Growth in Deposits Presents Opportunities and Risks

The American Banker today had an article detailing the recent trend of low cost deposit growth experienced by the major banks in the fourth quarter of 2009. According to KBW Inc.'s Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, the top 40 banks experienced a deposit growth rate of 8% in the quarter, with only a couple large banks intentionally allowing higher-cost deposits inherited during acquisitions to run off during the year.

Even though interest rates remain extremely low, consumers were still saving at a rate of 4.7% as a percentage of disposable income in November, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis primarily due to uncertainties in the marketplace and due to the view of banks being the safe harbor for funds accumulated during a time of reduced spending.
While bank revenues will not return to high levels until consumers begin to borrow again, productive deposit gathering should help banks lessen the impact of the Obama administration's proposed "financial crisis responsibility fee," which would subtract government-insured deposits from the covered liabilities on which the 15 basis-point tax would be based.

There is an opportunity and risk associated with this deposit growth however. For banks that have well developed onboarding and cross-sell programs in place, this deposit growth and the resultant increase in new accounts provides a tremendous foundation for developing long term relationships with an enhanced ROI. In addition, with households continually evaluating where to place their funds, firms with aggressive aquisition programs will benefit the most.

Conversely, those organizations who become complacent during this time of deposit growth could risk seeing the deposit growth over the past 15 months evaporate, moving either to other banking organizations or eventually to the equity markets as the economy grows stronger. I am recommending that my clients continue to focus on deposit acquisition programs and reach out to those new households they have recently acquired or households who have expanded their relationship and further secure the relationship through insight gathering, engagement programs and improved retention processes.

Eventually, it is expected that consumers will become more confident and will seek additional investment and savings options. When this occurs, it will be those organizations with the best customer experience and strongest relationships that will lose the least.

Can Banks Find Ways to Make Deposits Work Harder?

As was mentioned in yesterday's American Banker article, In Cash Glut, Banks Try to Discourage New Deposits, many banks are currently in a somewhat disadvantageous position of having an abundance of deposits at a time of depressed loan demand. With loan to deposit ratios dropping from a median of more than 105% to less than 95% in less than two years for the 15 largest banks, the excess liquidity is costing banks money.

This inability to earn adequate interest on these deposits, combined with lower overdraft fees and the potential for lower interchange income has banks that I am working with scurrying for ways to make up the revenue shortfall.

Some banks are reconfiguring their checking account pricing either by adding fees for enhanced services such as privacy protection or rewards program participation or are reducing costs by offering new streamlined products that have limited service structures (like Bank of America's new online checking test).

And there is no end in sight to the inflow of deposits, as the confidence level of both consumers and businesses is weak enough to encourage a heavier savings mentality and with the equity markets too risky for many investors. Many banks are seeing inflows even with historically low interest rates being paid on deposits.

While loan demand will eventually pick up and banks will most likely find ways to recoup some of the lost fee income through new products or pricing structures, the best long-term solution is to change from a transaction support mentality to a customer relationship perspective. This holistic view encourages the acquisition of accounts with a greater long term potential, a stronger emphasis on engagement of these accounts to increase fee income and reduce attrition, and a focused effort on increasing share of wallet through needs based cross-selling.

At a time when margins are razor this, loan/deposit ratios are anemic and traditional fee income is being attacked by new regulations, it is imperative that we maximize the value of relationships at every step of the customer lifecycle. Historically, too much revenue has been 'left on the table' and we have been accepting of people who open new accounts simply for a premium (gamers), customers with dormant or low activity accounts, and single service customers. Going forward, we need to refocus our efforts on increasing our value proposition at the same time we reduce delivery costs and maximize relationship value.

Has your bank stopped their deposit acquisition efforts? Has there been an increased focus on the engagement and cross-sell processes at your bank? I would love to hear about your bank's strategy for dealing with the abundance of deposits that currently exists.

DDA Under Siege

As part of the planning committee for this year's BAI PaymentsConnect 2011, I would love to take credit for the great title of this program track, but I am not sure even the great minds at the BAI could have foreseen how apropos "DDA Under Siege" would be for bankers attending this year's conference that wraped up today in Phoenix.

If there was a unifying theme from the many sessions I participated in this week, it was that revenue lost from last year's Reg. E and this year's Durbin amendment can not be completely recaptured through repricing. Instead there needs to be a stronger focus on targeted customer acquisition, share of wallet growth strategies, retention, product innovation and cost containment. While everyone at the event seemed to be interested in what others were going to do around checking repricing, the energy was definitely focused on building a stronger platform for the future.

Sessions at the conference started with a review of the BAI/Finacle Innovation Imperative Customer Sentiment Study completed last Fall, which found that while there is still a ways to go in the customer's confidence in the economy and the banking industry in general, the view of bankers is more closely aligned with the consumer than in the past couple years. This uniformity of beliefs should assist as banks try to build messaging around their checking repricing and try to improve the customer experience. The study also found that the customer's perception of their bank being 'innovative' tends to correlate with satisfaction, product ownership and overall confidence in their bank.

Steve Mott from BetterBuyDesign followed the BAI research presentation with a very fast paced competitive overview of the payments industry, including a discussion around Google, PayPal and several potential payments platforms from the U.S. and even China. His message was that it will be up to the banks to leverage their customer relationships, distribution network and trust advantages to maintain some level of ownership of the consumer payments continuum. He emphasized, however, that the bank 'ownership' of payments is anything but guaranteed.

