Skip to main content

Monetization of a marketplace in the financial industry - Make your idea profitable!


Marketplaces are on the rise! A digital marketplace is an online platform, where different third-parties connect and supply and demand can be matched. This supply/demand can be a specific product or service, but can also facilitate a full customer journey, by matching products and services of multiple vendors for each step of the journey (e.g. a customer journey of going on holiday can include flight tickets, travel insurance, hotel reservation, car rental…​).

Marketplaces are however not new. Newspapers, shopping malls, auction places, travel agencies…​ have been creating marketplaces for centuries. The revolution of the internet allows however to scale-out a digital marketplace exponentially, while keeping costs relatively flat and make it 24/7 available across the whole world.

Digital marketplaces are however not all success stories. Less than 10 percent of start-up digital marketplaces will become profitable.
This poor success rate is mainly caused by 3 factors:

  • Fierce competition: competition in this business is huge, e.g. in the peer-to-peer lending space in the UK alone there are over 100 different platforms (cfr. http://www.p2pmoney.co.uk/companies.htm).

  • Difficult to achieve critical mass: a marketplace platform (like a social network) is all about achieving critical mass. Once you have the critical mass, the network effect attracts automatically more market participants (e.g. higher number of consumers attracts more producers and vice versa).

  • Difficult to monetize a marketplace: in the B2C space customers are typically not willing to pay for the services provided by a marketplace (being used to impressive digital services like Facebook, Twitter, Google…​ at no costs), while in the B2B space there is a willingness to pay, but volumes (as often niche services) are often too small to become really profitable. Furthermore, monetization can be very fragile. As a digital marketplace usually intermediates between a producer and a consumer, it is often difficult to avoid these parties taking direct contact and thus eliminating the marketplace in the fee-generating transaction.

In the banking and insurance sector these threats are no different. FinTechs are flooding the market with new digital platforms and marketplaces, which try to disrupt the traditional financial services industry. In response to this evolution, the incumbents also setup new platforms to compete with these disruptors, which leads to even more competition in the space. Nonetheless while in several other industries a consolidation to a few international marketplaces has already taken place (Amazon, eBay, Uber, Lift, Deliveroo…​), marketplaces in the financial sector are still very local and immature, providing enormous opportunities for innovative offers.

Each of the above pitfalls for becoming profitable with a digital marketplace can be addressed:

  • Create a competitive proposition

    • Excellent customer service, i.e. fluent user experience, good technical performance, high availability…​

    • Excellent security

    • Clear governance conditions protecting intellectual property and privacy

    • Competitive and dynamic pricing (e.g. increase pricing when peak demand, discount pricing in periods of low demand, adapt pricing based on customer segmentation…​)

    • Personalized services and products, adapted real-time to the customer needs

    • …​

  • Achieve critical mass fast via significant initial investments:

    • Aggressive investment to build out the marketplace as quickly as possible (short time to market-fit)

    • Aggressive marketing to attract initial market participants

    • Free offerings or heavy discounting to attract initial customers (offer capabilities for free for a fixed term or limited usage)

    • Partner up with players in the market, with large established customer base (e.g. bank, telecom player…​)

  • Find an appropriate way for monetizing the marketplace

A marketplace can be monetized in different ways (and of course any hybrid model is also possible):

  • Charge producers

  • Charge consumers

  • Monetize through a 3rd party, i.e. typically income gained through featured ads, affiliate deals, data monetization (= selling collected marketing data) or cross-selling opportunities.

When charging producers or consumers different models exist as well:

  • Revenue-based model: the marketplace is paid a percentage of the revenue/profit the producer/consumer makes. A typical example is to identify the potential savings for a customer by offering cheaper services/products and taking a percentage of the savings for the customer. This is an example of a revenue sharing or pay-by-performance monetization model.

