Disclaimer: This interview is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as a basis for investment decisions. In Practise is an independent publisher and all opinions expressed by guests are solely their own opinions and do not reflect the opinion of In Practise.

{audio:0:00:20} Michael, can we have a short introduction to your role and responsibilities when you were at Cardlytics?

{audio:0:00:26} I was the account director, primarily working on the Santander account, but also with the other account directors, on many projects which impacted other banks. I also worked with some of the challenger banks they were looking to onboard at that time and some of the projects and startups in that space. My main role, outside of the relationship management with the bank, was around bringing on new products, ideas and revenue generating projects. I also looked at introducing new merchants and new ways of creating rewards, but also getting the banks to improve their rewards programs. I drove them to develop their U/I and U/X to the next generation of the program.

{audio:0:01:18} When Cardlytics tried to onboard or adopt a new bank, which person or team did they target within the bank?

{audio:0:01:33} That depends on the bank or the relationship and with any institutional sales, you are looking for a warm introduction. The more senior the better, so before we identify the team or person – and generally it is on the retail or tech side – you want someone at a senior level who either the company knows someone has a good relationship with or there is some way you can leverage that relationship. Generally speaking, you are looking for a head of retail bank or someone in the digital loyalty space. At Santander, it was slightly further up the chain. The higher up that corporate or exec sponsor is, the easier the onboarding process is.

{audio:0:02:35} Is it that strategic that it ever reaches the C-suite?

{audio:0:02:43} Is the CEO involved in driving adoption at the bank?

{audio:0:02:50} Yes, and it is really important when pitching the value of Cardlytics, that you find the exec sponsor. It is about landing that initial meeting or pitch with them, having that discussion and, once again, how warm that relationship is drives this, but then aligning the program or what Cardlytics can offer to their goals or targets. That is easy to do in a large corporation like that, because ultimately a bank wants sticky customers because that is how they drive revenue out of the customer. The head of customer loyalty or retail banking will be targeting on the number of accounts and products. The reward platform is almost seen as another product that the customer has, so it is easy to align with those goals, but it does get up to that C-suite level.

{audio:0:03:56} How did you pitch the value proposition of Cardlytics?

{audio:0:04:04} It is personalized loyalty in a digital age and loyalty programs are a dime a dozen. You can no longer walk into a bank branch and speak to your bank manager who knows your name and there is a warm fuzzy feeling. It simply does not happen because there are too many banks, too many people and too much going on. Cardlytics gives your customers a personalized experience based on their spend habits, which is a compelling proposition to a banker. It means their customer will get that experience where they think Santander or Lloyds know them and give them the stuff they want. That is the sales pitch.

{audio:0:04:58} Beyond that, depending on the size of the bank and where the sales process is at or where Cardlytics has penetration in the market, the second piece is that we offer this for free. There will be a revenue split and you will make money off this, so not only will you get more loyalty out of your customers, there will be a revenue stream on the other side. It almost sounds too good to be true.

{audio:0:05:27} Did you go through those calculations or was it fuzzier in terms of how you communicated the absolute dollar value of Cardlytics?

{audio:0:05:42} You want to keep it as fuzzy as long as possible, because you do not want to be pinned down on a revenue number early on in the piece, before you have set the benefit that the bank will get from it. That depends on the market penetration Cardlytics is trying to get into, as to when that conversation about the numbers happens. When they made the hop across the pond to the UK, trying to get into a brand-new market when you need the banks and retailers at the same time, was a real juggling act. The first bank who takes it up gets the biggest revenue share because they take the most risk and have the most bargaining power. As that moves on for the newer banks, I doubt they have that revenue conversation early on. The proposition would be, we give this to you for free.

{audio:0:06:42} So early banks have more bargaining power in the FI share they command?

{audio:0:06:48} The earliest adopter in a new market gets the best deal because they take all the risk. Large banks know they have the most bargaining power with everyone. Bank of America, Chase or Lloyds realized that if they came on, they presented a larger audience for the Cardlytics platform which means more advertisers which keeps the whole thing churning.

{audio:0:07:27} Does that bargaining power change over time?

{audio:0:07:31} Yes, as Cardlytics becomes more widely adopted in the market and has more retailers and banks, they no longer have that same bargaining power. Some of the bigger banks might be less susceptible to that bargaining power sliding, because they still have size, but over time it definitely decreases as they become more established in the market.

