> I know people who work at large banks, they work nothing like a tech company. > Tech/IT is seen as a cost centre, often outsourced, and if not outsourced per

> I know people who work at large banks, they work nothing like a tech company. > Tech/IT is seen as a cost centre, often outsourced, and if not outsourced performed by disillusioned teams with neither influence nor autonomy. That may be true, but how people work is beside the point. That's a question of culture and dependent on the industry and it's maturity. Yes, it may make or break individual companies, but on the scale of industries it's not relevant. The truth is that tech companies don't "win" by working better, they "win" by playing a different game and the game here isn't too different to the incumbents. > The back end of big banks is a huge mess of legacy systems Yes and no, as big banks are not monolithic nor homogenous. But this doesn't make the jobs of startups any easier either because the interfaces to existing platforms are just as necessary for them in order to interoperate. >the leadership don’t recognise that everything will be software soon Actually they do and they are betting on that to cut costs by automating legacy and inefficient functions. > They are the antithesis of big tech. They are not the antithesis, they are just at a different stage on the maturity curve. It's up to the disruptors to find enough gaps in their armour to usurp them. But I don't think that there is that much room for disruption in the retail market apart from niches players, because fundamentally their models are not that different.