David Stewart, Senior Expert from McKinsey & Co. expanded on his recent BAI Banking Strategies article, emphasizing the continued importance of the debit card in the bank's payment product arsenal. In addition to providing financial metrics around the value of the debit customer and the real impact of repricing with net interest margin and other fees are included, he emphasized that trying to move mindshare or marketshare from debit to credit may be close to impossible in today's economic environment. David also shared the view of McKinsey that the potential for merchants to 'steer' payments from one payment vehicle or another was unlikely since doing so may actually cost the merchant more in discounts than could be retrieved in interchange savings.

David also left the attendees with the following strategies for trying to reposition the debit product in the future:

• Base debit strategy on new debit economics as opposed to the old economics
• Price products for competitive advantage
• Rationalize customers on the relationship level not just checking level
• Remember that the debit product is still sticky and builds customer engagement

Ending the morning sessions was a presentation by Hitachi Consulting around the findings of their semi-annual Consumer Payments Preference Study released last Fall. Some of the highlights included:

• The millennial generation provides a good opportunity for growing payment volume (especially around mobile)
• Ease of use and convenience drive payments behavior
• Debit is still the preferred payment method
• Credit for online purchases expected to increase
• Micropayments will continue to increase

Hitachi also emphasized that security continues to be a concern of consumers and is impacting the take up rate of mobile for payments.

The afternoon sessions revolved around ways that banks are trying to take back the payments franchise and extend relationships beyond just the DDA, with speakers from the Federal Reserve, Fiserv, Comerica, Fifth Third, Peak Performance Consulting, Novantas, TD Bank and Huntington Bank all providing unique viewpoints. It was clear during these sessions that the days of every bank having close to the same product set are over. While some of the larger banks may retain a Free Checking program (PNC's decision was referenced often during the conference), many are completely revamping their deposit product portfolios in a way that reinforces their brand and leverages their customer franchise. All of the banks were also bullish on credit products as well as the need to continue to capture increased share of wallet.

Hank Israel from Novantas stated that banks should segment their customers based on channel preference and will most likely price their product set in one of the following ways:

• Keeping Free Checking (hoping to make it up on volume)
• Fee for services (make it up within the checking product set)
• Product bundling (packaging product sets based on customer needs)
• Relationship pricing (drive value from relationship perspective)

A strong case was made for all banks to move more to a relationship focus that can optimize customer profitability and focus on customer needs.

Tuesday's sessions focused on how banks can go on offense through mobile banking, prepaid debit and mobile payments as well as how institutions can better defend their customer base through onboarding and rewards. Some of the key takeaways from the mobile banking session presented by FIS and M&I Bank included:

• Smart phones will be used by the majority of consumers by the end of 2012
• Mobile banking will surpass online banking by 2015
• Remote deposit capture is the 'power app' that engages the customer (more are needed)
• Mobile banking customers have a 53% lower attrition rate (Tower Group)
• Mobile banking customers decrease VRU use by 55%

The speaker from M&I Bank also emphasized the need for banks to build mobile banking critical mass quickly, with a focus on expanding the solution set coming after 'getting the basics done right'. He referenced that mobile banking customers at his bank had higher balances, increased check card usage, and a better bill pay adoption rate than similar customers without mobile banking.

Greg Schreacke from First Federal Savings Bank and Robert Gitner from Velocity Solutions discussed the market potential for prepaid debit and how a bank could build a checking product set around the card. Research was presented that showed the following characteristics of a prepaid debit user:

• 53% have a checking account
• 50%+ want a prepaid debit because of overdraft fees
• 47% want immediate access to funds
• 46% believe they can get better service at a retailer than a bank
• 43% have had a previous problem that limits their ability to open a traditional checking

In the mobile payment presentation done by Calvin Grimes from Fiserv and Emmett Higdon from Forrester Research, the impact that mobile banking has on the customer relationship was again emphasized. It was shown that not only is a customer who uses mobile banking 30% more likely to stay with a bank, but the customer is also 26% more likely to recommend their bank. The team emphasized that now was not the time for banks to stand on the mobile financial services sidelines, but instead should be searching for ways to move their mobile solutions from being simply informational to being more transactional.

While many banks are still trying to build the business case for mobile payments, the following benefits were shared:

• Customer acquisition and retention benefits
• Lower cost of servicing
• Revenue generation potential and revenue retention
• Competitive parity
• Better customer experience
• Deeper customer engagement

It was also mentioned that, while security and privacy concerns still remail around mobile payments, these concerns will eventually work in favor of traditional financial institutions since customers inherently trust banks more than companies like Google, Apple or even their phone company.

The presentation that I did in partnership with Bill Stamp from KeyBank focused on the market trends around onboarding as well as the basics on development and implementation of a successful onboarding program. Interestingly, when the attendees were informally polled as to their current onboarding programs, while the majority were doing something, less than half were using more than one communication channel, very few were leveraging three channels, and only one bank was communicating with their customers more than 5 times in the first 90 days. It was stressed that this lack of a focused and consistent onboarding process could hamper organization's objectives of improving customer engagement, increasing fee income and definitely hurt cross-sale and retention efforts.

Bill's presentation around KeyBank's onboarding program illustrated that developing and managing an onboarding initiative is an ongoing process where testing of offers, channels, and communication sequence and cadence is continuously needed. Bill also shared how an onboarding process can reinforce cross-selling done at the new account desk and the importance of reinforcing engagement with services before the cross-selling of other products.

