@dan this sums up Revolutās model to a T. Low hanging fruit, white label products provided by others, who will take their cut a long the way.
But reading between the lines, it feels like speed to market is more important than doing things āthe right wayā cf. Monzo, who came under heavy, sustained criticism for not āinnovatingā hard or fast enough. Whilst Revolut was charging a lead and offering a racy basket of products, Monzo was building a bank (in the regulatory sense) from the ground up, to provide an agile yet robust core product. To me thatās the real innovation, as opposed to sticking your UI on top of Mambu (looking at you N26!)
As @freetrade_cal pointed out
and ( incoming ), offshoring their banking authorisation to a potentially less robust regulatory environment. Revolut certainly arenāt alone in this m.o. but again, a picture of shortcuts emerges.
Does this even matter to customers? The honest answer is probably not to most people. But for me getting the essentials right is important, and is certainly not incompatible with building innovative, paradigm shifting businesses that are in it for the long haul - as customer and investor thatās where I see value.
Totally, and they are seemingly doing astoundingly well from valuation, transaction volume, and customer acquisition perspectives, and this should be recognised and congratulated. But customers, investors, markets, people essentially, can be fickle things. Clearly, Yuri Milner knows something I donāt
Also, I canāt speak for anyone else, but I donāt necessarily consider the comments and criticism as taking shots per se. Itās really all part of a robust conversation around an incredibly exciting, fast moving industry. A point I make quite often is that as customers of, and investors in these businesses, itās important we have visibility and understanding of how they operate and the potential ramifications of their choices they make. Itās not a game, itās ultimately peopleās money and their futures.