{audio:0:07:59} From the bank's point of view, do they do the calculation of, if X customer converts to X number of offers, they will retain longer which increases their lifetime value, or are they not that sophisticated in their calculations?

{audio:0:08:23} Cardlytics will absolutely pitch that, and we have numbers relating to the lifetime value of a customer, but when we use that in the pitch with the banks, we are looking at that more immediate revenue stream or what the customer is doing. It is about, if you get this many customers on the platform, they will get this much spend, which is a big one, being the primary card that the customer is using is huge. You will get this much spend going through the card and this much revenue off the back of it. We play out those long-term figures which impact the bank, which is around how sticky that customer is.

{audio:0:09:22} If they have one bank account, how likely are they to come to you for your mortgage, which is where the long-term money is? If I know they have two accounts and a card, and I am the primary card they are using, because there is an incentive to use this card, they are much more likely to get the mortgage with the bank and be there for longer.

{audio:0:09:47} Cardlytics management have said the FI share is helpful to the bank, but it is not the core reason why banks adopt this; it is more about retention. Would you agree with that? Is that how Santander, Lloyds and other UK banks looked at the proposition?

{audio:0:10:06} Yes, probably slightly different from bank to bank, but at the end of the day, it is not the core focus for the bank until you try and take it away from them. It is more about the long-term proposition for their customers, but it is difficult to take something cash neutral or cash positive inside a business, to being cash negative. That discussion is tricky to navigate, but can be done over time. With the scale that Cardlytics is currently at and the products, features and enhancements they are bringing in, all those things chip away at that revenue and that FI share discussion can help to pull back a lot of that revenue share from the banks.

{audio:0:10:59} Do banks care about the FI share then when they adopt this product?

{audio:0:11:05} Yes, because any large financial institution is metricked on that cost and revenue, which at the end of the day, is what it comes down to. If you look at the wider market with those banks, a lot of their traditional revenue lines are decreasing. This includes fees on accounts and cards, transaction costs and home loan interest rates currently at all-time lows. You are getting more transient customers as banking becomes a lot easier and more fluid to transfer, so banks will start to claw onto these incremental pieces of revenue.

{audio:0:12:03} Some banks are far more flexible with that than others. Santander are willing to enter into those discussions and happier to look at different revenue splits. Do you use it to drive the program or plow the FI share back in and reinvest it? Whereas Lloyds are perhaps slightly more cagey about that and harder to have those conversations with.

{audio:0:12:36} So did Santander truly believe it increased lifetime value by using Cardlytics?

{audio:0:12:45} Yes, not only did they see the program as that surface level customer interaction, but also as the long-term value, and a way they could be a development partner to Cardlytics. The changes in the market include open banking and challenger banks coming on. The way people are banking is shifting, and when Santander looks at their portfolio of partners or divisions, Cardlytics becomes an outsourced R&D department where they can trial things on Cardlytics to come up with ideas and bring that back to Santander. Banks are trying to increase engagement and become that hub for your finances. You do not log into four apps to see your budgeting, banking, loan and credit card. They want to be that hub and, by the nature of the Cardlytics program, they can drive that engagement through instant gratification and real time notification. Cardlytics is definitely a strategic partner with many banks.

{audio:0:14:18} How did Santander and Lloyds view the platform differently?

{audio:0:14:22} They both viewed it similarly. Lloyds are more institutionalized and more rigid to work with. Even though they saw the Cardlytics platform the same, things took much longer and were harder to get done because they have bankers who have been there for X years and do not want to put their neck out and try something new. Most of the time you are fighting internal politics. Getting that C-suite sponsor is crucial because all of the people required in that onboarding process have a million other things on their desk, and somehow this loyalty program has to trump the rest of them. Core banking always comes before rewards platforms.

{audio:0:15:35} How did the newer fintech startup banks approach Cardlytics?

{audio:0:15:43} They viewed Cardlytics as more of a revenue stream, because many of them were not making money, so focused more on the revenue and numbers – both long term – and the revenue split. They take that strategic partner to the next level due to the tech and the speed which Cardlytics can implement. It aligns with those newer challenger banks. Newer banks are also looking to do the same as the larger more institutionalized banks, which is become that hub. They can do it quicker and easier and the product they deliver to their customers is far better. They have the data streams and the tech to ensure their product drives engagement.

{audio:0:16:58} Is there any difference between how UK and US banks adopted Cardlytics?