To further reinforce the importance of engagement and retention in a highly competitive and revenue challenged marketplace, Tom Brooks from Regions Financial Corporation, Lynne Laube from Cardlytics, and Aaron McPherson from IDC Financial Insights showed how a highly innovative merchant-funded rewards program may be the answer for banks looking to move away from a 'reactive' interchange funded program to a 'proactive' program that could be bring higher value to the customer and even make money for a bank.

Lynne Laube discussed two macro trends in the banking industry that has paved the way for a merchant-funded program:

• Digitization of payments (where and how payments are made)
• How customers relate to banks (>50% have online banking with 7 visits a month to their online banking site)

The benefits of a program like Cardlytics offering shared by the panel included the ability to target actual transactions for incremental growth and engagement. The benefit to the customer is that offers will always be relevant, while the merchant benefits from only providing offers to people very likely to be interested in their services. Since the targeting potential is so strong, more valuable offers can be developed as opposed to when a merchant is discounting to the masses.

While the program at Regions is relatively new, the benefits included:

• No enrollment is required (all customers with online banking and electronic statements are included)
• Ease of value transfer (no coupons are needed since the customer can electronically 'activate' an offer and 'redeem' the offer simply by using their debit card)
• Immediate notification of earnings/rewards
• Rebates deposited directly into account
• Offers are targeted and relevant
• Integrated user experience
• Fully funded as opposed to being a contingent liability like with points programs

The success of this innovative rewards program was probably best illustrated when Lynne mentioned that Cardlytics is partnering with 2 of the top 5 banks already and expect their customer base to grow from 15M today to more than 60M by the end of the summer. For more information on Cardlytics, read my earlier blog on the company done last year.

Without a doubt, this was a well-timed conference covering a broad range of topics on the front burner of many banks. On each attendee 'to do' list upon leaving, I am sure there will be a review of any pricing changes not yet implemented, a strong focus on ways to engage and retain new and existing customers we can ill afford to lose, and a much more accelerated movement to future payment products like mobile and even P2P.

I would love to hear from other attendees about their experience and takeaways.

From Free to Fee: Monetizing Mobile Deposits

Is your mobile banking channel a cost center or a profit center?

If your answer references that your mobile channel is 'saving you money' by diverting transactions from more costly channels, then I need to ask you how much you have reduced your CSR team, your teller staff and/or closed your branches as a result of mobile banking use?

You can generate revenue from your mobile channel, however, by building new pricing models that include fees for value-added services. As part of a new monthly series, 'From Free to Fee', I will be discussing revenue opportunities from several emerging financial services beginning with today's post on mobile deposits.

I am not the first to propose that banks and credit unions take a harder look at mobile banking from a revenue perspective. In fact, in May, 2011, Jim Bruene, publisher of the Online Banking Report and the NetBanker blog and founder of Finovate, proposed that new pricing models could propel online and mobile services to the next level in his Online Banking Report entitled, 'Creating Fee-Based Online Services'. He stated, "Unlike the $35 debit card overdraft fee, there are rational and understandable reasons for charging fees for value-added online and mobile services."

In his report, not only did Jim provide an historical perspective as to why and how banks and credit unions continually end up giving away their services, he provided 33 different services that could generate a fee and offered a perspective on the acceptance level by eight different customer segments.

In my post, I am going to try to tackle the opportunity for charging a fee for mobile deposits . . . even if your institution currently does not charge for the service. I will be referencing several research reports to provide rationale, especially a recently released pricing optimization study produced by Market Rates Insight entitled, Growth and Revenue Potential of Emerging Financial Services. This 168-page study covers 13 different emerging financial services, with insights into fee optimization, targeting, institutional differences and bundling options (I reviewed this study in a recent blog post).

I will also provide implementation and marketing recommendations based on my travels across the country and my work at New Control Direct and Digital. 

Note: A audio podcast of a 'Breaking Banks' interview by Brett King of Jim Marous and Dr. Dan Geller from Market Rates Insight around how and why banks should generate revenues from value added services is available for download here.

Moving From a Cost Savings to Revenue Generation Perspective

Many banks are under substantial pressure to reconsider the economics of retail banking, especially given the decline in net interest margins and the reduced income from sources such as debit interchange and overdraft fees. While there has been a slight rebound in deposit service fees lately, many fees are associated with services on the decline (mortgage refinancing).

Net Interest Margin for Banks with Assets > $10B

Aggregate Deposit Account Service Charges for Banks with Assets >$10B

There is no doubt that cost cutting has and will play a role in the effort to offset these reductions in income. But how much more can costs be cut without an impact on customer service or falling behind in the race for advancements in innovation and technology?

Another option is to have more customers pay for services that were previously 'free' like checking accounts. This strategy has been implemented by many banks over the past few years as evidenced by the decline in institutions offering free checking today (39 percent) compared to 2009 (76 percent) according to Bankrate, Inc. Many banks have also increased their overall service charge structure as well as the requirements to avoid fees.

The strategy of increasing fees on these basic services comes at a cost, however. According to the J.D. Power and Associates' 2012 U.S. Bank Customer Switching and Acquisition Study as well as a study conducted by the Deloitte Center for Financial Services, these types of fees lead to defections. 

