7 ms·

WhatsApp is omnipresent for communication in Brazil, and WhatsApp Pay was ready before Pix, but the government blocked the launch to launch Pix first.[1] I rare

WhatsApp is omnipresent for communication in Brazil, and WhatsApp Pay was ready before Pix, but the government blocked the launch to launch Pix first.[1] I rarely see this mentioned. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/brazil-suspends-whatsapps-new-payments-system-idUSKBN23V075/ https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/brazil-suspends-w...

jowea 2y ago
Well I'm thanking the government for saving us from yet another Facebook monopoly thorough first mover advantage and network effects.
- afarah1 2y ago
  It's an interesting topic for study. Being the first to launch wasn't the only factor, but certainly an important one - WhatsApp Pay is available today, but it's nowhere near as popular as Pix. That's why I mentioned it. With that being said, I don't think people need "saving" from choosing to use a service. It's not certain that WhatsApp Pay would really take off as much as Pix did. I also don't think one should be thankful for having one monopoly replaced by another (in the sense of market dominance, you can still use alternative payment methods). Imagine instead of WhatsApp Pay it was WhatsApp itself. Meta is no saint, but at least messages are E2E encrypted. How would GovApp look like? As mentioned in the article, Pix has every transaction go directly through the central bank, as opposed to going through commercial banks like traditional payment methods. It may provide great usability, but also concentrates power and risk, as written in The Economist. So far there is no indication this power has been used in any malicious way, or that any significant breach occurred, but the infrastructure for that is there, and governments change. That should at least be in one's mind, if one values some kind of personal financial freedom.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  Good to hear your words loyalty and patriotism, dear citizen! I will contact your local commissar and make sure he increases your social credit score by 5 points. But we must also be realistic if we want to win against our eternal enemy Eastasia, and admit that Facebook coin would never be a monopoly because Visa, Mastercard and cash exist.
  - jowea 2y ago
    Thanks, maybe someday I will finally be promoted to Internet Shill First Class. But seriously, it would still be a monopoly on the UPI-like segment. Visa and Mastercard charge fees that make them less attractive to some users and make it harder on some users. There are good reasons Pix replaced much of physical cash use that cards didn't. And Visa and Mastercard are also American companies. Don't they sell transaction data? And meh, at least I can vote for my president, but not even the Facebook shareholders can vote Zuckerberg out IIRC. Although Zuck can't arrest me so I don't know.
    - Vilian 2y ago
      it's kinda funny seeing us-american always baffled that we have a somewhat functional democracy in contrast to their corporatocracy
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      Visa and Mastercard are agents for the customer, who benefits greatly from instant and convenient transactions, fraud protection, currency conversion, and credit lines. The merchant pays them for access to these customers, and I have to say that the fees are small for what an amazing service these networks provide. I don't think neither their fees nor their profits are outrageous. While Pix is a very impressive system, they offer no benefit to the customer over credit/debit cards. Only benefits to the merchants. For inter-personal transactions it is great, and for micro businesses. But as soon as your business grows beyond that, you will want to accept card payments. If Visa and Mastercard sell transaction data, can you point me to where I can purchase this data? Everybody is saying this is the case, but forgive me for having doubts. Is this what you are talking about? https://usa.visa.com/solutions/visa-commercial-data-solutions.html https://usa.visa.com/solutions/visa-commercial-data-solution... From what I understand, they are selling data in the aggregate, not individual transactions.
  - postsantum 2y ago
    Literally 1984. Literally! Meanwhile in reality: soory, out services are not available anymore because your goverment did a hecking bad thing and we don't like it. And we are taking the rest of your money btw
paintbox 2y ago
It's a question of national security not to let Meta eat that cake, and Brasil made the right choice. Tangentially related, I've heard talk of EU alternative to VISA and Mastercard, which I also believe is the right direction.
- DanielHB 2y ago
  These systems are not a direct alternative to Visa/Mastercard. They offer no credit and give no fraud protection and no way to revert transactions (ie you can never get your money back once you send it). Although they can replace a lot (most?) of existing transactions that are currently done through credit cards, there is still a place for them.
- afarah1 2y ago
  WhatsApp Pay is available today in Brazil. The official reason for blocking the launch was missing paperwork, but word on the street at the time was that it was to favor Pix. This is all mentioned in the Retuers article. The reasons for favoring Pix are left for one to speculate. You say national security, the other says financial surveillance and control over the population. Time will tell.
  - xinayder 2y ago
    I'd much rather let the Central Bank handle my instant payments, than Meta.
    - afarah1 2y ago
      So do most Brazilians, as today that choice is available. It's interesting how being the first to launch contributed to that preference, regardless of the widespread usage of WhatsApp. There are other interesting factors to consider. For example, a lot of people had WhatsApp but no bank account. As mentioned in The Economist's article there have been changes to the banking sector brought by Pix as well. Anyway, an interesting case study, and that's why I mentioned it.
    - djrj477dhsnv 2y ago
nindalf 2y ago
Same in India. WhatsApp wanted to use the payment system UPI but wasn't granted permission to do. Same reason I think - one app that handled all communication and all payments would have been too powerful.
- ksynwa 2y ago
  WhatsApp does handle UPI though. Were they denied in the past?
  - nindalf 2y ago
    WhatsApp had implemented the feature as early as 2018 but they were denied permission to launch. They were finally granted permission in 2020 … but only to onboard 1 million users. This limit was increased to 100 million in late 2022 and then removed in late 2024. (https://coingeek.com/whatsapp-pay-to-expand-upi-services-to-user-base-in-india/ https://coingeek.com/whatsapp-pay-to-expand-upi-services-to-...). WhatsApp currently has 600 million active users in India and has been the most popular app for a long time. If it had been granted permission in 2018 it would be the most popular UPI app now. There wouldn’t be a competitive app ecosystem like there is now.
ave_b_2011 2y ago
This is presented as problematic, but I don’t think it’s a negative thing. You wouldn’t want a foreign company with billions of dollars in their war chest in charge of your countries payment system.
- Mystery-Machine 2y ago
  Isn't that what any other payment system and most of the banks around the world are - a foreign company with billions of dollars in charge of payment system in a country. VISA, Mastercard, HSBC, UnionPay, ICBC, Santander... Or is this all Brazilian technology? The difference is that Meta is privacy data hoarder, not that it's a foreign company. And it's not "in charge of countries payment system", because that's pretty-much impossible, but "one of the payment systems in the country".
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    That's why China created UnionPay, so it wouldn't be held hostage to a large foreign corp (Visa, MC) for CC payments. But most countries didn't have that capability. Kudos to Brazil for putting something together for domestic digital payments so as not to rely on a foreign company.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  actually, foreign capital and foreign investment is good - and fair play before the law facilitates that. securitization and anti-globalization makes us all poorer, worse off, and more prone to conflict. lawfare is an addictive drug and can lead to serious outcomes, as history in Brazil shows any number of times - like even with the current president.
  - maronato 2y ago
    WhatsApp pay wouldn’t be an investment. All money made from it, directly or indirectly, would go straight to the US
    - 2y ago
Mystery-Machine 2y ago
What people outside of Latin America don't realize that "they were missing some documentation" is just not true for companies of the size of Meta. They have the best lawyers in the world and I'm pretty sure they used them to prepare all the documentation for this big launch. "You're missing a document" means: we're just fucking around and not letting you in.
diego_moita 2y ago
Good! The president of the Brazilian Central Bank is accountable. Zuckaberg isn't.

