As we learned recently, Tom wanted to leave then. The ‘President’ role was because backers actually wanted to keep him on board, but it was pretty meaningless as he wasn’t involved with the business much and eventually left anyway.
Not winning any of the funding for business banking would appear to have been the biggest problem, meaning that Monzo’s business banking may not have been in a position to do what Starling did even if they wanted to. Maybe you could lay some blame on Tom in a way for not prioritising business banking earlier, but that’s easier in hindsight.
In a year or two, we could find ourselves saying that in hindsight Starling made a mistake getting too involved in risky lending. Who be knows?
At the end of the day, Anne is clearly good at her job with the banking side of things, and Tom is clearly good at his job with the challenging and innovating and disrupting side of things. They are very different creatures.
As for Monzo, Tom has created a launchpad (as it were), and what we’re all waiting to see is where T S Anil and the rest of the team take Monzo from here.
Ah good post, I get to use the mute button, just a shame you can’t hide posts from view to stop them popping up. Or if you can I’ve not figured that one out yet
No disrespect @Peter_G , but I really don’t know why you’d create this thread. It was only ever going to encourage completely unfounded personal swipes at both of them.
I imagine to give people the benefit of doubt and see how they’d compose themselves in such a thread. At the very least it keeps the other topics free from the soap opera gossip stuff, and if it gets wildly out of control it can always be closed.
Personally I think there’s some humour and humility to be found in discussions like these, and like it or not, in the modern world, founders and CEOs of companies are every bit as important as the company itself. Monzo vs Starling is just as much Anne vs Tom as it is monzo vs Starling. These people as individuals through their accomplishments are highly inspirational I feel too. To some people they are a hero, and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. There are three people I personally hold in such a regard and two of those were CEOs at one time or another, and of them a founder. They’ve undoubtedly shaped the paths I’ve chosen in my life. Their achievements made my life better, and in some cases really saved it.
Without Tom, there is no Monzo. I don’t doubt that Monzo has dramatically transformed people’s lives, and perhaps in some cases, saved lives. Pulled people out of debts, saved them from life destroying gambling addictions. @Peter_G worries about the cult of the founder, and whilst I agree cults are usually unhealthy, I think it’s justified for folk to feel immense appreciation for these people and hold them a pedestal of inspiration and deem them a hero.
Founders and CEOs will have their own personal values which tend to trickle down throughout the rest of the company. A good example of this would be to contrast Tom and TS. Tom always seemed to me to be very open, and honest, and that showed through Monzo as they too reflected those values as a company. We’ve heard very little from or about TS Anil, and as such he feels more closed off and private. It’s also no secret that Monzo as a company are not as open or transparent as they used to be either, they’re also a little more secretive too, which I don’t think is a bad thing as it’s resulted in more polished feeling products and features.
Thus far, I think this thread has been lighthearted and respectful towards the individuals being discussed. And as long as it remains impersonal, I don’t see why such a discussion shouldn’t take place.
The vast majority of people on this forum have never met Tom or Anne, and hence have no place passing judgment on their character or career choices.
If you want a thread set up to talk about the varying strategies of Monzo and Starling and how that’s all played out so far, then fair enough. But this thread should never have been centred on the founders.
This whole thread is fuelled by conjecture, but I’m driven to suggest a different take on your judgement of Tom Blomfield (I’ve never met him, by the way).
Without him, there’s no doubt in my mind Monzo wouldn’t have happened when it did. For it to get off the ground, it needed new thinking, clear expression and inspiration. He brought that (I don’t hold with the deifying of him, but hey, that’s what inspiration does, sometimes).
I suspect his journey with Monzo was always going to end the way it did. Whether it should have been better managed and the development of the company’s product better preserved - who knows?
Few good starters are good finishers. That’s how it works.