A better option may be to build a new fee structure around emerging financial services that bring added value to the customer. Similar to options available when you purchase a car, these new fees could be singular line items and/or could be bundled into 'value packages' that the customer could select. The key is for financial institutions to no longer race to the 'free' finish line, but to assess a logical cost for benefits that bring a value to the consumer.

So, how big is the opportunity for generating additional revenue from mobile RDC?

Mobile Deposit Marketplace Potential

According to recent research by Mitek Systems, more than 12 million mobile users have made deposits exceeding $40 billion using their mobile device. In fact, four of the top banks in the country have reported extraordinary volumes of mobile deposits when considering the relative infancy of this service.

• Bank of America: 1M/Week
• JP Morgan Chase: >3M in May
• Wells Fargo: 1.4M in May
• PNC Bank: 450K/Month

The percentage of the largest financial institutions offering mobile remote deposit capture has almost tripled in the past two years, with 64 percent of the top 25 retail banks offering mobile deposit in 2013, up from 48 percent in 2012 and 22 percent in 2011, according to Javelin Strategy & Research. 

In addition, according to research from community bank mobile app provider, Malauzai Software, Inc., the usage of mobile deposit varies from organization to organization. Best-in-class financial institutions have approximately 20% of their active mobile banking end-users making deposits monthly and the average bank or credit union has 10% of active end-users making mobile deposits monthly. Average usage increases to 15%-17% of active end-users when looking at activity over a longer, 90-day period. 

The growth in mobile deposit use is not expected to subside any time soon either. In a June 2013 Celent survey of US internet active consumers, mobile deposit was the second most highly valued capability surveyed, with two-thirds of smartphone users ranking the capability “highly valuable” (6 or 7 on a 7-point scale). Among those surveyed, mRDC was more highly valued than person-to-person payments (54%) and the emerging capability to enroll a new bill payee using the phone’s camera (46%) which a handful of banks offer.

“Mobile deposit, the ability for consumers to quickly and easily deposit checks using their smartphone or tablet cameras has become a must have for banks as consumers increasingly adopt a mobile lifestyle,” said James DeBello, CEO of Mitek, San Diego.

Mobile Deposit Customer Profile

According to the Spring 2013 Raddon Financial Group National Consumer Research, mobile deposit is currently done by 7 percent of households, with 21 percent of Gen Y households using the service and 30 percent of higher income (>$50,000) Gen Y households using mobile deposit.

Indexing the age, income, balances and behavior of the mobile deposit user against all households (index=100), a mobile deposit user is younger (by 14 years), has a higher income and loan balance, has an average checking balance, and provides interchange income that is higher than the norm. Not shown is the fact that these households have average mortgage, equity and credit card balances.

  

Mobile deposit users, as expected, index significantly higher than the average household as to their likelihood of opening a new checking account online, and are more likely to use mobile payments, apply for a loan online, use a prepaid card and even make a payment through social media.

Bottom line, mobile deposit users are heavy users of all mobile services . . . or heavy users of mobile services and heavy mobile deposit users. The research also found that these customers use the branch at a rate that is 66 percent of the average customer.

Mobile Deposit Revenue Opportunity

One of the selling points of mobile banking has been the reduced costs of delivery of the channel. Estimated cost of in-person or call center delivery is quoted as roughly $4.00, with the cost of a mobile transaction being quoted as $.19. Even if we assume that these are accurate estimates of the fully loaded costs of each channel, an assumption that there is a 1:1 offset of transactions is definitely faulty.

Taking these assumptions one step further, if we assume one transaction per month, some quote a cost savings of close to $50 per mobile customer per year. This is highly unlikely (as presented by Bob Meara, senior analyst from Celent in a recent blog post).

While it is definitely easier to assume the cost savings above and to simply sell 'free', this leaves a great deal of potential revenue on the table based on recent research from Market Rates Insight. In the report, Growth and Revenue Potential of Emerging Financial Services, executive vice president and author of the report, Dr. Dan Geller, provides evidence of the willingness of consumers to accept 'value-added fees. In other words, while increasing fees on traditional services such as checking accounts will be seen as punitive and met with resistance (and potential defection), there is an opportunity to sell emerging financial services such as mobile deposit either singularly or as part of an enhanced service bundle.

In the study, both the importance of mobile deposit and perceived value of the service were measured. In the case of mobile deposit (13 emerging services were evaluated in the study), this evaluation was able to illustrate that more could be charged for a premium level of service (such as same day availability) while a lower fee could be charged for slower availability.

According to the study, 56 percent of consumers who did not already have the service found mobile deposit important to some degree. The average value consumers place on this service is $2.63 per month, while the 3.5 percent who found the service extremely important would pay $5.60 per month as shown below.

Mobile Deposit - Level of Importance (MRI, 2013)

Mobile Deposit - Distribution of Monthly Value (MRI, 2013)

The MRI Study also provided these distributions for different types of institutions (national, regional, local and credit unions).

Demographic Variances

From the perspective of demographics, it was interesting that the importance of mobile deposit was stronger for females (72.8%) than for males (64.9%) but that males were willing to pay significantly more on average for mobile deposit per month ($3.89) than their female counterparts ($1.82).

In addition, as would be expected based on the Raddon Financial Group research noted above, the importance of mobile deposit as well as the willingness to pay for the convenience decreased with age, while the importance and willingness to pay increased with income (specific details of these values are available in the report).

