44 ms·

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

by sildur 5y ago

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.

sergiomattei 5y ago
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.
- djbusby 5y ago
  Innovation without revenue streams don't get funded by profit seeking organizations. EU didn't innovate their way, it was regulated into place.
  - ISL 5y ago
    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.
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      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.
    - lostcolony 5y ago
      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).
      - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        > 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.)
- manuelabeledo 5y ago
  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.
  - sergiomattei 5y ago
    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.
Semaphor 5y ago
> 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.
- sildur 5y ago
  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 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.
randsp 5y ago
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
- sildur 5y ago
  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 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.

by sildur 5y ago

sergiomattei 5y ago

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.

djbusby 5y ago
Innovation without revenue streams don't get funded by profit seeking organizations. EU didn't innovate their way, it was regulated into place.
- ISL 5y ago
  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.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    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.
  - lostcolony 5y ago
    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).
    - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
      > 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.)
manuelabeledo 5y ago
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.
- sergiomattei 5y ago
  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.

Semaphor 5y ago

> 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.

sildur 5y ago
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 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.

randsp 5y ago

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

sildur 5y ago
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 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.