{audio:0:17:06} On the adoption side, not so much. With the earlier banks, the proposition and pitch was different from what it is now, but the differences between the two markets are more around the ongoing running of the program. The US approach to Cardlytics and to digital advertising inside their apps differs from the UK. Santander ran one ad with a dog in it and someone complained and they had to pull their ad campaign. They ran another ad with a female Olympic athlete baking, and someone complained because it was a negative view towards women, so they had to pull that ad campaign. They are very hesitant to put any advertising into their apps which is not stock standard. The American banks are much more free and easy with this stuff. They require much less sign off for ad campaigns. The UK challenger banks are different from traditional banks, but the US is easier to market and run the program. The onboarding is the same between the two markets.

{audio:0:18:38} What was the biggest challenge for you in onboarding UK banks?

{audio:0:18:44} Maintaining that priority because there was always an issue with the bank's app. The core banking proposition is always ahead of Cardlytics being onboarded. There are always a thousand things to do, so it is about maintaining those key relationships at the senior levels. Cardlytics will find someone from a previous bank who onboarded Cardlytics, track them down to their new bank and start that process again. It is about maintaining momentum and the tech integration. Many banks have legacy systems and Cardlytics requires a big investment in kit, so trying to integrate tech can also be a real issue.

{audio:0:20:00} What were some of the things for Santander, for example, that were above Cardlytics in the priority list for the retail or loyalty side of the bank?

{audio:0:20:12} Several deployments were scuttled at the last minute because there is a lot more going wrong with banking apps than what customers see, especially in the traditional banks. This is not specific to Santander; up until the 11th hour when you were trying to deploy, you might have five minutes to go and it gets called off due to a legislation change taking priority. With legislation changes like GDPR, they will re-evaluate how the Cardlytics program runs. Any important piece of retail banking that needs to get out will definitely trump Cardlytics.

{audio:0:21:16} You mentioned a large hardware investment; what does the bank need?

{audio:0:21:24} This has probably changed from when UK traditional banks were onboarded. They need to set up load balancers and servers, which requires kit inside their data center which interacts with their mobile app, desktop banking and card network. It is big investment to bring on new functionality and often the tech needs to be upgraded. Cardlytics regularly upgrade their software, which needs to fit into the bank's cycle.

{audio:0:22:27} Where did Santander and Lloyds place offers in their mobile apps?

{audio:0:22:31} They had their own landing page in the mobile app, much like the desktop app. They had them inline, so on your account landing page you might have your checking account, savings account, mortgage, a Cardlytics set of offers and your cards underneath that. There were also widgets on pages, but on the mobile app it was the landing page and inline widgets.

{audio:0:23:02} How difficult was it to get banks to prioritize U/I to drive offer conversions?

{audio:0:23:08} That was difficult with different things trumping the Cardlytics offers program. Cardlytics has a network of banks they can test these things with, especially in the US market. You can almost use the data points from the US, excluding PII or customer data, showing how when we did this, this was the increase. You can use that as the use case to help drive that conversation and prioritize some of the other things, but it is still a long cycle for that upgrade. We have done consumer testing alongside Santander, having the public review versions of the app and provide feedback. We have also done a straight sales pitch which is, this is what we did in the US, this was the uptake and this could be your share of increased revenue.

{audio:0:24:19} Did Santander want a different feel to the app – such as the placement of card offers – from Lloyds, Barclays and other banks, or were they not too worried?

{audio:0:24:34} They were more worried whether the look and feel fitted their brand and app. They are not worried about reinventing the wheel each time, as long as the revenue and engagement increases are there. It is very easy to play the different banks against each other, saying this bank is doing this and are seeing these results, you are missing out, which creates that need for them to make the change.

{audio:0:25:07} How aligned is Cardlytics really with the banks? If the bank knows this platform increases lifetime value in the long run and they have some FI share in the short term, it seems they are aligned, but when you adopt, use and improve it, it does not seem like a real priority. Is there a misalignment where these banks do not fully appreciate the platform?

{audio:0:25:50} No, they are very aligned. I do not want it to seem like the Cardlytics program is not a priority, but certain things will always trump it and these things occur frequently. Banking apps and websites fall over much more than people realize. They also have security issues which will always trump anything else. They are very aligned in practice. It is an amazing feat that Cardlytics has pulled off by having their hardware sitting in these banks, extracting data. It is very difficult to pitch to a bank that their data will leave the bank and come back, and then also deliver on what they promise, which is increased revenue. It is very black and white with Cardlytics in terms of the revenue figures they deliver, and it is very easy for the bank to measure Cardlytics' performance. Cardlytics does stack up in that sense.