Potential for Bundling

Market Rates Insight (MRI) also developed revenue optimization scenarios for 26 different bundles of emerging financial services. Of the 26 bundles, four included mobile deposit as part of the service combination. These bundles included:

• Mobile Deposit with P2P Payments (optimal value of $8.38/mth)
• Mobile Deposit with Credit Score Reporting (optimal value of $8.57/mth)
• Mobile Deposit with Billpay, Low Balance Alerts and Prepaid (optimal value of $10.04/mth)
• Mobile Deposit with Payment Protection (optimal value of $9.23/mth)

While the development of optimal bundles would differ by customer composition, type of institution and competitive scenario, an analysis such as the one below combining mobile deposit with P2P payments illustrates how the analysis was performed for each bundle. As can be seen, while total revenue could increase with the addition of more services, the incremental revenue would actually decrease due to cost of offering and lower customer acceptance of an expanded bundle.

Overall Monthly Fees from Mobile Deposit/P2P Bundle + Add'l Services

Incremental Fees from Mobile Deposit/P2P Bundle + Add'l Services

"One of the most revealing and significant findings from our latest study on emerging financial services is that the principle of diminishing return applies to the bundling of financial services," states, Dr. Dan Geller, the author of the report.

Competitive Overview

Of the top five banks in the US, only U.S. Bank charges a fee ($.50) for each mobile deposit. Fees have been collected since 2010 by U.S. Bank, and while not currently supporting the Blackberry platform, mobile deposits are possible via an iPhone, iPad and Android devices. As with most programs, there are daily and weekly deposit limits.

Regions Bank is the other larger bank that currently charges for mobile deposits. Unlike the flat transaction fee charged by U.S. Bank, Regions has a sliding fee scale based on availability of funds. Immediate availability has a fee 1%-5% of the check amount with a minimum of $5. Overnight availability is $3 and 'standard processing' (two business days) is only $.50 per check. The 'standard' processing is actually faster than any of the 'neobanks' (Moven, Simple, GoBank) at this time. 

"Obviously, customers aren't going to be happy with any kind of cost you throw out there," stated Greg Melville, product owner of mobile products and payments for Regions Bank. "But if you offer a value-added service, such as immediate access to their funds, they have shown that it's something they are more than willing to accept." There was also some negative feedback initially, especially on social media, but very few of the complaints resulted in customers actually leaving the bank.


"FedEx pioneered the concept of higher fees for greater expediency and now consumers are expecting the same option from their financial institutions especially when it comes to mobile deposits," states Dr. Geller.

Jim Bruene, who was one of the first to write a study on the potential for fee revenue from mobile services applauded Regions Bank on their decision to charge a fee, but still believed it would have been better to include mobile deposit as part of a larger bundle with a monthly subscription fee. He also believed the fee structure is overly complicated.

Dave Kaminsky, a senior analyst at Mercator Advisory Group, a research firm focused on the payments industry, explained that users perceive mobile banking's offerings as worth the cost. "Customers tend to look at remote deposit capture or expedited processing as an additional value, so they're willing to pay for it—at least for now."

Many of the other large banks do not currently charge a fee, citing that the value of the mobile deposit customer is higher than average (as shown above), that they are less likely to leave the bank because of this 'sticky' service, that mobile deposits reduce their costs (somewhat debatable) and that there are more transactions that generate interchange income. While each of these arguments may be true to varying degrees, I still believe needed revenue is being left on the table.

The Process of Transitioning from Free to Fee

Despite all of the logic above around the why a  bank or credit union should charge for mobile deposits, the real challenge is in answering the how question without alienating your customers, frustrating your sales teams or negatively impacting the growth potential of mobile deposits. If there is a question around moving from a free to fee strategy, then research your customer base, competitive position, internal capabilities and institutional priorities. If there is not enough rationale around making this transition, maybe now is not the time.

According to James "Alex" Alexander, founder of Alexander Consulting, there are four options available when trying to implement fees when the market (or your current strategy) may be giving services away for free.

1. Don't Do It: With the potential challenges to moving to a fee-based structure, maybe it is better to wait until all impacted parties buy-in. Selling 'free' is easy. Selling 'fees' is hard.
2. Just Do It: This strategy is based on picking a date and letting customers and all employees know that there will be fees from the selected day forward. The upside is that this strategy is simple. The downside is that phones will ring and you need a very strong constitution to decipher the customer (or employee) threats from the reality. The key here is to not make exceptions, because exceptions quickly escalate into more and more fee waivers. If your entire team understands and believes the value proposition, they should be in a position to help stem attrition (there will be some).
3. Grandfather Existing Customers: Under this strategy, current customers who have used mobile deposit will not be charged, while any customers who use the service for the first time after the transition date will be charged a fee. The challenge is that customers (and employees) talk, potentially undermining this strategy.
4. Productize the Old and Sell the New: The challenge with any of the above strategies is that they can trigger a powerful, negative psychological response -- people don't like to have something taken away from them or to have differential treatment for a segment of the customer base. In this scenario, mobile deposit continues to be given away, but in a lower value manner. For the majority of organization, this approach is far superior to the others since the customer is given a choice of services and fee options.
• Productize the old: With 'basic' mobile deposit, this can be done by extending the period for funds to clear. Similar to what Regions Bank has done, change basic mobile deposit to a 7-10 day clearing period.
• Sell the new: For 'premier' mobile deposit, the clearing time can be reduced to 3 days or even shorter. When given the option, most customers will willingly opt for the faster clearing of deposit and will pay the fee. Another option is to include 'premier' mobile deposit in a bundle of mobile benefits as discussed above, with the option of charging an even higher fee.

