Government Releases Crowd-Sourced Equity Funding Framework

Crowd-sourced funding (CSF) is an emerging form of funding that allows entrepreneurs to raise funds from a large number of investors. It has the potential to provide finance for innovative business ideas and additional investment opportunities for retail investors, while ensuring investors continue to have sufficient information to make informed investment decisions.

The Government released its draft framework for consultation today.

The Bill will remove regulatory barriers to CSF, and will make available a new funding source for businesses. It is expected that the overall ‘per business’ compliance costs for issuers that participate in crowd-sourced funding will decline. However, given the likely growth in the number of businesses raising funds through these arrangements, the aggregate compliance burden over the economy is expected to increase.

A number of recent reviews have identified the potential of CSF to provide new and innovative businesses with access to the finance they need to develop their product or service and grow.

  1. The Government’s Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda, released in October 2014, called for consultation on a regulatory framework for CSEF.
  2. The Murray Inquiry into Australia’s financial system, released by the Government in December 2014, specifically recommended reducing regulatory impediments to crowdfunding by introducing graduated fundraising regulation. In its response to the Inquiry, released in October 2015, the Government accepted this recommendation.
  3. The Productivity Commission’s Business Set-up, Transfer and Closure draft report, released in May 2015, also supported the introduction of a CSEF framework.

Earlier in December, Minister for Small Business and Assistant Treasurer the Hon Kelly O’Dwyer said

“Today’s announcement is a key priority of the Turnbull Government’s National Innovation and Science Agenda”.

“CSEF or crowd funding is an emerging way for start-ups and early stage businesses to access the funding and investors they need, while maintaining adequate protections for retail investors who share in the risks and successes of these businesses.

“Following extensive consultation, the legislation will allow unlisted public companies with less than $5 million in assets and less than $5 million in annual turnover to raise up to $5 million in funds in any 12 month period.

“Companies that become an unlisted company in order to access crowd-sourced equity funding will receive a holiday of up to five years from some reporting and governance requirements.

“The Turnbull Government recognises the need to allow investors to make informed decisions and companies raising funds through crowd funding will be required to release an offer document.

“While investors will be able to invest an unlimited sum in crowdfunding, there will be a cap of $10,000 per issuer per 12-month period to ensure that mum and dad investors are not exposed to excessive risks.

“Australia’s CSEF model is competitive globally with the issuer cap of $5 million each year higher than the US and New Zealand cap, and the investor cap of $10,000 per issuance higher than the average in New Zealand and the UK.

“Intermediaries will play an important gatekeeper role and will need to conduct checks on companies before listing their offer. Intermediaries will be required to hold an Australian Financial Services Licence, providing issuers and investors with confidence in the integrity of the intermediary.

“Ongoing responsibility for issuing licenses for intermediaries and monitoring the operation of the crowd-sourced equity funding framework will sit with ASIC.

“Regulations to support the framework for crowd-sourced equity funding will be released for consultation shortly. The Government will also consult on options to facilitate crowd-sourced debt funding in 2016,”

Closing date for submissions: Friday, 29 January 2016.

Google trumps Apple for Australian mobile payments, but for how long?

From The Conversation.

After failing to come to agreement with Apple to enable mobile phone payments, six of Australia’s biggest financial institutions this week signed on with Android Pay. The service will go live in Australia in the first half of 2016.

Both Android Pay and its competitor Apple Pay allow consumers to pay for purchases using a card-linked mobile phone by tapping their phone in the same way you would tap your card at the point of sale. The services also work with smart watch devices, and in the case of Apple Pay, by holding the fingerprint on the phone.

Apple Pay had first mover advantage in the mobile payments space, having launched in the US in October 2014 and then in Britain in July 2015, before entering the Australian market this November.

To achieve traction in the US Apple Pay relied on the major American payment card issuers, earning money by taking a slice of the interchange fees that American card issuers gained from merchants. Interchange fees in the US average out at about US$1 for every US$100 of transactions and Apple Pay is believed to earn about US15 cents on every US$100 of transactions.

Apple Pay had been asking for the same slice of the interchange fees that are earned by the card issuers in other countries. In Britain the banks were able to negotiate Apple Pay’s slice to a much lower fee, believed to be only a few pence per one pound transaction, partially because interchange fees in Britain are much lower than in the US. Apple Pay originally wanted the same 15 cents for every $100 spent on its platform in Australia. But Australia’s main banks would not agree to this, given interchange fees in Australia are on average 50 cents for every $100 spent.