{audio:0:27:13} How could Cardlytics move up the priority list, assuming they have a champion inside the company who is pushing for Cardlytics?

{audio:0:27:43} There will always be things which trump Cardlytics, but from a regulatory perspective, their core banking needs to be first. If the loyalty program falls over, it is not a great customer experience but people will not come after the bank. Cardlytics can move further up the priority chain by delivering more value to the bank. I dislike using this consulting term, but they need to land and expand. Once they are inside the bank, it is about looking at what they can do. We were working on open banking propositions with some of the other banks and you shift from being a provider to a strategic partner. That is how you move up that priority chain, and Cardlytics is very good at doing that.

{audio:0:28:50} How did Santander, for example, market their offers to their own customers?

{audio:0:29:02} They will include you in digital mail outs to customers, do flyers in the branch, promotions through the branch network. They will put it on your onboarding track, so you might sign up for the account on day one, get a card on day two, get the Cardlytics proposition on day three and a home loan proposition or something on day four.

{audio:0:29:30} Are banks contractually obliged to market Cardlytics?

{audio:0:29:38} A certain level of marketing needs to be agreed on ahead of time, from both sides. Cardlytics needs that for the program to work, but so do the banks so that they see the value. You can have the best loyalty program in the world but if no one sees it, you will never get the adoption. The numbers are clear with Cardlytics because you can track everything on a day by day basis. Every time you send out an email, we get this many enrollments over day one and it trails off after day 18. The banks enjoy a real time view of what is going on because they have an accurate measure of their impact in the market. Most banks focus on brand spend.

{audio:0:30:31} If Santander puts out an ad campaign with only billboards around town, it is much more difficult to see the conversion impact. Whereas Cardlytics gives you, you did X, received Y and here is how we can improve X again. Some banks are better at marketing than others, but the more they push the program, the clearer the results are.

{audio:0:30:57} What was the biggest challenge in driving product awareness?

{audio:0:31:03} You can show the bank what is going on, but if something else trumps you, like when the GDPR regulation came in, that becomes the focus. Some of that bandwidth shifts away from Cardlytics because other things will eat that up, so it is about maintaining that priority and the relationship you have with the bank, and showing them the results.

{audio:0:31:38} Did Santander's willingness to market offers and change their U/I change over time?

{audio:0:31:50} Yes, the more that we shifted from providing a service to being a strategic partner, it was clear we were going up the priority chain. We shifted teams from where we were managed, to a more suitable area, which was also a catalyst.

{audio:0:32:12} Do you mean the bank was managing you?

{audio:0:32:16} Yes, we were originally managed out of retail banking because that is where the natural sales proposition sits. Retail bankers are interesting in driving loyalty and customers. Once you shift out of retail bank to the product space, you get managed like a product, which is a lot easier for Cardlytics and where their sweet spot is. You still need executive sponsors and champions through the retail space, but once you are in that product space, it becomes less of a, when are we going to get the space or money to do this or where revenue comes from, to much more of a business case. That sits on a board and as each project gets ticked off, Cardlytics moves up the list. We found that as we moved into that space and worked on other projects with them, what we said carried more weight. We were asked to do more projects and moved up that priority list in terms of how we were managed.

{audio:0:33:31} How did you become more of a strategic partner?

{audio:0:33:35} It is about coming to the bank with solutions. Open banking is both an absolute threat and an opportunity for Cardlytics. We went to our executive sponsor managing the division we were under and told him which issues were coming and what our solution was. We gave them an outsourced solution before they even started the investment. This is the same for any institutional sales relationship, solving problems and making them look good.

{audio:0:34:24} Why was open banking both a threat and an opportunity for Cardlytics?

{audio:0:34:33} With open banking, you have data feeds from outside financial institutions coming into third party aggregators. Someone is competing for that priority of card and which card you will spend on. I might have a Monzo account for this, a Santander account for that and a Lloyds account for my mortgage. All that is aggregated into one space, which all of a sudden is a real threat to Cardlytics, because aggregators could provide different rewards programs. The opportunity there is that banks move very slowly. They have legacy systems and people, making Cardlytics very agile compared to them. We can offer a rewards system which works on any bank card, however the customer spends, but it is run out of the Santander platform. Having those conversations is really powerful inside the bank, because they understand the threat is there and that they need to respond to it.

