Good point. It would have been more accurate to state that we were surprised at how much people used the app! Over 40% of employees that have access to our app use it! Also, we were surprised by how high user retention is.
Most likely because people are desperate for money because they need to eat, and your app will create a snowballing effect where the next month, they are even more desperate because a chunk has been taken off their pay.
This doesn't make much sense. The counterfactual is that they'd be desperate to eat and take out a sky-high APR short-term loan. How is the new ability to take zero-interest loans "creating" the snowballing effect instead of reducing an already-existing one?
This is called "the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics", in which any interaction with a situation in an attempt to improve it somehow gets warped into shouldering responsibility for the preexisting situation in its entirety. In this case, you've somehow transfigured substantially reducing the cost of credit into "creating global poverty".
Our average user in Spain withdraws 50$, but their monthly salary is >1,000$. We also regularly survey users to see chat reasons they make withdrawals for.
Our conclusion is users are taking small portions of their salary to cover unexpected expenses.
Users tell us they love this, because otherwise they would have had to ask a friend for money.
antihero|4 years ago
wutbrodo|4 years ago
This is called "the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics", in which any interaction with a situation in an attempt to improve it somehow gets warped into shouldering responsibility for the preexisting situation in its entirety. In this case, you've somehow transfigured substantially reducing the cost of credit into "creating global poverty".
Grustaf|4 years ago
asukhwani|4 years ago
Our conclusion is users are taking small portions of their salary to cover unexpected expenses.
Users tell us they love this, because otherwise they would have had to ask a friend for money.