Apple Pay boxed in

When Apple Pay finally launched in Australia it was in tandem with American Express, which at that time was not subject to the RBA imposed interchange fees that applied to MasterCard and Visa payment cards. Since then the RBA’s Review of Card Payments Regulation suggested bringing so-called American Express “companion cards” into the interchange regulatory fold. This would make them subject to the same interchange fee cap as MasterCard and Visa. This would help the RBA to achieve its aim of “competitive neutrality” between the various card schemes.

At first Apple Pay’s choice of American Express seemed like a good one. American Express has around 6.8 million credit and charge cards in circulation, of the total of around 42 million payment cards in Australia. But Apple Pay can only be used on American Express’s “proprietary” cards (not on its “companion cards”) and an RBA survey in 2014 found companion cards are now more widely held than American Express proprietary cards. So in reality Apple Pay can only be used on a minority of American Express cards in Australia.

And since American Express charges a higher average merchant service fee (1.7%), more retailers accept MasterCard and Visa. Small to medium sized enterprises are also less likely to accept American Express and this may prove to be an Achilles Heel for Apple Pay.

Deal breaker?

Imagine going into your local café to buy two coffees, using Apple Pay via your American Express card, say at $3.80 per coffee. Total cost to you $7.60. If the café charges a 2% surcharge for accepting American Express, then you will pay $7.75. Why pay 15 cents more, when you could use your MasterCard or Visa, credit or debit card? You can easily avoid the surcharge and still “tap and go”.

In Australia almost 70% of credit card transactions are now “tap and go”, and Australia is thought to be the world leader in the adoption of contactless payments. This is thanks to a simultaneous push to encourage merchants to use terminals that accept contactless cards and the willingness of the banks to issue these cards to customers. The “tap and go” functionality that Apple Pay offered as an innovation in the US was already a feature of the market here in Australia.

And despite initial enthusiasm for Apple Pay, persuading US consumers to switch from using physical cards or cash to using Apple Pay has been tough going. A recent survey found Apple Pay use was declining. Indeed shoppers used it on “Black Friday” (November 27, 2015) for only 2.7% of their transactions.

Australian challenge

In Australia, Android sales beat out Apple in the three months to October 2015, with Android operating system sales at 54.9%, compared to 37.9% for Apple’s iOS. So the decision by a group of Australian bank card issuers to go with Android Pay seems to make sense. ANZ Bank, Westpac (including Bank of Melbourne, Bank of South Australia and St George), Bendigo and Adelaide Bank, ING DIRECT, Macquarie Bank and the credit union payments provider Cuscal will be the first to offer eftpos, MasterCard and Visa on Android Pay from mid-2016.

Apple’s first mover advantage may turn out not to be so critical in Australia, but watch this space!

Author: Steve Worthington, Adjunct Professor, Swinburne University of Technology

ANZ teams up with Google to bring Android Pay to Australia

ANZ today confirmed it will offer Google’s Android Pay to its customers allowing them to make contactless payments with their Android phone, after being named an Australian launch partner for the mobile payment platform.

By mid next year, ANZ debit and credit cardholders in Australia will be able to use Android Pay to make quick and secure purchases wherever contactless payments are accepted. Android Pay also allows for in-app payments as well as storing gift cards, loyalty cards and special offers.

ANZ Managing Director Products and Marketing Matt Boss said: “This is an important milestone in the evolution of the mobile payments landscape and Google’s decision to make Australia one of the first markets after the United States to implement Android Pay demonstrates how quick Australians adopt new technologies.

“Australians are already the highest users of contactless payments in the world and given the dominance of Android in the local smartphone market, it made sense for us to partner with Google on the introduction of Android Pay into Australia.

“Android Pay will provide our customers with a quick and secure way to make payments with their smart phone and we think it will have strong uptake given the ability to incorporate additional features such as gift and loyalty cards,” Mr Boss said.

ANZ also confirmed that it will be launching its own mobile wallet for Android in the first quarter of 2016, offering customers a choice of solutions.

