7 ms·
$1 Instant Wire Transfers 24/7
- bzmrgonz 4y ago"ANY BANK IN THE WORLD"... is quite a TALL CLAIM!!! I have my doubts!!!
- zachrosen23 4y agoRunning a trading company, I send and receive a lot of wires. When wiring a few times a year, the $30-$75/wire fee is annoying but doable. Since we send dozens a month, we rack up $1k+/mo just in fees. Tried switching banks and sending ACH’s / Zelles whenever possible. Nothing let us move large amounts quickly and cheaply. Why on earth does it cost so much and take so long to move my money? There’s got to be a better way, right? Turns out, there’s not. So we built [Fortress](www.tryfortress.com) - it’s a platform that lets you send instant wires for $1, 24/7/365. Meaning, your monthly wire fee bill is decreased by 97%. You simply connect your bank account, select a sender, and confirm your transfer. That’s it—funds are instantly available in your vendor’s account. If you have any specific recommendations, just comment below. Would love to hear what you guys think! Thanks!
- jesterson 4y agoAmazing idea - everything that disrupts slow and expensive bank models is very welcome. I am just looking for similar service for Japanese market - a lot of small payouts/transfer - would love to use yours if you do play there
- ingigauti 4y agoCan you explain how it works? Let's say I'm in Germany and want to send money to US, doing it instantly is not possible with current Swift But I could see how Fortress would have accounts in both Germany and US and then have a ledger that keeps track of it, money coming in in Germany, send money out in US, something like that? Underlying tech then blockchain? Is it visible?
- bfeynman 4y agoIs it possible to learn how it actually works? Banks charge for wiring, so if you are still using bank how do you get around that? I assume that it's not actually doing a wire transfer.
- zachrosen23 4y agoBuilt on blockchain rails. Works like a 1-click bundle of debit sender account --> buy stablecoin --> send stablecoin --> (optionally) convert to fiat and disburse to receiver bank.
- ChrisRR 4y agoIs there a reason it wouldn't work with any other imaginary asset? I guess I just don't really under stand why you can't just can't cut out the crypto part in the middle
- bfeynman 4y agoWell this is the first time I've ever been impressed by an application of crypto, notwithstanding some major concerns. Thing is though that this is not a wire transfer, and lot of places where wire transfers are used are specifically used because of the infrastructure and guarantees around it. Would be interesting to a shift in adoption though Do you guys just eat cost of minor fluctuations in stablecoin prices?
- zachrosen23 4y agoThanks! Fortress can also slot into legacy infrastructure. Finality guarantee is also actually stronger with a stablecoin payment (cryptographically irreversible) vs a wire (99.9% irreversible, absent a bank mistake or court order).
- zachrosen23 4y agoFully backed stablecoins are redeemable from their issuer 1:1, regardless of what they're trading at on secondary markets
- pjkundert 4y agoThis is awesome. I’m nearing completion of a Crypto invoicing and payment platform that works without dependence on any infrastructure — but can’t receive payments in Fiat, only Crypto. This technology would provide a hugely valuable option; to wire Fiat currency, and pay for the service/software in Crypto. Because delivery of the Crypto payment to the designated address is the licensing mechanism…
- zachrosen23 4y agoSounds really cool!
- pjkundert 4y agoThere are a lot of small software developers who would like to get paid, but either can’t charge potential clients (too much regulatory overhead), or are completely un-banked (reside in remote areas w/little infrastructure or are residents of the same country as the boogie-man du jour) This let’s them get paid, even if every government in the word shakes in rage at the idea of someone licensing their software. But for normal companies buying software through their finance department, having a Fiat-to-crypto account where they can get a USD$ invoice approved and wire the funds would be wonderful! I’ve fought for 6+ months just to get one invoice paid (USA client, Canadian vendor). This would have made my pain so much less. For African or Eastern European clients, I basically can’t offer them my software as they effectively can’t pay me. If you can KYC the client company, and then they could pay via your service and deposit to a crypto account associated with the KYC-ed vendor — this will be a huge win!
