Honestly, I think it’s a polite way of letting people know they may now be eligible for an overdraft, and given the current climate people may benefit from it as a backup if things hit the fan & they need it.
People complained Monzo won’t lend them as part of an overdraft, but then when they start telling people they offer them, they complain. 
I’m still not sure that marketing is the same as pushing something.
This seems thoroughly responsible compared to the upselling I get from lots of financial institutions (have a loan! Take out a credit card!)
Personally, I’m not over keen on marketing generally. But I still can’t see anything particularly objectionable about this.
I’m using the term @Revels used in the OP, as I didn’t receive the email since I already have an overdraft with Monzo.
I think there’s a fine line between marketing and pushing. One tells you the product exists, explains the benefits. The other makes you feel like you need it. Looking at the screenshot, the part that crosses the boundary from market to push is this:
to make sure important payments aren’t declined
If I’m the sort of person who’s running short of money and having my Sky bill bounced and lose tv. I might just feel like I need this, and wind up trapped in a spiral of overdraft fees. This is less of an issue though if Monzo are carefully targeting customers where such a scenario will almost never happen unless circumstances change drastically, which seems to be the case here.
As I say, fine line, and to me, that’s dangerously close to it, and I’m not sure how I feel about that approach.
There feels like there’s been something of a tipping point of late, where Monzo have been willing to compromise their values in pursuit of testing what they can get away with to maximise on revenue and cut losses. Not that it’s a bad thing for a business, but it’s more the attitude of a struggling big bank, and less the attitude of a scrappy startup trying to challenge the status quo.
I don’t have marketing switched on so don’t get anything like this through at least.
I don’t disagree with this, but I wonder if we’re all just in a hyper-critical bubble on this forum. A lot of people, I imagine that got the message would probably just delete it, or may be thinking “Hm, I’ll take a look at whether I can get an overdraft and move everything over to Monzo if I can” etc.
Personally, I have an overdraft, I very rarely use it, and it’s there as a buffer incase anything unexpected comes. Having it over the last year has been a great safety net, if worst comes to worst, it could cover me for a couple of months out of work (without having to use savings/investments).
I’m probably more glass-half-full, so willing to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the intention behind the messaging. But again, without seeing the full message etc it’s tough to really understand.
Maybe there’re certain metrics on this account that could mean the user is living pay check to pay check, or hasn’t got an overdraft and could benefit one for some breathing room or similar? 
Yeah I’m quite in agreement with this.
I do understand for some people an overdraft can be dangerous. But like you, I have one for security and mostly infrequent need. If I ever do need to make a large unexpected payment, the funds are immediately accessible, no having to try get a loan etc.
Exactly this. Rightly or wrongly, banks (and others, for example credit card companies) turn a profit from other peoples debt. I think maybe this is an area where Monzo’s ‘friendly’ persona doesn’t resonate so well and something a little more straight might be more appropriate?
Hmmmm… what values do they have or did they ever had that would stop them from doing this?
Don’t actually think I’ve ever gotten a email over one
The values of a company change when the leader at the helm changes. Monzo’s priorities have significantly changed (it needs to focus on making a profit, rather than growing at the astronomical rate) and that’s how business works. With most of the founders gone, the company is now a different entity.
I would argue pushing overdraft products (especially if they get the audience dead wrong) is at odds with making money work for everyone. The recent account closure threads thus far seem to be odds with making banking accessible to everyone, including the unbanked, and their wordings recently feel at odds with their tone of voice guidelines, and the transparency they once boasted about no longer exists.
as @j06 rightly points out, they’re a different entity now.
The slogan will get dropped soon for sure.
hmmm. I’m really not sure they are. They have always been a private retail bank invested in by venture capitalists. Profit has always been the main goal. ‘Make money work for everyone’. Sure, neat marketing statement. But VCs weren’t putting hundreds of millions into achieving a ‘mission statement’, it was built for return on investment. And at no point did anyone say ‘we aren’t going to push our loans onto customers’ - in fact fairly sure that when Tom stood in front of VCs asking for money he would have highlighted how many loans they’d be able to push.
Maybe you are the optimist, but honestly I think it’s a touch hopeful to think this was ever not the exact plan.
Out of 5 million customers I suspect only a minority are put off by this kind of banking marketing.
They’ll of done the research no doubt
I’m not put off by this type of marketing email at all.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.