More than 60% of all card transactions in Australia are now contactless and accepted across a network in excess of 70% contactless merchant payment terminals. For more information on Android Pay visit www.android.com/pay

US Lesson On Mobile Payments

Interesting interview from eMarketer, showing how customer centricity transforms mobile payments.

Panera Bread, the fast casual bakery-café with more than 1,900 locations in North America, was among the first wave of brick-and-mortar merchants to accept in-store and in-app payments with the Apple Pay mobile wallet in 2014. Blaine Hurst, Panera Bread’s chief transformation and growth officer, spoke with eMarketer’s Bryan Yeager about the adoption of Apple Pay and other mobile payments among the company’s customers.

eMarketer: Slightly more than a year has passed since Apple Pay launched. What does adoption look like among Panera Bread’s customers?

Blaine Hurst: I am very pleased with the in-app usage, which is in the 20% range [of total in-app transactions]. For in-store, we assumed that for people to change their habits you have to have a much better experience. We’ve paid with mag stripe-based cards for a long time and this is a better experience. Is it enough better to get me to stop using mag stripe cards and overcome that built-in reluctance to change?

It is difficult to get the consumer to change behavior without a material improvement in the experience.

eMarketer: Do you see traction with customers using Apple Pay in your app translating to greater in-store mobile payment usage?

Hurst: We do. When we launched with Apple Pay we saw there was a spike in both methods. Anything that creates new habits or requires us to create new habits, that habit then begins to spread in everything we do. I don’t think that happens overnight because consumers are so used to swiping mag cards, but I believe it will occur.

I don’t know how long it will take, but I think proximity payments where I don’t even have to take my phone out or my wallet, smartwatches, the impact of chip-and-pin cards—the combination of those things will begin to drive adoption of mobile-related payments.

Part of it is the merchants have to get on board. But with many merchants re-terminalizing to accept chip-and-pin anyway, it’s relatively easy to do [mobile payments] at the same time. That’s my No. 1 objective: If customers want to pay with their phone or their watch or chip-and-pin, I want them to be able to pay.

I’m open to any and all comers because this is about Panera Bread adapting to the consumer rather than the company trying to force the consumer in terms of how they pay.

eMarketer: What is Panera’s approach to training front-line staff like cashiers to help mitigate issues with customers using proximity mobile payments?

Hurst: We build it in as part of our overall training program and then whenever there is a new release like Google just did [with Android Pay], we then go back through and update the training. When we rolled out Apple Pay last year, we pushed pretty hard to make sure the cafés were ready for it because we assumed that we would go from few transactions to quite a few transactions. Not huge percentages, but when you start from zero, you’re going to see a pretty big [increase]. We do 8 million transactions a week, so even a small percentage [using mobile payments] is a lot.

eMarketer: How does loyalty and rewards factor into Panera Bread’s approach to mobile payments?

Hurst: Let’s just say we have been working with Apple on some of the loyalty integration since it began. And we are working with both our point-of-sale vendor and Verifone on that integration. We’re not announcing when and where it might be available, but I do believe the ability to include loyalty information as part of the transaction is very important to our guests, and I think it is one more step.

Today, Panera has almost 50% of our transactions where the consumer gives us their rewards number. Clearly, we do that in-app and we see about 70% of those transactions with the loyalty identifier. So we will continue to do that. We have a well-accepted, perhaps industry-leading program, with 20 million consumers signed up.

SocietyOne Has Now Lent $60m in Total Loans

According to Australian Broker, peer-to-peer (P2P) lender SocietyOne has announced a major milestone this week, surpassing $60 million in total loans, with year-to-date loan volume already tripling the company’s loan originations during 2014. However, the chief executive says it is the type of growth that really demonstrates the value of the P2P proposition.

Since its launch the P2P lender has have seen a big shift from non-conforming borrowers to high-quality borrowers. In fact, SocietyOne’s growth this year has been driven largely by high-quality borrowers leaving the major banks.

“Right at the very start, literally at day one, there was certainly a higher proportion of people who may not have met the bank scorecard. However, there has been a pretty steady trend over the last three years where the average Veda score of all applications on any given week continues to go up as more and more.

“People who have a banking relationship have started to ask themselves if they are paying more than they should be for their existing personal loan or more than they might otherwise like to for the carry forward balance on their credit card.”

