原创翻译:龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译:tangerl 转载请注明出处
论坛地址:http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-479887-1-1.html

Why China’s Payment Apps Give U.S. Bankers Nightmares

为什么中国的支付应用是美国银行家的噩梦



Wandering the streets of Shanghai to admire the architecture, the head of one of the largest U.S. consumer banks recently found himself surrounded by a gaggle of teenagers.

最近,一家美国最大的消费银行的负责人在上海的大街上闲逛,发现自己被一群十几岁的青少年打击到了。

ltaaaTxt

Chinese vs. U.S. Payment Systems

中国支付系统VS美国支付系统

Americans more typically involve banks and cards when paying with apps

图:美国人在使用应用支付时更多地涉及银行和信用卡



Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. created Alipay in 2004 to let millions of potential customers who lacked credit and debit cards shop on its vast online marketplace. Tencent Holdings Ltd., similarly, debuted its payments function in 2005 in a bid to keep users inside its messaging system longer.

2004年,阿里巴巴集团创建了支付宝,让无数缺乏信用卡和借记卡的潜在客户在其庞大的在线市场上的以购物,类似地,腾讯控股有限公司也于2005年推出了支付功能,目的是让用户在其微信系统中停留更长的时间。

Alipay and WeChat have since swelled in popularity, boasting 520 million and 1 billion monthly active users, respectively. Consumers sent more than $2.9 trillion inside the two systems in 2016, equivalent to about half of all consumer goods sold in China, according to the payments consultancy Aite Group.

支付宝和微信的人气自那以来不断膨胀,分别拥有5.2亿和10亿月活跃用户,根据支付咨询公司 Aite Group 的数据,2016年,消费者在这两个系统内共支付超过2.9万亿美元,相当于中国销售的所有消费品的一半左右。

In contrast, U.S. consumers still rely on banks for most non-cash payments—whether it’s by check, debit, credit or a growing number of other payment systems tied to their bank accounts. Connected to that is a universe of wallets and payments systems operated by the likes of PayPal Holdings Inc., Apple Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google. From the perspective of merchants, too much of the U.S. system siphons off enormous amounts of money.

相比之下,美国大多数非现金支付仍然依赖银行——无论是通过支票、借方、信贷,还是越来越多的其他与银行账户相关的支付系统,与此相关的是贝宝控股( PayPal Holdings Inc. )、苹果和 Alphabet(谷歌) 等公司运营的钱包和支付系统,从商人的角度来看,美国太多的支付系统会吸走了大量的钱。

Transaction Breakdown
In a typical $100 credit card purchase...

图:分解图
典型的信用卡购物(100美元)



How That $100 Credit Card Purchase Is Processed

图:100美元的信用卡购物是如何处理的



Established players face potential disruption

“ 老玩家”面临潜在的颠覆

For now, no company in the U.S. commands the kind of clout that Alipay and WeChat wield back home. Instead, everyone is trying to replicate their success.

目前,美国没有一家公司拥有支付宝和微信的影响力,相反,每个人都在试图复制他们的成功。

“This is going to be the battle of all time—like who dominates all those services—and it’s still not known,” Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase & Co., told his company’s investors in February. “Everyone wants to be the place that is the one place you go to do that.”

摩根大通首席执行官杰米·戴蒙今年2月对其投资者表示:“这将是一场旷日持久的战争,谁将主宰了这些服务,目前还不清楚。”“每个人都想成为最终的赢家。”

The nightmare for the U.S. financial industry is that a technology company—whether from China or a homegrown juggernaut such as Amazon.com Inc. or Facebook Inc.—replicates the success of Alipay and WeChat in America. The stakes are enormous, potentially carving away billions of dollars in annual revenue from major banks and other firms. What follows is a breakdown of what that could look like—theoretically—using the explosive growth as China’s apps as a rough guide.

美国金融业的噩梦是,无论是来自中国的科技公司,还是亚马逊或Facebook等本土巨头,都会复制支付宝和微信的成功。这些风险是巨大的,有可能从大银行和其他公司夺走数十亿美元的年收入,接下来是一个关于这个问题的分析(理论上的)——中国支付应用的爆炸性增长的粗略指南。

Perhaps the clearest opportunity lies in siphoning off some of the fees that U.S. merchants pay to accept cards and mobile payments—about $90 billion a year, according to the Nilson Report, an industry newsletter. That money gets parceled out to card networks such as Visa Inc. and Mastercard Inc., payment processors and banks, which pocket the largest share.

根据行业通讯《 尼尔森报告》,最明显的机会或许在于从美国商人为接受信用卡和移动支付而支付的部分费用中吸走一些费用——每年约900亿美元,这笔钱被分配给了Visa、万事达( Master card) 等信用卡公司、支付处理商和银行,后者占据了最大的份额。

In China, analysts expect third-party payment providers to earn about 40 percent of such fees by 2020. If apps were to start grabbing market share in the U.S. at roughly the same rate they did in China, it would take a $43 billion revenue bite out of a business banks count as among their most profitable.

在中国,分析人士预计,到2020年,第三方支付提供商将获得此类费用的40%左右,如果应用程序开始以和中国大致相同的速度在美国抢占市场份额,这将使一家商业银行的收入损失达到430亿美元,因为商业银行被认为是最赚钱的银行之一。

Merchant Fees

商户费用



Financial firms would lose billions if the U.S. embraces third-party apps at a rate like China’s

图:如果美国像中国那样接受第三方应用,金融公司将损失数十亿美元

But that’s just one way that U.S. banks impose fees. They also generate revenue by dispensing cash. If payments apps were to replace paper money—as they have in many situations in China—another form of income could take a big hit.

但这只是美国银行收取费用的一种方式,他们还通过分配现金来创造收入,如果支付应用取代纸币——就像在中国很多情况下一样——另一种收入形式可能会受到很大打击。



Checking accounts generate about $3 billion in bank fees, which would dwindle if consumers embrace apps

支票账户产生了大约30亿美元的银行手续费,如果消费者接受应用支付,这一金额就会减。

ltaaaTxt

consumers were to start storing their extra cash with apps, banks would have to find an alternate—probably more expensive—source of funding.

对银行来说,这又是另一回事,他们传统上持有客户存款,并利用这些资金为贷款提供资金——创造了可观的利润,如果美国消费者开始用手机应用储存他们的额外现金,银行将不得不找到另一种,可能更昂贵的资金来源。

Deposits

存款



Even a relatively small bite to deposits would be a lot of money

即使是相对较小的存款,也是一大笔钱。

Still, banks and payment networks have a lot to lose if technology firms succeed in grabbing market share—and there are signs that Alipay and WeChat aren’t the only firms that may flex their muscles. Amazon is said to be interested in offering its own product to mimic checking accounts while offering to lower costs for retailers who use its online payments service.

尽管如此,如果科技公司成功地抢占市场份额,银行和支付网络将面临巨大损失——而且有迹象表明,支付宝和微信并不是并不是唯一可能展示其实力的公司,据说亚马逊有兴趣提供自己的一项产品,来模拟支票账户,同时为使用其在线支付服务的零售商降低成本。

“What happened in China was not an even playing field,” Al Kelly, Visa’s chief executive officer, said at an investor conference in March. “What I hope happens around the rest of the world as they migrate is that at least it’s an even playing field.”

Visa首席执行官艾尔·凯利在3月份的一次投资者会议上表示:“ 中国发生的事情并不是一个公平的竞争环境。”“我希望,当他们迁移到世界其他地方时,世界各地发生这样的事情时,至少会有一个公平的竞争环境。”