4 ms·

I'm surprised how forward-thinking India is with their financial regulations. Working in a peripherally related field, I had to go down the rabbit-hole with th

by hakfoo 4y ago

I'm surprised how forward-thinking India is with their financial regulations. Working in a peripherally related field, I had to go down the rabbit-hole with their E-Mandate concepts and it seemed like a feature that prioritized user consent over making it easy to transact-- in other words, something that would never get traction in the US. What is giving them an edge there? Is it a "we're late to market, so we don't have to repeat the mistakes we saw everyone else doing" thing? Is it a "let's throw up intentional hoops to make domestic products more competitive" play?

2Gkashmiri 4y ago
yeah. 2nd most likely. there isn't much of "lobbying" that you see in USA, say in turbotax or visa/MC or paypal. you have payment gateways fighting in terms of functionality and features, the standard is 2% across the board for "most" payments at retail. In volume, that % can go much much lower. Because of competition, the best bet of any org is to be as open as possible. If amazon implemented their own wallet system, why would i use that when someone else's works ACROSS the board? there is a victim to this "openness" also. Look up "paytm". a fincorp that made headlines with "Cashback" and stuff but when UPI turned up, their wallet essentially dried up. Earlier, they would PAY users with cashback to use their own wallet but now they CHARGE EXTRA for the privilege of using their services. plus, they went public and lost a lot of money. >"we're late to market, so we don't have to repeat the mistakes we saw everyone else doing" thing? i think USA gives too much credit and puts too much reliance on credit cards and "fraud protection". There used to be no autopay until last year i think so EVERY payment had to be a conscious effort. If i paid to amazon and i did not get the goods, well "contact amazon". there is no recourse from banks or cards or gateways. That is not a bad deal. say you do buying/selling on facebok marketplace, well since you are paying directly to the seller, or recieving funds, there is no one to blame. then there is actual fraud, like someone takes your ATM card and withdrawls money or takes your password and siphons off funds. In that case, you have to approach the police and have them fix that or contact the bank and have them try to revert the entry. Why should the intermediary "card" be in the middle? why should they earn that much for one-off chance of fraud?
2Gkashmiri 4y ago
>seemed like a feature that prioritized user consent over making it easy to transact-- yes. the OTP/PIN concept has been firmly ingrained in everyone. It works fine and people are taught to not proceed if there isn't one or report if you saw a transaction that went without your approval. edge i would say the competition. Plus, the government is making the infra so companies can develop ON TOP of existing infra and create value. i am pretty sure you can have UPI across USA/EU in a matter of 2-3 years if people want that. That would also mean VISA/MC and PAYPAL would have to die an instant death but that would be the good thing

by hakfoo 4y ago

2Gkashmiri 4y ago

yeah. 2nd most likely. there isn't much of "lobbying" that you see in USA, say in turbotax or visa/MC or paypal. you have payment gateways fighting in terms of functionality and features, the standard is 2% across the board for "most" payments at retail. In volume, that % can go much much lower. Because of competition, the best bet of any org is to be as open as possible. If amazon implemented their own wallet system, why would i use that when someone else's works ACROSS the board? there is a victim to this "openness" also. Look up "paytm". a fincorp that made headlines with "Cashback" and stuff but when UPI turned up, their wallet essentially dried up. Earlier, they would PAY users with cashback to use their own wallet but now they CHARGE EXTRA for the privilege of using their services. plus, they went public and lost a lot of money. >"we're late to market, so we don't have to repeat the mistakes we saw everyone else doing" thing? i think USA gives too much credit and puts too much reliance on credit cards and "fraud protection". There used to be no autopay until last year i think so EVERY payment had to be a conscious effort. If i paid to amazon and i did not get the goods, well "contact amazon". there is no recourse from banks or cards or gateways. That is not a bad deal. say you do buying/selling on facebok marketplace, well since you are paying directly to the seller, or recieving funds, there is no one to blame. then there is actual fraud, like someone takes your ATM card and withdrawls money or takes your password and siphons off funds. In that case, you have to approach the police and have them fix that or contact the bank and have them try to revert the entry. Why should the intermediary "card" be in the middle? why should they earn that much for one-off chance of fraud?

2Gkashmiri 4y ago

>seemed like a feature that prioritized user consent over making it easy to transact-- yes. the OTP/PIN concept has been firmly ingrained in everyone. It works fine and people are taught to not proceed if there isn't one or report if you saw a transaction that went without your approval. edge i would say the competition. Plus, the government is making the infra so companies can develop ON TOP of existing infra and create value. i am pretty sure you can have UPI across USA/EU in a matter of 2-3 years if people want that. That would also mean VISA/MC and PAYPAL would have to die an instant death but that would be the good thing