Five Keys to Marketing a Fee-Based Mobile Deposit Program

To fully benefit from the a fee-based mobile deposit program, the solution must be marketed to customers. For those who have used the service, it is extremely simple and time saving. For those who haven't, it could be considered confusing and even scary from a perceived security and risk perspective. Similar to making a deposit at an ATM, until a customer tries the process and realizes it works, there can be barriers to acceptance and use. Here are five quick ideas to stimulate mobile deposit usage:

1. Free Trial: When you buy a new car, many come with satellite radio already installed and ready for use. In my case, I would never have taken this option at the time of sale, but would have most likely waited or never turned on the service. With the free trial (and very complete up-front training), I not only enjoyed the service . . . I now pay for it on a monthly basis. For mobile deposit, make a huge deal about this service an its benefits. Educate the customer up front and get them 'hooked' on the 'premium' mobile deposit service. After the trial, penetration of the service will be much greater and the opt-in rate for a faster clearing (and the fee) will be greater.
2. Incent Your Team: Don't compensate on sales volume alone, compensate on profitability (or at least reaching a minimum 'premium'/bundle penetration benchmark). By providing incentives, your front line will spend more time educating customers and will emphasize the benefits of your 'premium' mobile deposit service or bundle. Make sure your expectations are that all new customers will begin to use mobile deposit immediately.
3. Don't Accept Deposits: O.K., maybe a bit radical, but when a customer wants to deposit a check into their account in a branch, use this transaction as a customer education opportunity. Either arm your tellers with a tablet device used exclusively for mobile deposits (and other training) or use another available terminal in the office.
4. Build an Educational Video: a short educational video serves several purposes including being a landing page for online and mobile banking customers, providing a location for linking email communication, and providing a tool that can be used in the branch when a customer opens an account or wants to deposit a check.
5. Leverage Digital Communications: Don't be afraid to regularly email customers about the benefits of mobile depost. If you have implemented either a 'premier' or bundled mobile deposit product, each email will more than pay for itself. In addition, monitor customers who continue to deposit checks in your branches. Remind these customers (through email, direct mail, online banners, digital retargeting, mobile banners, etc.) that they can save time by taking advantage of mobile deposit.

The key to success in generating revenue from mobile deposit programs is to 1) communicate the value of the service, 2) provide customers the option of not having to pay (or use the service), 3) reinforce the importance of 100% acceptance of the process to all internal teams through education, mandate and incentives, 4) continuously market the service, 5) build a segmentation strategy and 6) measure results.

"Amid the growing proliferation of digital channels and rapidly evolving consumer behavior, retail banks can no longer afford to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach in devising and enhancing their mobile strategies," says Vin Malhotra, consulting partner for Banking and Financial Services with Cognizant Business Consulting, Cognizant's consulting practice. "Providing innovative and personalized mobile services based on consumer segmentation will enable banks to not only run better by maximizing their investments, but also run differently by strengthening customer engagement and driving greater adoption of mobile banking for competitive differentiation." 

If properly positioned, packaged, sold and reinforced, not only will your employees and customers understand the rational of moving from free to fee, but the service will serve as a retention tool as customers become more comfortable with the benefits and value the fee options. 

And mobile deposit will become one of several new revenue engines within your institution.

Coming Next Month: How to Generate Revenue from Mobile Bill Payments

Additional Resources 

Growth and Revenue Potential of Emerging Financial Services - Market Rates Insight (2013)

Study on Emerging Lifestyle Financial Services - Market Rates Insight (2012)

The Mobile RDC Cost-Savings Myth - Bob Meara on the Celent blog (August 2013)

The US Mobile App Landscape: An Annual Evaluation of Mobile Banking at Top US Banks: Celent (June 2013)

Leveraging an Omnichannel Approach to Drive $1.5B in Mobile Banking Cost Savings - Javelin Strategy and Research (July 2013)

Creating Fee-Based Online Services - Online Banking Report (May 2011)

Retail Bank Pricing: Resetting Customer Expectations - Deloitte (April, 2013)

Three Things You Need to Know About Mobile Deposit - The Raddon Report (August 2013)

The State of Consumer RDC 2011 - Celent (November 2011)

2011 Mobile Remote Deposit Capture: Creating a Compelling Business Case for Mobile Servicing - Javelin Strategy and Research (May 2011)

The ath Power Mobile Banking Study - ath Power Consulting (2013)

Mobile Deposit: Why Now . . . and How - Mitek Systems (2012)

Mobile RDC: Changing How Consumers Bank and Banks Compete - AlixPartners (October 2011)

Subscribe to Bank Marketing Strategy Via Email

P2P Payment Simplicity Square'd

Some of the best mobile banking apps are those that make everyday tasks simpler. Two of my favorites are GoBank's Balance Bar, that lets you see your account balance without login, and Moven's real-time mobile purchase receipts and analysis.

Tuesday, Square, Inc. joined my growing list of über-simple mobile banking applications with their introduction of Square Cash, a new app that makes sending money person to person as simple as sending an email. In today's mobile world, simplicity is the 'new black'.

