars were too far in the future for them to worry about now. This I think is a major error on the part of the insurance companies. There’s likely to be two paths to autonomous cars with the regular manufacturers such as BMW, Audi, Ford, etc slowly introducing self-driving tech in to their vehicles over the next 20 years or so while high tech companies such as Google, Apple and Tesla will completely leap frog the regular human-driven car and go straight to autonomous vehicles in the next 10 years (I know Tesla makes regular vehicles but their autonomous driving tech is well ahead of others). What this means is that insurance companies are likely to be taken by surprise sooner rather than later as consumers start wanting/needing insurance products that they don’t yet offer for vehicles from these high-tech companies. The advance of autonomous vehicles from regular manufactures will also creep up on them just as the continual advance of mobile has snuck up on so many industries such as retail.
There’s currently around an 85:15 split between personal and commercial insurance [2] across the industry but as mobility on demand increases, spurred on by the introduction of autonomous cars, insurance companies will need to refocus their products to the commercial side. The ‘uberisation’ of autonomous cars will remove the need for the majority of personal car insurance policies. As an aside and in the shorter term though is the increase in car sharing services such as BlaBlaCar - I’m yet to see insurance policies specifically designed for people that regularly use these services.
Data is already prolific in our lives but one aspect that its yet to really arrive in is our cars and particularly our car insurance. While there’s a few companies offering black box policies they’re few and far between and mainly aimed at new young drivers. With the increase in data in our cars there’ll be a huge shift to data based insurance policies but one has to question how many insurers are ready for this change, how many have a data analysis skill set, do they have the processing, storage and security requirements - I suspect not.
One of the major reasons for the introduction of autonomous cars is to increase safety. Today, around 94% of crashes are caused by human error (the rest a mix of component failure and environmental factors) [3] so with the introduction of autonomous cars will inevitably come a huge reduction in crashes and therefore insurance claims. This you’d think would be good news for the insurance industry but consumer demand and competition in the industry will most definitely lead to much lower premiums. In addition to this there’ll be much fewer cars being purchased and therefore fewer policies. With the huge advancements in technology and the naivety of the current industry players there’s bound to be start-ups offering insurance products that people want - I could quite easily see black boxes in cars with dynamic pricing based on how much you use the autonomous features, if you drive manually then you pay more (this goes back to the previous paragraph). You could also see manufacturers themselves offering this insurance as part of the vehicle cost (remember that we’re unlikely to own cars in the future but rent them per thousand/miles).
The aggregate of all of this could spell bad news for many of the big players - who will be the Blackberry and Nokia of the insurance industry?
[1] Automobile Insurance in the era of autonomous vehicles. Survey results. June 2015. KPMG.
[2] UK Insurance Key Facts 2013. Association of British Insurers.
[3] Traffic Safety Facts. Crash Stats. February 2015. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.