Why Banks Are Ditching ‘.com’ for Bank

`Bank’ Domain – Consumer Protection

With over 4,000 registrations in the U.S for web address, European banks have been making haste in acquiring the more secured domain name `bank; where more than 500 European financial organizations have signed to take advantage of this special domain. According to the chief executive of domain name seller, CentralNic, the reason is `consumer protection.

Ben Crawford informed CNBC that the reason for the `bank’ domain is basically that the millions of dollars which are lost annually are through online fraud’. Several banks together with the popular establishments in recent yearshave seen breaks in their network inclusive of JPMorgan in 2014 when the bank had revealed that some 76 million household together with seven million small businesses had their data conceded by cyber-attack.

Besides this, a report of 2014 by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies projected that the cybercrime costs the global economy over $400 billion each year. The domain name `bank’ is only made available to banks and hence it gives consumers the security of knowing that if they tend to get to a website which ends with `bank’, it is not a bogus website, it is not deceptive and it can be trusted.

`CentralNic – Support Financial Institutions

In order to avail one of these domain names, it is said that banks are paying about $1,500 which is higher than the standard consumer name of domain. The role of CentralNic in the procedure is to render support to financial institutions in order to go through the compliancy issues, in obtaining the new domain name while `bank’ seems to be operated by fTLD Registry Services.

Moreover, CentralNic also seems to have some contribution in the launch of Google’s Alphabet website `abc.xyz’ Entrepreneur. The owner of `xyz’ is Daniel Negari though CentralNic is the exclusive wholesaler for `xyz’ which helps in powering the domain’s registry. Registrations on `xyz’, according to Reuters had increased intensely since the announcement from Google with Crawford adding the `xyz’ being the only contender to the future `.com’.Customers are being compelled to seek alternative options of banking due to bank fees and low interest rates. But will going `bank-free’, provide the answer to these problems?

`Credit Union/Money Market Mutual Funds

To know if the world could do without a bank, it is essential to determine how the changes have taken place in banking and if those changes are friendly or not to the consumers. Co-owner of Money Crashers, Andrew Schrage states that several people seem to be ditching their banks.

 He further commented that over 5.6 million Americans have closed their accounts with the big banks and among those consumers; around 214,000 had opened new accounts with a credit union. With the increase in bank fees, low interest rates accompanied with poor customer service at several of the large banking institution, people seem to be unhappy.

Schrage informs that two of the best alternatives to bank in keeping your funds in place where it could gain a return are credit unions as well as money market mutual funds. The interest rate, for instance, offered on credit union accounts are usually on the higher side than those offered by most banks, and the fees seems much lower.

Money market mutual funds also seem to be a good alternative which is an investment in short term certificates of deposit or securities. These could be in the form of Treasury bills, government bonds or corporate bonds.

Payment Wallet Companies See Red in New Game Plans

Some Payment Wallet Firm – Locked out of e-commerce Segment

Some of the payment wallet firm are of the opinion that they get locked out of the successful e-commerce segment since companies running marketplaces tend to prefer their own subsidiaries or are determined in ensuring that customers spend any cash-back money on their own sites.

Oxigen for instance has said that it is no longer available on one of the biggest shopping sites of India. According to CEO of Oxigen, Ankur Saxena has stated that they are presently on Snapdeal prior to acquiring Freecharge and have decided to take them down.

He further stated that at one point of time they accepted wallets but now they want to come up with their own wallets. Freecharge seems to be the only wallet option on Snapdeal that has also launched cash-back options which tends to direct consumers to the unit’s offerings. Freecharge was acquired by Snapdeal in April this year, for almost 2,400 crore.

Snapdeal had refrained from responding to queries and Flipkart informed that it would not comment on its wallet practices. Saxena had mentioned that the trend would hurt Oxigen and that there would be an impact on the business if the customers are unable to use the wallet on a particular site, they would be compelled to utilise another mechanism to process the payment.