P2P applications are definitely not new. There are literally hundreds of bank and non-bank applications that allow you to send money digitally, including Google, PayPal and Venmo. Consumers also have the choice of simply writing a check as they have done for years. But, I believe Square has introduced the most streamlined app that may have the broadest mass market appeal. 

Imagine emailing money to another person, without a fee, directly from a debit card without a login or password. All that is needed is a debit card number, Zip Code and expiration date from the sender and recipient (only need to be entered the first time you use the service). After that, sending money is only an email address away.

Compare that process to most banks, that require mobile banking sign-in (don't get me started), a test transaction and potentially more steps, even though there is normally no fee for the service. PayPal's P2P app transfers money from a PayPal account to another PayPal account, with transferring funds to a bank account being an additional step (in addition to a one-time signing up for PayPal). Google's P2P service uses email like Square, but requires signing up for Google Wallet and transferring funds to a bank account. Venmo is a growing favorite of younger people who prefer to send money via a Facebook-like newsfeed. This service also requires an application sign-up.

Unlike Square Cash, most of the other P2P applications have fees attached as shown below. Square Cash, however, only supports debit cards at this time, with low weekly limits ($250) unless you provide a mobile phone number and Facebook account or verify your full name, the last four digits of your social security number and date of birth -- then the limit is raised to $2,500. If the Facebook option is selected, no information or messages are ever passed to the social channel. Square is simply using Facebook as part of authentication.

Source: My Bank Tracker, September 2013

How Square Cash Works

I got introduced to Square Cash first thing yesterday morning with an email from fellow fintech geek, David Gerbino, who sent me $1 via email. To inform me of the 'gift', I received both an email from Dave that told me he was sending me money and an email from Square informing me of the same (shown below).

To transfer the funds into my account, I simply hit the 'deposit funds' link on my computer or cell phone, and enter my debit card number, the expiration date of my card and my Zip code as shown below. That's it (and I only need to do that once). 

Notice how spartan each step of the process is. While there is an animated background with color and theme changes over time, there is zero unneeded information, highlighting that there are no strings attached.

Upon making my deposit, I immediately received an email confirming my deposit was made and letting me know that I can now send money as well. As with the initial communication, my email and all processes are clearly optimized more for mobile than for a desktop.

The Square Cash mobile app (offered in both iOS and Android versions) is very simple, with a built in step-by-step tutorial and an FAQ component. I found the desktop and mobile versions to be equally concise even though it is clear that Square Cash was built as a mobile-first application.

With Square Cash, money is transferred from bank to bank with no funds ever being held in a Square account (like with PayPal). Square says that deposits will be made within 1-2 days, and I found it a bit ironic that it took me longer to log into my mobile banking account to confirm my deposit than it did to perform the entire transaction with Square.

According to Square, there are no plans for ads or fees on the service as it is offered today, yet it does plan to offer premium options (I would assume that a fee could be implemented for faster transfers much like some organizations do for mobile check deposits).

Pros and Cons of Square Cash

I believe the simplicity of Square Cash is the application's strongest benefit. While Square may not be known by everyone, it has a track record in the merchant arena and obviously plans to promote this service heavily. And unlike many of the competitors, if a payment is initiated with Square, the recipient can get their funds with minimal steps and can start using the app themselves immediately.

From early comments on both the Apple and Android app sites, early buzz is overwhelmingly positive. I am sure that since it is free it helps.

That said, there are still some drawbacks to Square Cash:

• Debit Card Only: While the limitation to only MasterCard and Visa debit cards may be viewed as a negative by some, I believe the limitation is consistent with the streamlined nature of the service. No decisions are needed as to what card or account to link. Simply link a debit card.
  
• Use of Email: Many of my Fintech friends debated on the merits of using email as opposed to SMS as the transfer media. Again, I believe this was a conscious decision by Square to appeal to the 'mass' market. While email is not used by Gen Y as much as texting, everyone has an email address and knows how to use it. The email-only decision may be adjusted over time. Again . . . simplicity.
  
  In addition, new Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) rules limit the ability to market via SMS without opt-in. Square can use email for subsequent marketing messages (such as for their wallet) or to promote the download of the Cash app like below.

• Limited Options: There is also no way to see a history of your transactions (except by keeping track of your emails) and you can only link one email to one debit card at this time. Again, I believe Square made a conscious decision to keep the application simple as opposed to filling it with a number of options that may be geared to 'power' P2P users.

• Transfer Limits: The limit on amount that can be sent ($250 a week unless additional personal information is provided and then the limit increases to $2,500) could be a drawback for some, but the service is not meant for large purchases.
  
• Fraud Liability: Square makes no guarantees in case of fraud beyond what is available on a person's debit card today. While they will reverse the transaction, that may not be enough.
  
• Funds Availability: While many fintech followers pointed to the 1-2 day funds availability stipulation as a negative, this is still faster than checks clear. However, the marketplace is definitely moving to real-time P2P so I expect Square to follow this trend over time (potentially with a 'premium' fee).
  
• Clarity: In the mission to remain a very clear app, some clarifications are tough to find. For instance, what if I want to change the debit card I have linked? (A Google developer answered this question online by referring me to www.square.com/cash/settings. As expected, the process was quite easy (even when I forgot my password).
  
  

Convenience vs. Security

Getting the balance right between convenience and security is difficult at best and potentially a death blow if miscalculated. Square definitely broadens the reach of its new product by leveraging email as the funds transfer tool. Very straightforward . . . very simple. 