  • Commission model: a percentage of every transaction that takes place on the marketplace is charged. This is the most popular monetization model, as it is the most scalable and solves the chicken-or-the-egg problem, i.e. as users only pay once a transaction is done, it bothers them less if the marketplace doesn’t have a critical mass yet. The main challenge of this model is the ability of producers/consumers to match on the marketplace, but take the transaction offline to avoid the commission. This can be avoided by tedious audit rules (e.g. not allowed to post or exchange phone numbers or email addresses on the platform), but these are difficult to enforce and reduce usability of the platform. Instead the platform should provide a number of value-added services (e.g. invoicing services, insurance services, tracking services…​), making it more profitable and convenient for both parties to transact via the platform, even when considering the commission.
    Even though this model seems easy, there are still dozens of decisions to take when choosing for this model:

    • Type of transaction fee:

      • Selling or sales fees

      • Bidding fees for auction marketplaces

      • Lead fees (pay to view the details or an individual deal)

      • …​

    • Type of payment of the commission:

      • Direct payment: parties pay directly to each other and marketplace invoices on a regular basis the calculated commission

      • Aggregated payment: parties pay to the marketplace and marketplace pays out the other parties on a regular basis

      • Split payment: the payment is automatically split in 2 payments, i.e. payment to other party and payment to the platform for the commission

    • Fee calculation:

      • Flat fee or percentage on the transaction or a mix of both

      • Global fee for whole marketplace or different per category or per party

    • Evolution of the fee: the model of the fee calculation will likely evolve over time. A new marketplace will typically work with a percentage-based global fee across the marketplace, but after scaling and consolidation will likely evolve to a more complex pricing strategy.

  • Membership/Subscription Model: in this model parties pay a monthly or yearly fee for a certain set of features (cfr. LinkedIn Premium Subscription model). The main advantage of this model are the recurring revenues, but at the flip side this model requires a strong convincing of users to buy a membership. Especially for a young marketplace, it might be hard to convince new users to pay, without the assurance of finding value on the platform. To resolve this issue, the freemium model is often used. In this model, the core offering of the platform is free, but users have to pay for the premium offering (or sometimes the platform offers a free trial and becomes paying after that). Idea is to hook users via the free model, after which they will be willing to pay a subscription fee. Biggest hurdle with this freemium model is the tendency to have a huge user base of non-paying (often occasional) users, compared to a small percentage of paying users. The effort and costs spent on the non-paying users should be carefully monitored.
    Also, for this model a number of decisions are required:

    • 1 pricing plan or foresee different plans with different features

    • Options to switch between different plans (continuous, min. X months in between…​)

    • Incentives when paying for longer periods at once (e.g. 15% discount for yearly plan versus monthly plan)

    • A one-time fee (sign up, registration or onboarding fee) can also be considered under this membership model. Potentially even with the possibility to act as an equity-partner for the marketplace.

  • Sponsored products/services: this model allows producers to pay for a sponsored listing, which appears more visual (e.g. always on top of overview screens) on the marketplace. It is a very flexible monetization strategy, which also scales well, but may negatively affect your customers' experience

  • Listing or publishing fees: this model asks a producer to pay directly a fee for the listing they place (even if no transaction done yet on the listing). Like for the commission model, the fee can be a flat fee or percentage on the listing value and can be a global fee or different per category or per party. The model can be interesting when supply contains a large number of items, on which rarely a transaction gets done.

  • In the future, micro-payments might give even more options (e.g. paying a fraction of a euro for each view on an item). When feasibility for micro-payments has been resolved, this could even more enlarge the scala of options a marketplace can choose from for their monetization strategy. See my blog on Micro-Payments for more info, i.e. https://bankloch.blogspot.com/2020/02/micro-payments-revolution-in-payments.html).

It should also not be forgotten that - especially in the financial services industry - not every marketplace should be directly profitable (i.e. can be indirectly). Marketplaces in which incumbent players of the financial industry are involved, sometimes don’t need to be profitable, when there are other gains for the founding party/parties:

  • Increase revenues for the founder(s) by synergies (i.e. synergies of selling other products/services)

  • Attracting more customers

  • Improving customer relation, thus improving customer retention for the founder(s)

  • Branding as innovative company

  • Work together for cost reduction

From the above described models it should be clear, that there is ¨no "one size fits all" approach. The major marketplaces successfully combine two or more monetization models. For example, Amazon successfully uses the commission and subscription models, and Etsy takes a listing fee and a percentage from the transaction (= commission model).

