|
Having built the original prospectus for Project Action, I can say that a
contributing reason for its demise was investments in debit card solutions at
the time, and a the lack of interest in credit transfer alternative in
the US ACH network.
Regarding standards, most financial institutions participate in standards
with a defensive, not offensive posture. A current day example of
this can be seen if you look at BizTalk, RosettaNet, Swift, and IST
integrations being prepared.
Michael Versace
Financial Services
NEC Solutions America
-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Weinberg
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 3/6/2004 2:14 PM
To:
'internet-payments'
Cc:
Subject: RE: The FI
e-standardization blues
Anders,
I agree with the premise on standards.
One small point about Project
ACTION. It wasn't killed by the banks
due to anything related to
standards or the public domain. It was
killed because the banks didn't
want to invest in a system which, while
desparately needed, would
threaten the higher revenue streams from existing
payments.
Best regards,
Allen
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
= = = = =
Try our new site: www.PaymentsNews.com
Allen
Weinberg
Glenbrook Partners
Trusted Advisors in Financial
Services
(415) 305-6660
www.glenbrook.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: Anders Rundgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
Saturday, March 06, 2004 7:49 AM
To: internet-payments
Subject: The FI
e-standardization blues
The FI e-standardization
blues
-----------------------------------
Have you seen the movie "A
beautiful mind"? In case
you have not it is about a Nobel-prize
winner (disturbed
but brilliant at the same time), who's primary thesis
is
an game optimization theory that goes as follows:
"You gain more
by doing something that your entire group
gains by, than by doing
something that only benefits yourself"
I believe this applies extremely
well the establishment of
infrastructure standards.
An industry
which seems completely unaffected by this theory as
well as by the virtual
cemetery of earlier failed proprietary efforts,
is the financial
sector. Even in a very small country like Sweden
the FI sector (only
comprising of 4-5 major banks) have
managed to not unite on:
-
Electronic invoices (3 different) [1]
- On-line payment systems (4-5
different)
- Citizen electronic ID software/system (3-4 different)
A
recent US example is NACHA's Project ACTION, were
the members preferred
shelving the entire project rather than
putting it in the public domain
where it might have spurred the
creation of a highly needed on-line payment
system standard.
It is also interesting to note that banks in spite of
their heavy
use of IT, are virtually invisible in general
standardization
efforts and that they in their own standardization
efforts,
often charge huge member fees excluding a lot of
potentially
useful people and organizations.
I believe it is time
for the financial industry to [re]enter the
21st century with an open mind
instead of unmotivated fear.
Anders Rundgren
1] After 5 years(!)
of unsuccessful operation, they have finally
concluded that the customers'
apparently have no interests in
supporting three invoicing "standards" that
essentially do the
same
thing.
|