{audio:0:36:07} If PSD2 regulation requires all banks to have an API to make the customer data portable and that implies any aggregator can get access to that credit card data, so how much of a unique asset do Cardlytics have in this new world?

{audio:0:36:41} Cardlytics definitely has a view of much more data than these aggregators.

{audio:0:36:50} What is the difference in the data?

{audio:0:36:53} Transaction streams might be clipped to fit through PSD2, so you might lose the auth data off the end of it, whereas Cardlytics will be able to see that. Auth data is crucial for real time transactions. In the open banking space, PSD2 is limited to five API calls per day. There are subtle differences in the data, which make a large difference to the end proposition. That data is portable but it is a long way off from being as good as the OPS feed which Cardlytics gets from the bank. The connections are unstable and often drop out, the APIs do not work properly. The banks will respond to a threat in several ways, but one of them is to simply stagnate the threat and not put too much investment into it. You are seeing that through open banking and how long it has taken to properly come to market.

{audio:0:38:24} The direct OPS feed they have from the banks is real time transactional data that aggregators cannot get through PSD2. Is theirs a more stagnant slower feed?

{audio:0:38:40} It depends on the bank but they traditionally run batch cycles overnight. Most banks are moving towards real time which is what Cardlytics do well.

{audio:0:38:58} Is that a major long-term risk for Cardlytics?

{audio:0:39:01} The open banking PSD2 is a major risk but it is, equally, a big opportunity. There are a thousand ways Cardlytics can play open banking. There are many products Cardlytics could present to the banks to drive engagement and revenue, simply sticking to their core. The threat open banking has to Cardlytics is almost 10-fold to the bank, because they will lose out on customers, who may no longer even interact with them, whereas Cardlytics can still work with those aggregators. If a large aggregator moves into the space and starts to pull customers away from banks, Cardlytics can work with them, whereas the bank cannot. There is a small threat to Cardlytics but it is more so an opportunity.

{audio:0:39:58} Cardlytics recently rolled out the Nectar loyalty program at Sainsbury's in the UK. It seems they are moving more into white label platforms for grocers and retailers, which some could argue is diversifying them away from banks?

{audio:0:40:34} Cardlytics is aware of these challenges and opportunities in the market. They are very aware of the concentration risk of only dealing with FIs. Banks work very slowly and are much more rigid, whereas Sainsbury's are more dynamic in their advertising and willing to take risks because they do not have the FMA waiting for them to make a mistake. That is why Cardlytics have diversified from working with FIs and you will see more product development in that space.

{audio:0:41:33} What was your proposition to Santander or Lloyds around open banking?

{audio:0:41:46} I doubt the product we pitched is similar to the one they currently pitch. It was about having that bank's card be the card of choice. As long as they are tapping with their Santander card, we will provide loyalty offers, wherever they spend. At the same time, if they do spend with their Lloyds card or one of the other bank's cards, how do we link that back to the Santander app.

{audio:0:42:31} I have multiple bank accounts so if I convert on Santander to a Starbucks offer, but spend on my Lloyds card, how do you attribute that to Santander?

{audio:0:42:54} I am not sure where they are down this track, but what you then start to look at is how do you not join the data between the banks, but create a third pot of data which mixes the two, and what does that look like in real time and how does that work?

{audio:0:43:15} But the data isn’t shared outside of the banks today?

{audio:0:43:19} Take Morrisons, for example, because Sainsbury's works with them under Nectar. Morrisons do not want a 30% cash back pitched for both cards, because the same customer is getting the cash back twice. That is something you can work through with open banking and it starts to break that down. There are ways you can do it and that was our proposition to Santander. How do we still maintain that you are the bank of choice, agnostically on what card the customer is spending on, or how do we use open banking to enhance that on the Santander card.

{audio:0:44:16} Did the bank not care which card the customer used, as long as they used their app and the offers on it?

{audio:0:44:24} To a degree, yes, but ideally, they use both the Santander card and app. If not, it becomes, how do we drag them back into using that Santander app.

{audio:0:44:40} Is that because you want their mortgage money and the longer-term value rather than debit cards which earn nothing?

{audio:0:44:55} Yes, and like you just said, where is the money for the banks? On the retail side it is that mortgage book and credit cards, which traditionally were very profitable for them. Mortgages have decreased but the size of that mortgage book means that is where you want people to go. Once they get that mortgage, they become sticky because they are locked in. With open banking, tying them back to that app is a really powerful thing.

