Nice try but sadly you guys missed the entire stake of blockchain in Remittance. WU is remitting from 18xx and you guys think they don’t have their hands in Blockchain? WU and MoneyGram has hold of more than 50% of market share in Sub Saharan Africa where there are no mobile network. How about putting blockchain there? – Useless. Blockchain actually just solves the settlement part and not capturing and disbursement part. The settlement part is already almost free and the cost is due to agent management, cash transfers and regulatory compliances. You guys made it look so nice that it is a magic stick to solve the problem, if it was really that. WU wouldn’t even let anyone stand because their own settlement system is powerful than anyone else and cheaper than any blockchain. Now, about the startups doing remittance using blockchain. Most of the names you mentioned have exited the market already. Guess why? They got fancy UI and lured investors with buzzword but then they realised no one uses their service and they aren’t allowed legally to remit because of AML/CFT rules. What about those who want to send cash? These fancy services never calculated that most people prefer cash remittance as they are poor or earn illegally or in cash to save their taxes. Most migrants do not use any formal service but they go informal as it is actually cheaper and faster. How about comparing blockchain prices with them if it is really becoming cheap? This article was 1% of the tip of the tip of the entire iceberg. Nice graphics, less value.

All my thoughts are supported by my own fact based research I did in my master thesis using credible sources. E.g. WorldBank