The Geometry of Fintech – by Pete Townsend

xxx

I was moderating a panel at the ABN AMRO + Techstars Future of Finance Accelerator Demo Day, immediately after a keynote by David Birch. Dave made a statement that stopped me in my tracks:

“AI will become the dominant user of stablecoins.”

At first glance, that sounds provocative. Maybe even theoretical.

But the more I sat with it – especially while watching nine finely tuned fintech pitches back-to-back – the more it started to feel… inevitable.

From: The Geometry of Fintech – by Pete Townsend.

xxx

Why European APMs Need More Than Apple’s NFC to Win In-Store Payments

xxx

European alternative payment methods (APMs) have a long history of failed attempts to succeed at the physical point of sale (POS). In contrast, Apple Pay has achieved tremendous success. Apple’s tight control over the iPhone’s NFC chip has fueled iOS’s dominance in contactless payments (see Figure 1) while blocking APMs from delivering a comparable user experience (UX). A regulatory push by the EU has now forced Apple to open NFC access, giving European APMs a new opportunity to compete in-store.

However, NFC access alone is unlikely to guarantee success. Even if other wallets match Apple Pay’s UX, they still face major hurdles: achieving broad merchant acceptance and convincing users to switch their default mobile wallet. In this article, we review European APMs’ historical attempts to gain traction in-store and analyze early initiatives and adoption barriers they must overcome to succeed at the POS.

From: Why European APMs Need More Than Apple’s NFC to Win In-Store Payments.

xxx

Emberpay

How the Mad Men Lost the Plot Again – by Ian Leslie

xxx

Sharp’s first law is that brands can’t get bigger on the back of loyal customers. Applying a statistical analysis to sales data, he demonstrates that the majority of any successful brand’s sales comes from “light buyers”: people who buy it relatively infrequently. Coca-Cola’s business is not built on a hardcore of Coke lovers who drink it daily, but on the millions of people who buy it once or twice a year. You, for instance, may not think of yourself as a Coke buyer, but if you’ve bought it once in the last 12 months, you’re actually a typical Coke consumer. This pattern recurs across brands, categories, countries and time. Whether it’s toothpaste or computers, French cars or Australian banks, brands depend on large numbers of people — that’s to say, the masses — who buy them only occasionally, leave long gaps between purchases and buy competing brands in between.

If you work for a brand owner, the implications are profound. First, you will never increase your brand’s market share by targeting existing users — the task that digital media performs so efficiently. The effort and expense marketers put into targeting their own customers with emails and web banners is largely wasted; loyalty programmes, says Sharp, “do practically nothing to drive growth”. What seems like a prudent use of funds — focusing on people who have already proved they like the brand — is actually just spinning wheels.

Second, and paradoxically, a successful brand needs to find a way of reaching people who are not in its target market, in the sense of people who are predisposed to buy it. The brand’s advertising must somehow gain the attention of people who are not interested in it, have never bought it, or who bought it so long ago they can’t remember — so that when they are ready to buy, it automatically springs to mind. In the wastage is the value.

Advertising, says Sharp, works best when it doesn’t try and persuade, but merely makes us remember the brand at the point of purchase.

From: How the Mad Men Lost the Plot Again – by Ian Leslie.

xxx

How the Mad Men Lost the Plot Again – by Ian Leslie

xxx

First, you will never increase your brand’s market share by targeting existing users — the task that digital media performs so efficiently. The effort and expense marketers put into targeting their own customers with emails and web banners is largely wasted; loyalty programmes, says Sharp, “do practically nothing to drive growth”. What seems like a prudent use of funds — focusing on people who have already proved they like the brand — is actually just spinning wheels.

Second, and paradoxically, a successful brand needs to find a way of reaching people who are not in its target market, in the sense of people who are predisposed to buy it. The brand’s advertising must somehow gain the attention of people who are not interested in it, have never bought it, or who bought it so long ago they can’t remember — so that when they are ready to buy, it automatically springs to mind. In the wastage is the value.

Advertising, says Sharp, works best when it doesn’t try and persuade, but merely makes us remember the brand at the point of purchase.

From: How the Mad Men Lost the Plot Again – by Ian Leslie.

xxx

POST It’s not only people who need fake IDs

xxx

Collectors are using documents produced by artificial intelligence to “prove” artworks’ authenticity and ownership when obtaining valuations or making insurance claims, according to industry figures.

“Chatbots and LLMs [large language models] are helping fraudsters convincingly forge sales invoices, valuations, provenance documents and certificates of authenticity,” said Olivia Eccleston, a fine art insurance broker at Marsh

From: Fraudsters use AI to fake artwork authenticity and ownership.

xxx

Artemis

xxx

The Visa Onchain Analytics Dashboard, developed in collaboration with Allium Labs, uses the first approach. Their method applies filtering to provide less noisy information about general stablecoin activity. They show that after filtering the raw data, the total monthly stablecoin volume reduces from around $5 trillion (Total Transaction Volume) to $1 trillion (Adjusted Transaction Volume). When only considering Retail Transaction Volume (transactions less than $250), the volume is only $6 billion. We use a similar filtering approach to the Visa Onchain Analytics Dashboard but provide methods more focused on labeling transactions specifically as payments.

From: Artemis.

xxx

Coinbase Sues 3 States Over Prediction Market Laws

xxx

Coinbase is taking three US states to court in a bid to lock in federal protection for its planned prediction markets, opening a new front in the battle over whether event contracts are finance or gambling.

The exchange has sued regulators in Connecticut, Illinois, and Michigan, asking federal judges to declare that prediction markets listed on a US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)-regulated platform fall under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and the CFTC’s claimed exclusive jurisdiction, not 50 separate state gambling codes.

From: Coinbase Sues 3 States Over Prediction Market Laws.

xxx

Artemis

xxx

When further labeling payment transactions into P2P, B2B, P2B, B2P, and Internal B transactions using Artemis labeling data in section 3.2, we find that P2P payments represent only a 23.7% (11.3%) share of total payments (all raw data). Previous studies have pointed out that stablecoin payments contribute around 25% for P2P payments, and we obtain similar results. Finally, in section 3.3 we observed that in terms of volume, the majority of stablecoin transactions is centralized by the top 1,000 wallets. This opens an interesting question: is stablecoin usage developing as a vehicle for payments run by intermediaries and big firms, or as a P2P transaction settlement, which time will tell.

From: Artemis.

xxx

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started