From this study, we can see that, even in Latin America, where much of Bitcoin + Lightning’s opportunity is seen to rest, we’re up against the improving feature set and UX of none other than card payments. If we include Lightning as part of “digital payments” (no mention of Bitcoin or crypto in this report), this means we have a rising tide, but also a great deal of competition.

A few highlights that caught my attention:

• Where digital payments are prevalent, it’s a result of ease of use and promotions (read: less than first-rate UX is a non-starter)

• A preference for digital payments is negatively correlated with a preference for tap and pay (read: cards are good enough and getting better for most)

• Where digital payments are not common, respondents expect wider merchant acceptance in order to change their payment preference (read: adoption continues to be two-sided market problem)

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/the-rapid-evolution-of-payments-in-latin-america

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I’ve come to terms with the fact that most customers will prefer to use fiat for payments.

It’s Gresham’s Law… customers will always prefer to spend their devaluing currencies first.

I think that Bitcoin won’t start gaining mainstream traction for payments until sellers refuse payment in anything but bitcoin (Thiers Law).

I’m assuming bitcoin stays at the store of value stage for a while. We still have a long way to go in this stage (ie culminating in the global reserve asset).