But, with 73 percent of consumers being concerned about their card details being stolen on the internet (according to Datamonitor's 2012 Financial Services Consumer Insight Survey) there is likely to be a concern by potential users that there is a lack of visible payment authentication.

This highlights the paradox of mobile payments that must be overcome. On one hand, consumers find current authentication processes as being overly complicated and time consuming. On the other hand, increased awareness of cybercrime makes consumers concerned about how their security and privacy are being protected.

With Square Cash, they hope they struck the right balance. If they are wrong, and a highly publicized security breach occurs, it is likely to damage Square's goal of becoming a trusted consumer payments brand.

The Epitome of Digital Innovation Today

More than just a very easy way to transfer money, Square Cash represents what mobile innovation means today. Instead of trying to solve all of the world's problems in one app, companies are developing ways to use mobile to make our lives easier . . . from the customer's perspective. 

Square could have followed the lead of many of their payments counterparts and integrated Square Cash into their mobile wallet product. While it may have met corporate product growth objectives, it would have been a worse customer experience with a cluttered user interface. They could have carried forward their $.50 fee from the beta version of the service, at the cost of acceptance.

It is clear that Square Cash is a mobile-first application. Look at all of the 'unused' space on the desktop version of the application. Square Cash is a killer app because they didn't fall into the trap of moving beyond simple elegance. When you use the application for the first time (much like the first time I used my Moven or GoBank account), the first impression is, "Wow, that was really easy".

Irene Etzkorn, co-author of Simple: Conquering the Crisis of Complexity, recently wrote, 

"There's a tendency to think of innovation as coming up with the latest gadget, or adding new features onto existing applications. But the concept of breakthrough simplicity recognizes that today, the most powerful forms of innovation don't manifiest themselves in new bells and whistles. They take the form of better customer experiences (or patient experiences, citizen experiences, etc.). And one of the best ways to improve any experience is to simplify it -- remove complications, unnecessary layers, hassles or distractions, while focusing in on the essence of what people want and need in a particular situation."

What will be interesting to see is whether other payments players follow Square's lead toward a more simplified application. More importantly, it will be interesting to see if the banking and credit union industries will be able to focus on taking steps out of mobile and online processes for a better user experience.

Square Wins Best of the Web Award

Jim Bruene, publisher of the heavily followed Online Banking Report and Net Banker newsletter has a discerning eye for what is evolution and what represents evolution in digital financial services. As founder of Finovate, he has the opportunity to see banking innovation up close on a regular basis. This week, however, he awarded Square with a 'Best of the Web' award. In doing so, Jim said,

"It's been six months since he handed out an OBR Best of the Web award. Since then, there have been many new enabling technologies and promising applications. But with every passing year, it gets harder to raise the bar with a new digital financial product. Square did it this week. The company took P2P payments -- something PayPal commercialized in 1999, CashEdge/Fiserv bankified in 2009/2010, and Google simplified in May -- and distilled it down to its essence."

He sums it up best when he says, "It's hard to imagine P2P payments being any simpler. And Square is doing it all for free".

Square Cash Twitter Discussions

Regarding @Square Cash, the product managers for P2P at every major core provider just pooped their pants. https://t.co/vAnUksFttX
— Brian Billingsley (@BBillingsley) October 16, 2013

Send money via email to anybody, for free. Nice move from Square to get more people to join their ecosystem? // https://t.co/NG1HDlUK4s
— Philippe Masset (@_pioul) October 17, 2013

@bornonjuly4 @JimMarous @duperrieu @Square @leimer @rshevlin @sammaule My suggestion to the critics- try it. @Jack has got it goin’ on.
— Matt West (@Matt__West) October 17, 2013

@JimMarous the P2P game is tough, but I think it's all about text payments- Square and Google are on a goose chase. Still want Venmo
— Melanie Friedrichs (@mfriedri) October 16, 2013

Still it's a great play by Square. Acquire a large customer base w/ a default debit payment option. That's a good thing for Square merchants
— Cherian Abraham (@cherian_abraham) October 16, 2013

@sammaule @JimMarous @bornonjuly4 @duperrieu @Matt__West @Square @rshevlin mindshare leads to wallet share, engagement and usage - ask Apple
— Bradley Leimer (@leimer) October 17, 2013

The UX of of debit is much better than ACH (no trial deposits) and Square is making a big bet to get a two sided network going despite cost
— Gus Fuldner (@gusfuldner) October 16, 2013

Square's new e-mail money services is undeniably interesting, even if you do have to have a bank account to use it http://t.co/r3DKPrP6V7
— Dave Birch (@dgwbirch) October 16, 2013

Pay for dinner with one card, all my roommates send me #Square Cash... Simple. pic.twitter.com/RglsQj3k2t
— NickBastone (@NickBastone) October 16, 2013

Additional Resources

Square Cash vs. Venmo vs. PayPal vs. Google Wallet: What's The Best Way to Send Money Online? - Yahoo News (October 2013)

Square Cash: P2P on Steroids? - Deva Annamalai (October 2013)

Square Cash is a Head Fake - Drop Labs by Cherian Abraham

How Google Wallet Compares to Other P2P Payment Providers - My Bank Tracker (Sept. 2013)

Square Cash Makes Sending Money as Easy as Sending an Email - Square Press Release (October 2013)

Subscribe to Bank Marketing Strategy Via Email