2009). Infopro’s other Cambodian customeris May bank. Temenos’s tally in recent years includes Bank for Investment and Development Cambodia(BIDC) in 2009, followed in 2011 by Amret Microfinance. The latteris another large player, with 110+ branches; the central system went live in October2012, followed by the roll-out to the branch network, with the some what delayed completion set for the end of 2013.
According to the Association of Banks in Cambodia, the
market is made up of 30+ commercial banks of which 22 are local incorporated and the rest are foreign bank operations (the latter have been increasing, with Taiwan Cooperative Bank and Hong Leong Bank arrivals in 2013), seven specialist banks including one state-owned bank, 32 MFIs, of which seven are eligible to collect customer deposits(GIZ’s MBWin is widely used here), and 29 NGOs involved in rural credit activities. At the end of 2011, the four largest banks accounted for 70 per cent of deposits and loans. These are Acleda Bank (a long- standing customer of Temenos), ANZ Royal, Cambodia Public Bank (Campu) and Canadia Bank (another taker of Temenos’ T24, signing in 2006). Temenos won 1 more deal in 2015, for T24 . Apart from this Misys opened an account in Cambodia with a sale to small size bank. In 2016, Temenos clutched two more deals, both for microfinance institutions.
India
The Indian market has seen almost wall- to-wall core system replacements among the biggest banks in the last decade or so, followed by considerable activity in the mid and lower tiers. The vast majority of the high-end deals have gone to the traditional Indian heavy weight suppliers, with other domestic suppliers entering the fray for the smaller deals. It is arguable that there has not been another country that has seen comparable activity. For outside vendors, the pickings have been few, despite the fact that they often have considerable development resources in the country. There have been a few selections of treasury and capital market systems, while the few Indian banks that have not gone for Indian suppliers for core banking have mostly had bad experiences and have ultimately headed this way as well in the end.
The high-endIndian deals were prompted by heightened competition in the market as a result of the arrival of a number of new banks. The entrants turned to packages and this in turn forced the lumbering, typically decentralised existing banks to do so as well, from State Bank of India downwards. Infosys won the largest slice of the market, followed by TCS and I- flex/Oracle FSS. The resultant projects have been rolling on ever since, with some more successful than others.
One or two of the high-endIndian projects failed and have seen the banks opt for different systems. Punjab & Sind Bank
actually selected three core banking systems, the latest being Infosys’ Finacle, in 2010. In 2006, the bank, with almost 1000 branches, had originally gone for Symbols from System Access (now owned by Sungard) but gave up. It then opted for Oracle FSS’s Flexcube as an alternative route, with Satyam as the integrator, but a new tender was then issued and this time the contract went Wipro’s way. The ten-yeardeal, worth nearly $22million, saw Wipro implementing and supporting Finacle.
Although low-end, Equitas Micro Finance India signing in
2009 for Temenos’ T24 was notable as it was the first ever incursion for this supplier in India (despite a large Indian support operation). This was followed by an off-the-record deal in 2014.
Although low-end deals were excluded in 2011, the number of deals still jumped, to 22 from 13 the year before. Some well- known names chose systems in 2011, including Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, signing for Intellect Core, from Polaris, state-owned United Bank of India, which has 1600 branches, signing for Kastle Treasury from 3i Infotech, and National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, which signed with Polaris for the Intellect lending system. In 2011, it was only the Indian vendors– 3i Infotech (four deals), Infosys (four), Nucleus (five), Oracle FSS (one), Polaris (six) and TCS (two) – that signed deals.
In 2012, India Post signed with Infosys. The decision was
made by the Department of Post, India, which is seeking to transform its banking operations across150,000 post offices in the country, and Infosys was preferred to TCS at the shortlist stage. Karur Vysya Bank opted for Polaris’ Intellect Core
The slight ray of hope for international vendors has been the
treasury market, which started to open up to outside suppliers a few years ago. HDFC Bank, in 2007, and Axis Bank, in 2008, took Misys’ Summit, for instance. In 2007, Calypso won Kotak Mahindra Bank and there were two deals in 2006 for Reuters with KTP (later residing with Thomson Reuters, now part of Misys) plus solitary wins in the same year for Sungard, with Sierra, and Murex. Thomson Reuters had the most success with its back-endto Kondor+, K+TP, with a deal in 2009 at Canara Bank taking its total for this system in India to five.
Infact, even this slight opening for non-domestic vendors
has closed of late. There are a number of domestic treasury systems for smaller banks, including 3i Infotech’s Kastle Treasury. In 2010, theonly treasury deals went to the domestic suppliers, 3i Infotech and Polaris. In 2011, all three deal went the way of 3i Infotech. These were Daiwa Capital, India Infrastructure Finance Corporation and the aforementioned United Bank of India.
This pattern meant that Calypso’s win in 2012 at IndusInd Market Dynamics Report 2017 |
www.ibsintelligence.com 155
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