jowea 2y ago

Well I'm thanking the government for saving us from yet another Facebook monopoly thorough first mover advantage and network effects.

afarah1 2y ago
It's an interesting topic for study. Being the first to launch wasn't the only factor, but certainly an important one - WhatsApp Pay is available today, but it's nowhere near as popular as Pix. That's why I mentioned it. With that being said, I don't think people need "saving" from choosing to use a service. It's not certain that WhatsApp Pay would really take off as much as Pix did. I also don't think one should be thankful for having one monopoly replaced by another (in the sense of market dominance, you can still use alternative payment methods). Imagine instead of WhatsApp Pay it was WhatsApp itself. Meta is no saint, but at least messages are E2E encrypted. How would GovApp look like? As mentioned in the article, Pix has every transaction go directly through the central bank, as opposed to going through commercial banks like traditional payment methods. It may provide great usability, but also concentrates power and risk, as written in The Economist. So far there is no indication this power has been used in any malicious way, or that any significant breach occurred, but the infrastructure for that is there, and governments change. That should at least be in one's mind, if one values some kind of personal financial freedom.
carlosjobim 2y ago
Good to hear your words loyalty and patriotism, dear citizen! I will contact your local commissar and make sure he increases your social credit score by 5 points. But we must also be realistic if we want to win against our eternal enemy Eastasia, and admit that Facebook coin would never be a monopoly because Visa, Mastercard and cash exist.
- jowea 2y ago
  Thanks, maybe someday I will finally be promoted to Internet Shill First Class. But seriously, it would still be a monopoly on the UPI-like segment. Visa and Mastercard charge fees that make them less attractive to some users and make it harder on some users. There are good reasons Pix replaced much of physical cash use that cards didn't. And Visa and Mastercard are also American companies. Don't they sell transaction data? And meh, at least I can vote for my president, but not even the Facebook shareholders can vote Zuckerberg out IIRC. Although Zuck can't arrest me so I don't know.
  - Vilian 2y ago
    it's kinda funny seeing us-american always baffled that we have a somewhat functional democracy in contrast to their corporatocracy
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    Visa and Mastercard are agents for the customer, who benefits greatly from instant and convenient transactions, fraud protection, currency conversion, and credit lines. The merchant pays them for access to these customers, and I have to say that the fees are small for what an amazing service these networks provide. I don't think neither their fees nor their profits are outrageous. While Pix is a very impressive system, they offer no benefit to the customer over credit/debit cards. Only benefits to the merchants. For inter-personal transactions it is great, and for micro businesses. But as soon as your business grows beyond that, you will want to accept card payments. If Visa and Mastercard sell transaction data, can you point me to where I can purchase this data? Everybody is saying this is the case, but forgive me for having doubts. Is this what you are talking about? https://usa.visa.com/solutions/visa-commercial-data-solutions.html https://usa.visa.com/solutions/visa-commercial-data-solution... From what I understand, they are selling data in the aggregate, not individual transactions.
- postsantum 2y ago
  Literally 1984. Literally! Meanwhile in reality: soory, out services are not available anymore because your goverment did a hecking bad thing and we don't like it. And we are taking the rest of your money btw

