Japan
The main banking software in cursors in Japanhave been the treasury and capital market system brigade. However, even here it has often been fairly slim pickings. There were two deals in 2012, for Misys’ Summit and Calypso, following one deal in 2011, also for Summit. Calypso, Murex, Misys and Sungard all have customers in the country from previous years and shared all but one of the country’s four deals in2010 and five in 2009. One of Calypso’s two takers in 2010 was the Tokyo Stock Exchange.
Japan still offers virtually nothing for the core banking
system suppliers. Among key obstacles that give domestic players the upper hand are regulations, local market practices, interfaces to local settlement networks and passbooks (commonly used by bank customers in Japan), language and culture. The large banks have significant IT teams, an in- housedevelopment mentality, and turn to a few domestic IT heavyweights for services and software. In the mid- and low-tier banking market in Japan (comprising regional, shinkin and labour banks, credit and agricultural co-ops), NTT Data is the dominant player. It claims nearly a 100 per cent share in the low- end banking market (tier three and below) and a 30 per cent share of the tier two segment.
For Temenos and Oracle FSS, you have to go back to 2006
for the last deals(SumitomoMitsui Banking Corporation for the former, Rakuten and one off-the-record deal for the latter), ahead of Temenos picking up a deal at a niche player in the country in 2013. The other deal in the year was treasury again, going to Murex.
Indian supplier, Nucleus, has been a provider of its lending
system in the past but won no new business for a few years and had seen a falling away of users, although it still claimed Shinsei Bank and Tokyo Star Bank. It made another step forward with the only win in the country for any supplier in 2014. There were two deals in 2015, which was awarded to Misys and Probanx, respectively. Misys won the sole deal in the country in 2016 for its wholesale banking system, Fusion Invest.
Malaysia
Malaysia has traditionally been an interesting market, with some large banks, a fairly active treasury segment, and a burgeoning Islamic banking space. There was a significant peak in 2006, following which sales were steady without being spectacular, with six ineachof2010,2011and2012. As such, the solitary win in 2013, for SAP with Loans Management, was a notable decline, so too the same total for 2014, a solitary treasury and capital markets deal, picked up by Open link with
Findur. The market picked up in 2015 with three deals signed, split between TCS, Murex and Oracle. In 2016 there were two deals recorded in the country, one each to Misys and Intellect Design Arena.
There are 27 commercial banks, with a mix of local and
foreign ownership, 20 or so Islamic banks(this is a well- established sector, from the early 1980s) and 15 investment banks. There has been plenty of consolidation, with finance companies merged into commercial banking groups and with discount houses, securities firms and merchant banks brought into investment banks. The government has stakes in the two largest banking groups, Maybank and CIMB. The latter in particular has become a major regional player, although the six largest banks all have overseas operations.
The leading domestic supplier is Silverlake. Sales of its core
IBM iSeries-based SIBS have been diminishing, although it has some loyal customers that bring repeat business. The clearest example of a major win at an existing customer was the 2010 signing of CIMB for a single platform, worth over $350 million, for its operations across Malaysia,
Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore. The new solution is a
major constituent of CIMB’s enterprise-wide IT/operations transformation, with the overall costs projected at $670 million. Other components included financial reporting and management software, an HR system, a front-endfor sales and a regional transactions banking system. CIMB also chose IBM to provide IT infrastructure, IDS Scheer for BPM applications, and Accenture as a primary consultant for programme management, with Silverlake building the core platform. Silverlake did also not chup a brand new win in2012, at Malaysia Building Society.
There has been heightened competition and one arrival has been Path with iMAL. It had breakthroughs in 2009 at Bank Muamalat Malaysia and First East Export Bank (FEE Bank). Bank Mualamat signed for all modules of iMAL in late February for its 53 branches but the project was not a success. Path had been helped in the selection by having had a support office in Malaysia since September 2007, and could provide a reference in the country at RHB Islamic Bank. In fact, things also did not go to plan at RHB Islamic itself. A Path spokesman subsequently claimed that iMAL had gone live but that the bank planned to extend its existing system, FIS’s Systematics, to cover the scope of iMAL for reasons of‘group strategy’.
Path’s deal at FEE Bank was for a new operation in Malaysia
and an established one in South Korea. The bank was a subsidiary of Bank Mellat and this was Path’s first success with an Iranian bank. However, a year later FEE Bank became subject to UN sanctions and its assets were frozen. Two other Middle
Market Dynamics Report 2017 |
www.ibsintelligence.com 103
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224
