Agreed - but actually I think it’s more fundamental than this.
If Monzo had truly been trying to make money work for everyone - i.e. sticking to their stated aim - we might have cheque imaging by now, and they might have found something more reliable to replace the PayPoint network.
Instead, Monzo badly lost their way. They screwed up Plus, and started charging customers for the laughable “Supporter” package and posting people stickers. It was PR disaster and wasted a huge amount of resource.
I really do think that Monzo harm their long term prospects with these kinds of actions. Right now, Monzo have a technical lead over many of their rivals. The sensible thing would be to encourage people to switch, to leave their old banks - Monzo’s rivals - behind. Instead, just about everyone on this forum tells users to keep another account open just in case they need to pay in cash, in case Monzo breaks, in case they need cheque imaging, in case they need foreign payments. All of this means Monzo’s customer base is far more likely to be running two current accounts, and to be keeping the door open for the competition to catch up and win customers back.
So why should monzo stay true to their marketing? Because (1) it’s easy to waste money and resource on silly projects when you lose sight of your overall goal and (2) Monzo really do need to make money work for everyone if they want to dominate the banking sector.