According to data from SocietyOne, the median yearly income of their typical borrower is approximately $82,000 and their median credit score is 742. The most common job titles of their typical borrower are professional (34%) and manager (22%).

SocietyOne chief executive Matt Symons says this not only proves the value proposition of P2P lenders, but the opportunity they have to significantly disrupt the market.

“I think there are opportunities for marketplace lenders, like SocietyOne, which are just inherently more efficient and competitive to offer a range of borrowers a great deal. I think the big thing is that historically in Australia, everyone has paid the same price. What we have pioneered in Australia – as the first marketplace lender to launch in Australia three years ago – was risk-based pricing in consumer credit,” he told Australian Broker.

“It is great to see Australians taking back control of the sort of information that banks and other institutions have traditionally always had on all of us as consumers and getting the benefit of that themselves. It is that kind of revolution where the power is being put back into the hands of the customer to make better choices about what financial services products meets their needs.”

Two-thirds of Australians Use Social Media

Research conducted by Tumblr into the ‘Status of Social in 2015’ shows that of the 19m Australian internet users, 67% use a mix of Tumblr, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, Twitter, Vimeo and other social media channels.

Around 93% of these use social media more than once a week, while 72% use it daily. Key times of access are wake up (45%) and evening and bed (40/41%). 32% of users accessed social media whilst at work.

The main reason to visit is to find interesting content. 61% of Australians surveyed said they will only engage with content they love or are truly passionate about.

Whilst access methods vary, 70% use a mobile phone, 52% use desktop or laptop and 34% use a table (more than one answer is included).

Max Sebela from Tumblr said

“Our new Social Norms report shows just how much our behaviours are changing online. Australians have moved away from using social media as a way to connect with their loved ones, and are increasingly using these channels as an identity construct. The value placed on individual online personas is higher than it has ever been before, proving that the influential power of social media is only on the rise.

… It’s not just about creating but curating beautiful content that speaks to your personal identity.”

Brokers not immune to fintech disruption

From Australian Broker.

A new index tracking the rate of change within financial services industry has revealed that emerging fintech companies are rapidly changing the face of financial services – and brokers are not immune.

The Disruption Index, a joint initiative from online SME lender Moula and research firm Digital Finance Analytics (DFA), tracks important leading indicators, such as smart device penetration and use, online loan applications and service expectations in the SME sector. Between May and July 2015, the Index stood at 33.02. Between August and October 2015, the Index rose to 33.94. The higher the Index score, the greater the disruption of the industry.

Speaking to Australian Broker, Martin North, principal of DFA, said the SME sector has driven disruption in the financial services space.

“There are three things that have happened relatively recently which have fundamentally changed the game. The first thing is the Treasurer gave a 100% capital write-off to small businesses and they have gone out in their droves and bought smart devices. We have seen a very significant rise in the penetration of smart devices as the main device businesses are using for their interactions with their customers, suppliers and the banks.

“The second thing is this means that [businesses] now have a much higher expectation in terms of immediacy of access to information, products and services than they did before. This has created a big gap between where the banks currently are in terms of servicing small business customers and where small businesses want to be.

“The third thing is there are lots of new players coming in and essentially offering a different proposition… People are responding to the opportunity created by the disruptive environment.”

According to North, 2016 is likely to see more fintech businesses enter the market, however the major trend will be existing fintech businesses starting to gain serious momentum.

“I think we are going to see more momentum. I think the peer-to-peer players are going to very interesting and I think we will probably see some new players beginning to think about the wealth creation sector because I think that is an area which is ripe for fintech penetration and development,” North told Australian Broker.

Brokers are also likely to face significant disruption through more effective use of technology and data insights, say North.

“I think there is an opportunity particularly in the broker segment for a different way of handling the consumer and a different way of providing advice. This means we are likely to see some different types of broker models.

“In other words, we will see [brokers] using technology in a more thoroughbred way to perhaps provide better advice rather than the cheapest loan. Essentially, they will provide a more tailored proposition. I wouldn’t be surprised if we started to see some more intelligence coming through the broker sector.

“Let’s be honest, a lot of the conversations are price-led to find the cheapest loan but there are a whole bunch of other conversations which could be had if they had access to better data and better insights.”

