When it comes to an organisation like NAB, we need to remember that reputation of the organisation to those high up matters A LOT. Not just the reputation it holds with its customers but it's employees
internally as well.
When something like IAM is mentioned, this has the potential to impact a whole arm of this organisation, and in turn you don't want to upset the union. Therefore it needs to be handled with sensitivity and the utmost care. Politics are no doubt at play.
However, IAM and NAB currently make perfect sense together. You have:
- Mark Rantalls history with NAB and I'm sure many relationships
- a big 4 bank which is currently trying to cut costs as a main goal this year (would you look at that? IAM can provide upto 40% cost savings in financial planning practices)
- an industry that is aggressively trying to enter/take over/partner with smaller fin techs
It makes perfect sense to me and I actually think it would be a big loss for NAB not to take the first mover advantage here.
Even if this doesn't materialise in the form of a binding agreement.... I want confirmation of a relationship this week. Even if it's a mock trial/pilot whatever you want to call it. As others have said, it's free publicity. Plus if we can confirm an official relationship of any kind (trial/nonbinding/binding), I suspect that in itself will go a long way to bringing others of all sizes to the table to have a sniff
IAM Price at posting:
6.3¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)