The starting point for a monetization strategy should however always be a simulation of the value-creation of the platform for the producer and consumer. Once you have a clear view on what value the marketplace creates for a producer/consumer, it becomes much easier to determine a pricing strategy, which allows all parties (producers, consumers and the marketplace itself) to gain from using the platform.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Transforming the insurance sector to an Open API Ecosystem

1. Introduction "Open" has recently become a new buzzword in the financial services industry, i.e.   open data, open APIs, Open Banking, Open Insurance …​, but what does this new buzzword really mean? "Open" refers to the capability of companies to expose their services to the outside world, so that   external partners or even competitors   can use these services to bring added value to their customers. This trend is made possible by the technological evolution of   open APIs (Application Programming Interfaces), which are the   digital ports making this communication possible. Together companies, interconnected through open APIs, form a true   API ecosystem , offering best-of-breed customer experience, by combining the digital services offered by multiple companies. In the   technology sector   this evolution has been ongoing for multiple years (think about the travelling sector, allowing you to book any hotel online). An excellent example of this

Are product silos in a bank inevitable?

Silo thinking   is often frowned upon in the industry. It is often a synonym for bureaucratic processes and politics and in almost every article describing the threats of new innovative Fintech players on the banking industry, the strong bank product silos are put forward as one of the main blockages why incumbent banks are not able to (quickly) react to the changing customer expectations. Customers want solutions to their problems   and do not want to be bothered about the internal organisation of their bank. Most banks are however organized by product domain (daily banking, investments and lending) and by customer segmentation (retail banking, private banking, SMEs and corporates). This division is reflected both at business and IT side and almost automatically leads to the creation of silos. It is however difficult to reorganize a bank without creating new silos or introducing other types of issues and inefficiencies. An organization is never ideal and needs to take a number of cons

RPA - The miracle solution for incumbent banks to bridge the automation gap with neo-banks?

Hypes and marketing buzz words are strongly present in the IT landscape. Often these are existing concepts, which have evolved technologically and are then renamed to a new term, as if it were a brand new technology or concept. If you want to understand and assess these new trends, it is important to   reduce the concepts to their essence and compare them with existing technologies , e.g. Integration (middleware) software   ensures that 2 separate applications or components can be integrated in an easy way. Of course, there is a huge evolution in the protocols, volumes of exchanged data, scalability, performance…​, but in essence the problem remains the same. Nonetheless, there have been multiple terms for integration software such as ETL, ESB, EAI, SOA, Service Mesh…​ Data storage software   ensures that data is stored in such a way that data is not lost and that there is some kind guaranteed consistency, maximum availability and scalability, easy retrieval and searching

IoT - Revolution or Evolution in the Financial Services Industry

1. The IoT hype We have all heard about the   "Internet of Things" (IoT)   as this revolutionary new technology, which will radically change our lives. But is it really such a revolution and will it really have an impact on the Financial Services Industry? To refresh our memory, the Internet of Things (IoT) refers to any   object , which is able to   collect data and communicate and share this information (like condition, geolocation…​)   over the internet . This communication will often occur between 2 objects (i.e. not involving any human), which is often referred to as Machine-to-Machine (M2M) communication. Well known examples are home thermostats, home security systems, fitness and health monitors, wearables…​ This all seems futuristic, but   smartphones, tablets and smartwatches   can also be considered as IoT devices. More importantly, beside these futuristic visions of IoT, the smartphone will most likely continue to be the center of the connected devi

Neobanks should find their niche to improve their profitability

The last 5 years dozens of so-called   neo- or challenger banks  (according to Exton Consulting 256 neobanks are in circulation today) have disrupted the banking landscape, by offering a fully digitized (cfr. "tech companies with a banking license"), very customer-centric, simple and fluent (e.g. possibility to become client and open an account in a few clicks) and low-cost product and service offering. While several of them are already valued at billions of euros (like Revolut, Monzo, Chime, N26, NuBank…​), very few of them are expected to be profitable in the coming years and even less are already profitable today (Accenture research shows that the average UK neobank loses $11 per user yearly). These challenger banks are typically confronted with increasing costs, while the margins generated per customer remain low (e.g. due to the offering of free products and services or above market-level saving account interest rates). While it’s obvious that disrupting the financial ma

