It doesn't make sense even as a growth hack, because they already have millions of users, it's not like without this, they will not be able to acquire more users. My reaction was, "What were they thinking"?
I guess maybe but if they sort of try to squeak by using signed up users who signed up in a period where there was bad data out there and don't go out of their way to correct what they told them.... I gotta think there is very real legal risk there.
As I've mentioned previously in another thread, this is clearly a gamble. When you're on the VC track to justify $4b+ valuations, taking gambles is par for the course.
I just see bringing those customers along after putting out information that could be seen as deceptive / was deleted and already called into question info a recipe for legal and regulator ... pounding.
Silly social media stuff is one thing, but financial stuff where you rope in users with stuff that sounds like "bank" but isn't. Whole mess of folks out there with serious legal tools to come down on you, and a lot eager to do so.
This just seems unusually risky.
The “personal financial independence” crowd avoids this stuff like the plague, although seemingly ironic, those crowds primarily cater to people that lack the most basic understanding of a bank account who need to repair and control horrible financial situations
They are steered clear from capital markets, aside from managed ETFs and retirement plans
But add .25% interest rate improvement in a bank account and these people will salivate over it
Robinhood going above competitors, even at the expense of going above market rate, would have gotten there attention
They would park their money in that account and have easy access to stocks and cryptocurrencies, allowing Robinhood to continue their big data/market sentiment/payment for order flow selling business with greater efficacy