Can I just test this? It seems to me that a lot of the issues would go away if it worked (almost) exactly the same way as bill pots. Namely:
Money comes out of the main account
An immediate pot transfer to cover the value
No feed needed for pots, no regulatory changes about pots being payment accounts, no overdraft issues.
The only problem I can see is if you run a low or zero balance in the main account. In which case I wonder if you could extend a dynamic overdraft to cover the value of the pot you choose to pay with, knowing that it’ll only be overdrawn for microseconds?
I agree, this is how I would want them to work most
So we can decline transactions that will take you below 0, but sometimes due to things like exchange rates changing between auth and presentment we can’t always completely stop you from going negative on the pot, just as we sometimes can’t stop your main account going negative even if you don’t have a overdraft
Our key concern here is burning through our entire PAN ranges very quickly, but we’ve not ruled it out at all
And just to add even more to this. Hey I’m on a roll now…
When you create a new category, it takes you to a random icon in the list (so I never really know where I am in relation to the icons)
And from what I can tell, there’s no structure to the order of Icons - there’s little sets of groups, like 3 or 4 ‘food’ related together, but there’s more food stuff elsehwere. Similar with what you might call “Sport” icons. (So I have to scroll for longer to find one suited).
It sounds really minor but it’s just one of those areas where a simple flow would increase my use of the feature, but instead it makes creating a custom category frustating, and knowing I have at least 20 I want… Not sure I want to repeat this process 20 times.
This is a genuine option, but you don’t get the separation of money benefits because have £10 in your virtual card pot doesn’t stop you spending £15 on it, as it will just come out of your main balance
It would be way quicker to build as you say, but we’re not sure it actually solves the problem that most people have
Thanks, Adam. I think I’d prefer the main option, too, but was looking for something that might work for the majority and be quicker. But hopefully you can work through the other option soon!
(Edit: although I suppose the same critique could be made of Bill Pots - and folk seem to love those).
Fair, hadn’t considered those types of transactions.
I guess it brings you back to the “What is a Pot” debate, in the Grand Account Heirarchy discussion of past. Should it be it’s own distinct account and work as one (i.e. account number but no card). Or should it be a complete “sub component” of the Main Account.
It sounds like the more Virtual Card features people would want to implement, the more you have to treat said Pot like it’s own account…
The same critique can be made for bills pots for sure, although in my mind having a direct debit fail to pay because you didn’t have enough in your pot is much worse than a card transaction declining, so having it fail over to your whole balance is quite nice. In the future it would be nice to support both options, so people could budget in a way that works best for them
I reeeeallly don’t want to discourage Monzo staff and it’s great that you’re replying to us now, taking feedback (not saying you haven’t previously) but why has it taken 3 months for any sign that Monzo cares?
The cynic in me says because it’s cancellation date for a lot of people.
Out of interest, how many avaiable card numbers exist per PAN range? From what I gather the virtual cards have a BIN of 8 digits? So 7 digits + 1 checksum left? (Or perhaps a 6 digit bin, not sure)
On paper that’s 10 million values - but I imagine the checksum part rules out a good proportion of the potential values.
Can card numbers be recycled, since they are paired with a unique CVV?
(Thanks for the thread engagement btw, it’s great to get some feedback on our feedback).
I’m the opposite with this. I find left to spend terribly inaccurate and I’m much happier knowing that I have enough in my bills pot to cover everything. But horses for courses.
It makes me sad to read things like this. I am disappointed if it seems like we haven’t cared, we really do, and I am sorry if you don’t think we’ve engaged with our community or any group of users enough.
To be completely honest our team has been exhausted. Due to the pandemic, not being able to see each other, having Plus launch delayed, working non stop to try and make a product that fit in a locked down world, not being able to stop and celebrate after launching plus. We love engaging with you all, and getting your feedback, but if you are emotionally drained it can be hard.
I 100% get all that, lockdown is tough on everyone and it must seem worse when everything you do say is pulled apart and criticised.
And I don’t want you to think “Ahhh whats the point, I tried to engage and Revels just moaned”
But (and there is always a but) other than the AMEX launch, your posts in this thread are the most we’ve seen from anyone about Plus. Look how engaged people are that someone is talking, listening, replying. It’s a small thing and it goes a long way.
I’m not cancelling yet, some already have and although what you’ve said is good, for lots it will be too little, too late.
I don’t think this, and I don’t think you’ve done anything wrong. You’ve called out that we haven’t engaged as much as you want, and that’s fair. I’m really enjoying engaging on this thread this morning, although it has meant I’ve not done too much building of anything new
