I brought up the point about fees being not worth the effort months ago. Nothing has changed and the fees that someone in a "developed country" make is meaningless no matter which way you look at it. Here is what I conclude.
1. The AirAgent-1 in the US will be the actual migrant. After all what benefit is there finding someone close to you to do something you can do yourself, quickly, easily and free. After all the AirAgent has his/her own bank account in the developed country. (before you all go on about illegal immigrants doing cash jobs - well if they wanted to use this service they would go through someone they know and again its not about the 1% fee.....argument invalid).
2. AirAgent-2 in Mexico or wherever else, will NOT be the person who is the final recipient of the money. 1% goes a long way in some countries, I don't know about Mexico but I know in Asia you can buy a good meal for $1 some people get paid $1 a day in very remote regions of the globe. $20 would be life changing.
3. DCC don't even care about the 1%.... Its not about how much fees/revenue they make out of this. In fact its only 0.75% because partners are taking the other 25% of that 1% fee. I haven't done my homework, so someone better in the know can correct the following, nonetheless the principle remains.
Lets say a large market share player charges 10%. For every person that decides to use AirPocket instead of them, they lose 10% lets call it a $100 transaction and $10 fee. So the player loses $10, but DCC only get 75-cents from that same customer. So DCC isn't going to make a huge amount of money off AirPocket, but it seems ever so obvious a takeover won't be far off.
Use cash injection from AirPocket buyout to further develop products.
Mind you I haven't read the presentation yet, so hopefully the above is still relevant.