Paytm – Its Own e-Commerce Platform

According to managing partner, Ashvin Parekh of Ashvin Parekh Advisory Services, stated that striking boundaries on the e-commerce evolution could be envisaged as a restrictive exercise and that they have still not achieved anything with regards to permeation of e-commerce.

Market leaderPaytm, though does not seem to be too worried. Vice President Products, Paytm, Nitin Misra had commented that they have better acceptability and more consumers. Why would customer put money in a wallet which can be used only on that particular site and the cash back too cannot be utilised elsewhere?According to him the consumers is not dumb and if someone does not intent to permit them as a payment option on their site it is entirely their choice.

Paytm has expanded to begin its own e-commerce platform and the government as well as the Reserve Bank of India have made financial presence significant, making for an ecosystem wherein payment wallets would play a role together with various other elements. However, what is serious for such companies is having a large subscriber base.

Several Banks Launched Own Wallets

Towards the last week of October, Vijay Shekhar Sharma, founder of Paytm had received a message from State Bank of India which was not good news. The message stated that the nation’s largest lender together with its associate banks would not permit their customers to load money onto the Paytm wallet from their accounts.

The reason provided to their query was that the net banking services were only for shopping and not for uploading wallets according to Sharma. After independent wallet companies have started operating in India and gained reputation, several of the banks launched their own wallets.

SBI in fact according to reports by The Economic Times, recently, even planned to launch a wallet for feature phone users known as Batua, by next month. Chairman of Payments Council of India and the managing director of ItzCash, Naveen Surya, had stated that some players would always think that they are big enough and that they have adequate customers. However as one tends to go deeper and begin running independently the payment business, when it is separated from the core business, one would realize that it is difficult to create scale.

European Commission and Audit Reform

Force companies to change auditors periodically and prohibit auditors from providing other services are part of changes to draft legislation to open the market for audit services in the EU and to increase the quality and transparency adopted in Committee on Legal Affairs on 25 April 2013. The role of auditors has been questioned because of the financial crisis. "We need to regain the confidence of investors, who want quality audits and independent give them the assurances they need when investing in European companies," said Sajjad Karim (ECR, UK), in charge on the reform of the audit. The committee decided by 15 votes for and 10 votes against to open negotiations with the Council in order to reach a common text. The S & D, Greens / EFA and GUE / NGL voted against. Informal negotiations begin as soon as possible. The legislation would force auditors in the EU to publish audit in accordance with international standards reports.

For auditors of public interest entities, such as banks, insurance companies and listed companies, the committee agreed that audit firms should provide stakeholders and investors a comprehensive document containing all actions of the listener and providing a comprehensive manner, the accuracy of the accounts of the company. As part of a series of measures to open the market and to increase transparency, the committee voted in favor of the proposal to ban contractual clauses "only four major companies" that require the audit is performed by one of them. The public interest entities would be forced to launch a tender in the selection of a new auditor. To ensure that the relationship between the auditor and the audited company become too familiar, MEPs adopted a mandatory rotation rule that an auditor would have the right to audit the accounts of a company for 14 years maximum, a period that could be extended to 25 years if guarantees are provided.

The European Commission had proposed a period of six years, but a majority of MPs in the committee felt that it was an expensive and undesirable intervention in the audit market. To avoid conflicts of interest and threats to their independence, EU audit firms would be forced to comply with rules similar to the standards internationally. Most members of the committee considered the proposal for a general ban on the provision of other services, counterproductive to the quality of audits. They agreed that the only other services that could threaten the independence should be banned. They also approved a list of services that would be prohibited under the new legislation. Audit firms could, for example, continue to provide certifications regarding compliance with tax requirements but would no longer provide tax advisory services that directly affect the financial statements of the company. They could also be examined by the national tax authorities.

Does Greece’s bankrupt without default?

The question is all the more legitimate than the last few days have resulted in an assault interpretations based on several aspects of the agreement of the private sector, which will only be confirmed on March 8. It is difficult to consider that Greece is in default if creditors agree on a form of sovereign debt restructuring.