{audio:0:45:25} Was the challenge that the data was not shared between the banks?

{audio:0:45:30} These were early discussions in the infancy of open banking, and the challenge for us was building the momentum around that. They could see it as a threat, but banks know how to slow things down. Every UK bank missed their open banking deadlines by a long shot, said sorry and kept going. They know how large they are in the market and how they can move to protect themselves. Our main challenge with open banking was getting that ball rolling and getting them to realize that they needed to respond to this in the market. Different areas in the bank saw that differently, with product definitely seeing it more than retail.

{audio:0:46:30} Fundamentally, how we do this with open banking is combining the different data sets in a way that makes the banks happy. If we ran open banking for Lloyds or Santander, what happens then, because you can only pick one player and there is a conflict of interest.

{audio:0:47:08} The product proposition has evolved since what we were talking about. In its core fundamentals it is probably the same, but the how and the what, they will have worked through all those issues. They will have to pick and choose who they do open banking with, if they use Cardlytics as an open banking solution. It looks like aggregators will be the big winners in the market, and many of them will be able to plug straight into Cardlytics, who will ultimately win in the open banking world as they have the scope to work with everyone.

{audio:0:47:54} Would there be another white label platform for banks and Cardlytics is the ad network in the middle, or will there be other players competing in this space?

{audio:0:48:16} Cardlytics can work with different banks in the open banking space and banks themselves will have a response and a way they use open banking. It is very easy for Cardlytics to plug into that. They can still work with their traditional banking partners, while simultaneously putting their open banking product into the market. The third advantage Cardlytics has in that space is that, although they have their traditional FI partners and their Cardlytics open banking product, they can easily work with aggregators. All new aggregators have really good tech and can probably onboard Cardlytics in the space of a month.

{audio:0:49:18} It is not so much about where Cardlytics sits in the open banking space but how they drive engagement in each of those three areas inside open banking. Their priority is working with the FIs, then the aggregators, then their open banking proposition. If everyone is building the open banking proposition and Cardlytics plugs into that, it works for everyone.

{audio:0:49:48} Why do Cardlytics have an advantage to be that central node?

{audio:0:49:56} Although banks are becoming more receptive to opening up to third parties, having a trusted relationship with someone who handles your customer's data is paramount. Experian had a large data hack which a bank simply cannot afford to have. Having Cardlytics as a trusted partner puts them at the top of the queue. There is no sales pitch; we already do this, but we will do it slightly differently to make you more money or ensure you are at the top of the wallet. An aggregator would choose Cardlytics over other partners because of their track record working with large FIs, already handling large amounts of data.

{audio:0:50:53} For their open banking proposition, it is down to their track record in the market. Cardlytics is already an established player in the market, handles large volumes of data and does interesting things with it. That is an easy sell to pitch a white label open banking product.

{audio:0:51:13} It comes back to the direct OFS connection they have to the bank?

{audio:0:51:25} Yes, that is something very difficult to get going with the banks. They have worked with Santander for 12 years and have handled X billion transactions. They do this constantly on a daily basis. A challenger bank's core offering is their mobile app, which when it goes down, they are in serious trouble. If you are looking at two different options to partner with, and Cardlytics do this with Bank of America, Chase, Lloyds and Santander, handle a thousand times the customer volume you have per day, and they do not charge you anything, it becomes a natural yes, let us plug and play.

{audio:0:52:50} Why would Chase or Bank of America leave Cardlytics in the next five years?

{audio:0:53:09} That will come down to the open banking piece. I cannot see Bank of America or Chase leaving because the program is not performing. Cardlytics evolves daily for customers. The only reason one of the big banks would leave is the threat of open banking or they think they no longer need Cardlytics. Any other competitor would have to be in the open banking space.

Cardlytics: Santander, Lloyds, & The Bank Side

Former Account Director at Cardlytics

inpractise.com/articles/cardlytics-santander-lloyds-and-the-bank-side

Executive Bio

Michael Vincent

Former Account Director at Cardlytics

In Practise Notes

Interview Transcript

Related Content

Cardlytics: Scaling the Advertiser Side of the Network

Former President at Cardlytics

Cardlytics: Barriers to Advertiser Adoption

Audio

Cardlytics: Santander, Lloyds, & The Bank Side(August 31, 2021)

PARTNER

Speak to Executive