 

 

China’s plan to put two-faced citizens on credit blacklist isn’t all that foreign

From The Conversation.

China has a problem.

No, not Donald Trump trying to savage it any time he comes within three feet of a microphone. It’s that enormous social shifts in recent years – like the forcible relocation of 250 million people from rural areas to urban environments – have transformed the country, in the words of its Academy of Social Sciences, from “a society of acquaintances into a society of strangers.”

And these strangers, it turns out, don’t think much of each other. Social trust is at miserable levels, leading to a shaky business environment in which half of all written contracts are blatantly breached.

Since part of the problem is the lack of a credit reporting system, the government has decided to establish one. But instead of only considering people’s ability to repay loans, this system will rank people based on their trustworthiness using all sorts of data.

This might sound exactly like the kind of thing you’d expect from an authoritarian regime. And as someone who has pondered the ways in which privacy is squeezed by an ever-expanding surveillance state, I was intrigued by this unholy alliance between Big Data and Big Brother.

But what really surprised me was not just the outlandish lengths to which the Chinese government will go to evaluate its citizens. It was that its tactics were surprisingly close to what is already happening here, as banks look for ways to lend money to – and collect fees from – people with no traditional credit history.

But first let’s look at what the Chinese are doing.

The glories of trust-keeping

Using an enormous range of information, from traffic violations to consumer patterns to social networks, China intends to give every one of its 1.3 billion citizens a “social credit” score by 2020.

A recently translated summary of the plan explains that the goal is nothing less than raising “the sincerity and quality of the entire nation.” That, it says, should help address everything from workplace accidents to food safety failures to tax evasion and production of counterfeit goods (putting Canal Street, every New York woman’s go-to source for knockoff Chanel handbags, rather under a cloud).

The plan includes recommendations for establishing “civil servant sincerity dossiers,” something I’d like to see applied to my local DMV, lots of talk about “professional ethics, household virtue and individual morality” and encouraging companies to conduct “client sincerity evaluations.”

I’m not sure what that means, but it conjures visions of online retailers diligently making entries like, “Disappointing customer. Returned item saying ‘It didn’t fit.’ Strongly suspect she’s lying about being a size 6.”

There’s also a large public relations component, with the use of news media to “forge a public opinion that trust-keeping is glorious” and a raft of proposed holidays, including “Sincere Trading Propaganda Week” and “Quality Month.”

Alibaba’s Jack Ma wants to read your mind. Reuters

The pains of trust-breaking

Before you start worrying about the caliber of the other 11 months of the year, you’ll be glad to hear that there’s also a strategy for enforcement. This includes informants, blacklists and the rather chilling promise that “those breaking trust will meet with difficulty at every step.”

Interestingly, the government is letting private companies, like Alibaba, the e-commerce giant that made US$1 billion in eight minutes the other day, take the lead in a series of pilot projects.

Alibaba’s finance arm, Sesame Credit, has been issuing customers with social credit scores based in part on their purchases and hobbies.

As Sesame’s technology director explained, someone who played hours of video games “would be considered an idle person,” so less creditworthy, while someone “who frequently buys diapers” is probably a parent, so “more likely to have a sense of responsibility.”

Suddenly that puts Nicolas Cage in Raising Arizona, running from the cops with a stocking mask over his head and a package of Huggies under his arm, in a whole new light.

Raising China

Rank your friends!

Although it seems that someone’s score, rather shockingly, may rise and fall with the creditworthiness of their friends and relations, companies are focusing consumers on the positive.

Sesame has even launched a mobile phone game in which users can guess whether they have higher or lower scores than their friends. What could be more fun than seeing whether your friends are – literally – worth hanging out with?

This may all seem crazy, in ways both scary and silly. But before we get too smug about how it would be unthinkable here, consider the recent news about credit agencies “exploring new ways of assessing consumers’ ability to handle loans,” right here in the United States.

These include scouring “phone and utility bills, change-of-address records and information drawn from DVD clubs and suppliers of rent-to-own furniture.” And that’s just the well-known companies like TransUnion and FICO.

Start-up credit agencies and banks, reports The Economist, go even further, “piecing together scores by analyzing applicants’ online social networks,” monitoring their Facebook messages and determining whether they are spending prudently.

