Those do sound like decent features, although I'm not sure I'd pay a monthly fee for them personally. (I did envelope savings via YNAB for a while; I suppose ha

Those do sound like decent features, although I'm not sure I'd pay a monthly fee for them personally. (I did envelope savings via YNAB for a while; I suppose having it integrated directly into my bank account might make things smoother?) I certainly agree that banks are pretty bad about improving their features and general UX. My comment was largely responding to the total lack of self-awareness in the article, which treats concepts like "tech company rebuilds complex legacy system" and "unregulated banking innovation" as being obviously good things in and of themselves. (The article seems to be part of a web3 blog, so no surprises there.) Taking the idea more seriously, I would expect neobanks to fail in a few different ways: 1. Being bought out or cut off by actual banks who decide they can offer new services directly without giving middlemen a cut of the money. 2. Enshittification. Lure in customers with low fees, then gradually add to the fees and start harvesting personal information for advertising. 3. Fraud. Seems to be a default option for many ambitious go-getters handling other people's money in a lightly-regulated environment. I'm feeling rather cynical about both tech and finance these days, but I wouldn't mind being wrong for a change.