- toomuchtodo 4y agoIs this for domestic USD or international transfers? For domestic, FedNow is going live this year and will support instant settlement transfers up to $100k for a few cents per transfer. International transfers might be compelling depending on currency exchange rates. https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow
- zachrosen23 4y agoBoth. FedNow is promising! Excited to give it a try when it goes live. If we can't build + distribute a product better than the federal reserve, we've got bigger problems :)
- therockspush 4y agoLooks awesome and I've already shown it to a few folks. I'd avoid the "military grade" encryption marketing part though. For a lot of people, "military grade" means lowest bidder.
- zachrosen23 4y agoThanks! Fixed!
- bdcravens 4y agoI don't think most people think that, but I would say that the target market for this service would tend to suspect such an ambiguous term. I'd just specify the actual encryption algorithm (AES-256 I assume, which is frequently what is meant by "military grade")
- pffft8888 4y agothere is no military grade. there is NSA Suite A and Suite B, and one of them doesn't even have any published specification
- Ekaros 4y agoMilitary grade is bullshit to me. If I were ever writing a recommendation I would go with "industry standard" or "industry best practise" both almost equally meaningless. But still more valid, specially in financial system. As with standards you can't be blamed for doing it wrong.
- happymellon 4y agoI don't understand quite how slow the American banking system is. In the UK we have had immediate money transfers between institutions for a long time now. Why hasn't the US ACH system provided a near real-time transfer service, and the rules put in place to adopt it? There is Zelles, but from what I understand, not everyone has adopted it plus it's a 3rd party so it would reduce visibility of dirty money transfers for the Fed.
- fragmede 4y agoMost banks I've run into have adopted Zelle. The problem with Zelle are that the UX is shit, and there are strict limits on how much you can transfer, which severely hampers its usefulness.
- fransje26 4y agoBecause.. ..money? They can get away with being slow, and with overcharging for a transfer, so why not? The system they use can probably do an instant transfer at close-to-zero cost, but their "cartel" position means that they have no incentive to improve the current system. And if a "threat" comes from an exterior actor, they can a) use their influence to regulate it out, or b) lower their fees/accelerate the transfer process while "showing" how reactive they are..
- happymellon 4y agoSame day ACH appears to be a thing though. https://www.nacha.org/rules/same-day-ach-moving-payments-faster-phase-3 https://www.nacha.org/rules/same-day-ach-moving-payments-fas... So doing it but through another 3rd party doesn't make much sense. When the same system could be immediate or the destination takes a day or two, it's all a bit mad. Does the US not have the same levels of competition that you see elsewhere? Surely a financial institution that can offer immediate money movement, or even overnight, would drive people to use that bank. We have startup banks, like Starling, Monzo, Revolut who come up with some really neat ideas to differentiate.
- refurb 4y ago
- rkagerer 4y agoKind of unfortunate name - as soon as I saw "Fortress" I thought you were the buzzards trying to snap up 'Gox claims, and almost skipped this.
- pffft8888 4y agoAre you licensed in every state in the US? if not, it's against regulations to operate a money movement business without licensing by every state where you operate. Secondly you need AML and other compliance.
- flangola7 4y agoNo, AML is very bad and privacy invasive. It's no one's business but our own who we send money to. Monero and other models like it are the future.
- valdiorn 4y agoWhat the f? It costs 75 bucks to do a wire transfer in the US? I pay 4 pounds per SWIFT transfer, and I thought THAT was a ripoff...
- TonyTrapp 4y agoI've once paid 40€ for a wire transfer from Germany to the UK because I was stupid enough to pay in pounds instead of Euros. The goods I paid for were worth 40€. So this is also a problem outside of the US. It very much depends on your bank, too.
- sneak 4y agoThis is a great example of one of the many many real-world uses of cryptocurrency that has (likely) been made illegal by regulators.
- curiousgibbon 4y agoEurope has had instant, free bank transfers for years without any crypto in the underlying tech. The same regulators taking away crypto are perpetuating the horror show that is US retail banking in other ways.
- sneak 4y agoThey require identity, and a trust relationship with a bank, and only work inside the one defined economic zone. Cryptocurrency is better than those systems by almost all metrics.
- kfcharron 4y agoHow do you connect your bank? Are you using a 3rd party like Plaid or Trustly?
- bfeynman 4y agowhich basically is not an integration, literally here's my bank login info I trust you to do whatever you want with it....