(Here we pause as I put down my phone, from which I was just about to order a gravy separator from Williams-Sonoma, in case I needed to separate gravy sometime. Suddenly, it just didn’t seem – what’s the word? – prudent.)

The credit agencies say that they are responding to a demand by their customers – the banks, which are looking for new sources of revenue and hoping to find it in people who previously had no credit score.

In China, diapers apparently means trustworthy. She deserves a loan. Reuters
These guys would have a tougher time getting credit. Reuters

Building a better citizen

So while we’re not subjected to a government effort to “build a better citizen,” as the Chinese are, we’re not doing much to prevent the private sector from conducting not-entirely-dissimilar data-mining investigations into millions of people too young, too poor or too new to the country to have traditional credit scores.

Ever since Target started using data-mining to predict whether female customers were pregnant (which explains why I received a can of formula, seemingly out of the blue, right before I had my first child), scholars have warned us about the many ways the private sector can use predictive analytics to figure out who we are and what they can sell us.

But even if it’s good business, there’s something odd about collecting all these disparate pieces of information – traffic violations, bills paid and unpaid, staying friends with your ne’er-do-well elementary school classmate, having children, playing Call of Duty: Black Ops III – and assigning the whole mess a single numerical score.

Reducing all aspects of social and consumer life to a single unit of value seems to fundamentally misunderstand the complexity of human experience. Maybe remaining friends with a childhood buddy with a poor loan history does reflect on your own financial creditworthiness. But that friendship might also point to other things about you – your past, your loyalty or your willingness to help those in need – that cannot be assigned a numeric value along the same spectrum as whether you paid your gas bill.

Maybe an authoritarian single-party state can’t be that concerned with the dignity and autonomy (let alone the privacy) of its citizens. But at least the Chinese plan has been publicly circulated. Its “you will be trustworthy – or else” message might be a little alarming, but it’s not like it keeps you guessing.

We can’t really say the same for our own shadowy system of credit ratings. And if the market requires it, how long will it be before we all get evaluated based on whether our purchases are of the “responsible adult” or “idle slacker” kind?

Better start stocking up on the Huggies.

Author: Caren Morrison, Associate Professor of Law, Georgia State University

Sizing up the Asia Pacific’s booming alternative finance sector

From The Conversation.

If digital disruptors like crowd-sourced equity funding and peer-to-peer lending platforms are going to transform the finance sector, they need to be regulated. If they are going to create permanent positive change, they need to be regulated intelligently.

But so far, the ability of regulators and industry to agree on the rules has been hampered by a significant knowledge gap: there is no accurate, up-to-date information about the size, scale and scope of the rapidly growing online alternative finance sector in our region.

The University of Sydney Business School has joined forces with the United Kingdom’s University of Cambridge and Tsinghua University in China, to conduct the first comprehensive survey of the rapidly expanding alternative finance sector in China and across the rest of the Asia-Pacific.

Building on a successful 2015 benchmarking survey of the UK and Europe, the Asia-Pacific survey will run through to mid December 2015. By early 2016, we will have aggregate information about the various types of online platforms, the overall size and recent growth of the alternative finance sectors in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, China and other Asia-Pacific neighbours.

Why is aggregate data on crowd-sourced and peer-to-peer finance so critical? Uninformed regulation can indeed be harmful — so why regulate at all? Direct connection between lenders and borrowers, or donors and causes, is part of the attraction of alternative finance, and that’s all between consenting adults after all. But it’s the “peer-to-peer” feature of these markets that calls for intelligent regulation.

Naïve ideology sees all regulation as anathema to free markets. In reality, most markets can’t function without it. Efficient markets depend on reliable information about product quality being shared between buyers and sellers, as Nobel prize winner George Akerlof demonstrated in his analysis of the used car market – his famous work on the “market for lemons”.

If buyers can’t tell whether they are buying a good car or a lemon they will never pay what a good car is worth. Owners of good cars will not offer their cars for sale and eventually only lemons will be left. Markets with this unequal information problem are likely to collapse without minimum quality guarantees.

In crowd-funded and peer-to-peer finance markets, the borrower knows much more about their ability to repay than the lender does. Minimum credit worthiness standards for borrowers, some limitations on risk exposure for unsophisticated lenders, and effective disclosures are needed for the survival of these platforms.

