4 ms·
It's easy to talk shit on the Internet... Obviously, I support your business idea, and I look forward to it shaking banks up a bit. If the product is strong en
by lhnn 15y ago
It's easy to talk shit on the Internet...
Obviously, I support your business idea, and I look forward to it shaking banks up a bit. If the product is strong enough, a generic brand won't kill the business. I still believe
BankSimple was a better name (in my opinion), as it actually positioned you as a new player in a game to change the status quo. I can understand if there were potential legal issues with a non-bank calling itself a bank. If this is the reason a change was made, then I'm wasting my keystrokes.
Send me a beta invite!
- eavc 15y agoMy thinking is that an innovative, abstract replacement for banking will either float or sink on the strength of its offering and subsequent word-of-mouth. My mother wouldn't ever sign up for this on her own regardless of what it's called, but in time, I might be able to get her to use it if it's good. A descriptive brand name is almost irrelevant for a company like this. Now, the other angle here is that banking might simply be their entree into the abstraction business at large. So maybe today I bank through Simple, but in a few years I buy insurance through them. And maybe my cell phone plan. There's a lot of confusion and noise interfering with the efficiency of consumer markets as mediums of value exchange. Abstraction, quantification, and objective selection could be a neat way to cut down on some of the inefficiency, misinformation, and confusion.