From app to super-app to personal assistant

In July of this year,   KBC bank   (the 2nd largest bank in Belgium) surprised many people, including many of us working in the banking industry, with their announcement that they bought the rights to   broadcast the highlights of soccer matches   in Belgium via their mobile app (a service called "Goal alert"). The days following this announcement the news was filled with experts, some of them categorizing it as a brilliant move, others claiming that KBC should better focus on its core mission. Independent of whether it is a good or bad strategic decision (the future will tell), it is clearly part of a much larger strategy of KBC to   convert their banking app into a super-app (all-in-one app) . Today you can already buy mobility tickets and cinema tickets and use other third-party services (like Monizze, eBox, PayPal…​) within the KBC app. Furthermore, end of last year, KBC announced opening up their app also to non-customers allowing them to also use these third-party servi

Can Augmented Reality make daily banking a more pleasant experience?

With the   increased competition in the financial services landscape (between banks/insurers, but also of new entrants like FinTechs and Telcos), customers are demanding and expecting a more innovative and fluent digital user experience. Unfortunately, most banks and insurers, with their product-oriented online and mobile platforms, are not known for their pleasant and fluent user experience. The   trend towards customer oriented services , like personal financial management (with functions like budget management, expense categorization, saving goals…​) and robo-advise, is already a big step in the right direction, but even then, managing financials is still considered to be a boring intangible and complex task for most people. Virtual (VR) and augmented reality (AR)   could bring a solution. These technologies provide a user experience which is   more intuitive, personalised and pleasant , as they introduce an element of   gamification   to the experience. Both VR and AR

Low- and No-code platforms - Will IT developers soon be out of a job?

“ The future of coding is no coding at all ” - Chris Wanstrath (CEO at GitHub). Mid May I posted a blog on RPA (Robotic Process Automation -   https://bankloch.blogspot.com/2020/05/rpa-miracle-solution-for-incumbent.html ) on how this technology, promises the world to companies. A very similar story is found with low- and no-code platforms, which also promise that business people, with limited to no knowledge of IT, can create complex business applications. These   platforms originate , just as RPA tools,   from the growing demand for IT developments , while IT cannot keep up with the available capacity. As a result, an enormous gap between IT teams and business demands is created, which is often filled by shadow-IT departments, which extend the IT workforce and create business tools in Excel, Access, WordPress…​ Unfortunately these tools built in shadow-IT departments arrive very soon at their limits, as they don’t support the required non-functional requirements (like high availabili

PFM, BFM, Financial Butler, Financial Cockpit, Account Aggregator…​ - Will the cumbersome administrative tasks on your financials finally be taken over by your financial institution?

1. Introduction Personal Financial Management   (PFM) refers to the software that helps users manage their money (budget, save and spend money). Therefore, it is often also called   Digital Money Management . In other words, PFM tools   help customers make sense of their money , i.e. they help customers follow, classify, remain informed and manage their Personal Finances. Personal Finance   used to be (or still is) a time-consuming effort , where people would manually input all their income and expenses in a self-developed spreadsheet, which would gradually be extended with additional calculations. Already for more than 20 years,   several software vendors aim to give a solution to this , by providing applications, websites and/or apps. These tools were never massively adopted, since they still required a lot of manual interventions (manual input of income and expense transaction, manual mapping transactions to categories…​) and lacked an integration in the day-to-da

Beyond Imagination: The Rise and Evolution of Generative AI Tools

Generative AI   has revolutionized the way we create and interact with digital content. Since the launch of Dall-E in July 2022 and ChatGPT in November 2022, the field has seen unprecedented growth. This technology, initially popularized by OpenAI’s ChatGPT, has now been embraced by major tech players like Microsoft and Google, as well as a plethora of innovative startups. These advancements offer solutions for generating a diverse range of outputs including text, images, video, audio, and other media from simple prompts. The consumer now has a vast array of options based on their specific   output needs and use cases . From generic, large-scale, multi-modal models like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Bard to specialized solutions tailored for specific use cases and sectors like finance and legal advice, the choices are vast and varied. For instance, in the financial sector, tools like BloombergGPT ( https://www.bloomberg.com/ ), FinGPT ( https://fin-gpt.org/ ), StockGPT ( https://www.as