Take peer-to-peer lending for example. In conventional lending markets an intermediary like a bank transforms the deposits of lenders into loans for borrowers. Intermediation turns one person’s bank deposit into another person’s loan but no individual depositor cops a direct hit if a particular borrower defaults; the intermediary bears this risk. Of course, banks charge for the service of disconnecting lenders from the risk of individual borrowers.

This charge partly accounts for the (at least 10 percentage points) difference between term deposit rates and personal loan rates.

Peer-to-peer lending uses a direct connection between lenders and borrowers. This allows the platform to shrink the difference between lending and borrowing rates. Someone wanting a $5,000 loan for a holiday might register with a peer to peer platform. If they default on their repayments, whoever lent them the money bears the loss. While the average default rate across all loans on a peer-to-peer lending platform in normal times might be low – say less than 3% – the actual outcome for each lender depends on the specific borrowers they lend to and economic conditions at the time.

Without some minimum guarantees and lender protections, interest rates and charges are likely to rise as poor quality borrowers (lemons) drive out good quality borrowers, and the market will collapse. Similarly, the crowd-sourced equity platforms that can enable brilliant and highly profitable new ideas (so-called “unicorns”) to find capital depend on regulatory protection for unsophisticated investors. Stability, sustainability and trust are needed so we can all benefit from the accessibility and efficiency of this digital disruption.

Most alternative finance providers now operating in Australia are well aware of the need for sustainable business practice. Peer-to-peer lenders, for example, check the credit worthiness of borrowers in conventional ways, using credit history, capacity to pay, and sometimes secured assets. The platforms usually spread lenders’ funds across a range of borrowers, and facilitate payments and repayments.

However minimum regulatory guidelines ensuring good practice will protect the sector from “fly-by-night” entrants with lower standards. Setting those minimum standards well can only be done with comprehensive data on the alternative finance sector.

We don’t want to lose or delay the benefits of digital disruption in finance simply because not enough is known about the structures and participants.

Author: Susan Thorp, Professor of Finance, University of Sydney

Measuring Disruption in Small Business Lending

Launched today, the Financial Services Disruption Index, which has been jointly developed by Moula, the lender to the small business sector; and research and consulting firm Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) shows that Financial Services are undergoing disruptive change, thanks to customers moving to digital channels, the emergence of new business models, and changing competitive landscapes. Combing data from both organisations, we are able to track the waves of disruption, initially in the small business lending sector, and more widely across financial services later.

The index tracks a number of dimensions. From the DFA Small business surveys (26,000 each year), we measure SME service expectations for unsecured lending, their awareness of non-traditional funding options, their use of smart devices, their willingness to share electronic data in return for credit, and overall business confidence of those who are borrowing relative to those who are not.

Moula data includes SME conversion data, the type of data SMEs share, the average loan amount approved, application credit enquiries, and speed of application processing.

The index stood at 33.02 from May to July 2015, and rose to 33.94 in the August to October period. The higher the score, the greater the disruption. Of note SMEs are becoming more aware of non-traditional unsecured lending options, are becoming more demanding in terms of application processing times, are more willing to share data and are more likely to apply using a smart device. In addition, the loan values being written are rising, more businesses are willing to share richer data, and the confidence levels among borrowing SMEs is on the rise.

Overall, unsecured lending to the SME sector is being disrupted significantly, and we expect the index will continue to trend higher, as awareness of alternatives to traditional banking continues to rise, and more firms apply for credit.

  1. The average expectation duration was down from 9.2 days in Q3 2015 to 7.5 days this quarter. SMEs continue to expect better service standards when applying for credit. Whilst they accept it may take a few days for an application to be processed, the survey data shows that many think a week should be enough to complete an unsecured loan and get money into their account, and they expect to receive regular progress reports and updates on the way through.
  2. We see a rise in awareness among SMEs of the availability of alternative credit solutions and greater familiarly with the tag “Fintech”. This month 3.75% of businesses recognised the concept, up from 2.74% last month, and momentum is increasing.
  3. More business owners are using smart devices to run their business. They expect access to a wider range of services this way, and more immediate responses. Last quarter 42.6% of businesses used a smart device, this time it was 44.6%, and the rate of adoption is increasing.

The index is featured in an SMH MySmallBusiness article today.