paintbox 2y ago

It's a question of national security not to let Meta eat that cake, and Brasil made the right choice. Tangentially related, I've heard talk of EU alternative to VISA and Mastercard, which I also believe is the right direction.

DanielHB 2y ago
These systems are not a direct alternative to Visa/Mastercard. They offer no credit and give no fraud protection and no way to revert transactions (ie you can never get your money back once you send it). Although they can replace a lot (most?) of existing transactions that are currently done through credit cards, there is still a place for them.
afarah1 2y ago
WhatsApp Pay is available today in Brazil. The official reason for blocking the launch was missing paperwork, but word on the street at the time was that it was to favor Pix. This is all mentioned in the Retuers article. The reasons for favoring Pix are left for one to speculate. You say national security, the other says financial surveillance and control over the population. Time will tell.
- xinayder 2y ago
  I'd much rather let the Central Bank handle my instant payments, than Meta.
  - afarah1 2y ago
    So do most Brazilians, as today that choice is available. It's interesting how being the first to launch contributed to that preference, regardless of the widespread usage of WhatsApp. There are other interesting factors to consider. For example, a lot of people had WhatsApp but no bank account. As mentioned in The Economist's article there have been changes to the banking sector brought by Pix as well. Anyway, an interesting case study, and that's why I mentioned it.
  - djrj477dhsnv 2y ago

nindalf 2y ago

Same in India. WhatsApp wanted to use the payment system UPI but wasn't granted permission to do. Same reason I think - one app that handled all communication and all payments would have been too powerful.

ksynwa 2y ago
WhatsApp does handle UPI though. Were they denied in the past?
- nindalf 2y ago
  WhatsApp had implemented the feature as early as 2018 but they were denied permission to launch. They were finally granted permission in 2020 … but only to onboard 1 million users. This limit was increased to 100 million in late 2022 and then removed in late 2024. (https://coingeek.com/whatsapp-pay-to-expand-upi-services-to-user-base-in-india/ https://coingeek.com/whatsapp-pay-to-expand-upi-services-to-...). WhatsApp currently has 600 million active users in India and has been the most popular app for a long time. If it had been granted permission in 2018 it would be the most popular UPI app now. There wouldn’t be a competitive app ecosystem like there is now.

ave_b_2011 2y ago

This is presented as problematic, but I don’t think it’s a negative thing. You wouldn’t want a foreign company with billions of dollars in their war chest in charge of your countries payment system.

Mystery-Machine 2y ago
Isn't that what any other payment system and most of the banks around the world are - a foreign company with billions of dollars in charge of payment system in a country. VISA, Mastercard, HSBC, UnionPay, ICBC, Santander... Or is this all Brazilian technology? The difference is that Meta is privacy data hoarder, not that it's a foreign company. And it's not "in charge of countries payment system", because that's pretty-much impossible, but "one of the payment systems in the country".
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  That's why China created UnionPay, so it wouldn't be held hostage to a large foreign corp (Visa, MC) for CC payments. But most countries didn't have that capability. Kudos to Brazil for putting something together for domestic digital payments so as not to rely on a foreign company.
whimsicalism 2y ago
actually, foreign capital and foreign investment is good - and fair play before the law facilitates that. securitization and anti-globalization makes us all poorer, worse off, and more prone to conflict. lawfare is an addictive drug and can lead to serious outcomes, as history in Brazil shows any number of times - like even with the current president.
- maronato 2y ago
  WhatsApp pay wouldn’t be an investment. All money made from it, directly or indirectly, would go straight to the US
  - 2y ago

Mystery-Machine 2y ago

What people outside of Latin America don't realize that "they were missing some documentation" is just not true for companies of the size of Meta. They have the best lawyers in the world and I'm pretty sure they used them to prepare all the documentation for this big launch. "You're missing a document" means: we're just fucking around and not letting you in.

diego_moita 2y ago

Good! The president of the Brazilian Central Bank is accountable. Zuckaberg isn't.