Dialogue with Ria Cecilia Tamez: When Traditional Banks Meet the New Global Payment Economy

Author: Payment 201

Money Travels Season 4 Episode 8, presented by Visa. For decades, immigrant workers wanting to send money home have had to endure incredible friction—because legacy banks are unwilling to serve them. This exclusion has instead sparked a wave of innovation: emerging economies have leapfrogged the West with mobile wallets and real-time networks, but it has also left a huge interoperability gap.

This episode's guest is Cecilia Tamez, Chief Strategy Officer and Head of Data Science at Euronet Worldwide, overseeing a vast global network covering Ria, XE, and Dandelion. She is an immigrant herself and has personally experienced those outdated financial systems. Her grand vision is to transform a massive remittance network into an invisible infrastructure connecting legacy banks with the unbanked population. We discussed why Ria has a unique advantage in building this bridge, how AI is quietly transforming cross-border compliance, and how this connection leads to a future where "work migrates to people, rather than people migrating for work."

They discussed the following core points:

1. "Expat sending money is called money transfer, while migrant sending money is called remittance"—the same fact, different words, carrying different burdens.

2. Remittance is not niche: three-quarters of global consumer payment flows go to low- and middle-income countries, which have historically been informal and completely invisible.

3. The truly underbanked may be the banks themselves—they have not connected to new systems and are being excluded from modern economic activities.

4. Quick Q&A: If one financial infrastructure were to be abolished overnight, Cecilia would choose legacy correspondent banking.

5. From Kenya's M-Pesa to India Stack: government-deeply involved leapfrogging has allowed emerging markets to develop payment technologies that the West is now trying to catch up with.

6. Ria's 30-year-old payment network is becoming Dandelion—"the AWS of money movement," transitioning from proprietary infrastructure to external productization.

Timestamps:

00:00 The language of money: why we call them migrants, not expats.

00:50 Welcome to Money Travels: connecting underserved economies globally.

01:43 Quick Q&A: abolishing legacy correspondent banking.

03:33 Misunderstandings about remittance: they are not niche payments.

04:30 The distinction between expats and migrants: the burdens behind the vocabulary.

05:40 Interoperability is hope: global alignment, connecting everyone.

06:26 Why legacy banks abandoned the remittance market.

09:23 Leapfrog effect: how emerging markets surpass the West.

11:34 Building bridges: legacy systems meet modern infrastructure.

12:40 Inside RIA: the world's largest cash payout network serving 200 countries.

14:00 Founded by us, for our own people: a culture of immigrant-led financial services.

15:07 Real impact: from medical crises to earthquake relief.

16:56 Three times as an immigrant: personal lessons in financial exclusion.

20:21 From remittance to cross-border: building the AWS of money movement.

24:03 Real-time payments require real-time compliance: AI solutions.

26:13 The future of work: when work migrates, not people.

29:11 Empowering global work: paying anyone, anytime, anywhere.

30:43 Mission: to be the financial partner for international living.

Here are the takeaways from this episode:

The language of expats and migrants The same cross-border remittance is called money transfer when the sender is referred to as an expat, and remittance when referred to as a migrant. Cecilia says that the distinction between migrant workers and expats is muddled with too many preconceived notions—she herself, as an expat, is essentially a migrant worker. This distinction reflects a mindset of "division," but she also acknowledges that the two are indeed different: money transfer typically refers to self-remittance between high-income countries, while remittance refers to immigrants sending money home to support their families.

Remittance is not niche The biggest misconception is that remittance is just a niche, troublesome, and inconspicuous payment business. Historically, it has been informal payments that were not counted or seen, completely invisible—because of this, many legacy financial institutions have not truly met these needs, as it is too difficult to do so. The reality is that three-quarters of global consumer payments flow to low- and middle-income countries. Financial institutions that do not serve this market may miss out on a very large segment of the reachable market, and many institutions are beginning to realize this gap.

Who is truly underbanked Cecilia speaks candidly about the industry buzzword "banking the underbanked": those we refer to as underbanked actually live in areas with highly modernized payment infrastructure, building alternative channels and skipping legacy systems. The ones truly becoming underbanked are the banks themselves—they are being excluded from modern economic activities because they have not connected to new systems. A more accurate term would be alternatively banked: 95% of households in Kenya have mobile wallets; the key is not whether one has a bank account, but whether one has access to the digital economy.

Quick Q&A: abolishing correspondent banking If one financial infrastructure were to be abolished overnight, Cecilia would choose legacy correspondent banking—payments should not have to jump three times to go from one country to another; this model does not work. The most outdated financial practice is that a payment takes longer than sending a text message, even though it uses the same internet. The coordination and arrangement in between can be automated; it should be as fast as texting.

Why banks abandoned the remittance market There are three layers of reasons: first, it is complex—the more corridors supported, the more regulatory environments to deal with, and banks are inherently risk-averse; second, technology—banks are tied to legacy technology, making system modernization difficult, and remittance is just one item on a long list waiting for modernization; third, invisibility—there are many informal components in these payments, and banks think their customers are all in high-income countries until they realize they have missed a large number of customers they could have served, and even existing customers are starting to migrate to other services.

The starting point of leapfrogging: Kenya and India The starting point is Kenya, where M-Pesa emerged around 2007, and the government created a new light banking license to allow telecom operators to reposition the airtime recharge system as a wallet. At that time, the bank penetration rate was only 17%, and today, 95%-96% of households have mobile wallets. India then built its own India Stack, continuously developing since 2009. Cecilia emphasizes that deep government and regulatory involvement is key—this is not just business, but an effort by governments to modernize their economies and connect opportunities. Today, these regions have the world's most advanced payment technologies, and it is now high-income countries that are trying to catch up.

Interoperability is key The fundamental perspective needed to bridge the gap is that this is a financial opportunity for every participant, not charity. The real question is how to design the extensibility between legacy systems and modern systems and how to establish connections—this is the source of the Dandelion product. It can now do even more: not only does it enhance interoperability between various channels, but it can also modernize the traditional correspondent banking system we have historically dealt with.

Ria: cash payout network in 200 countries Ria is one of the largest money transfer companies in the world, serving 200 countries and regions: it can make real-time payments to banks, to wallets, and also cash payments—boasting the largest cash payout network globally. The business initially focused on cash: allowing unbanked individuals to send money in one country and have their families withdraw cash in another. As low- and middle-income countries modernized, Ria opened up bank accounts, debit cards, and mobile wallets, all covered by a single API. Culturally, this is a company "founded by us, for our own people"—the people who make up Ria are all immigrants, solving the very problems they faced during their own cross-border migrations.

Real impact and three times as an immigrant Cecilia shared a recent example: after the earthquake in Venezuela, the biggest challenge was how people could access money when the banking infrastructure collapsed. Ria immediately waived fees, allowing money sent to Venezuela to incur no additional costs. She herself has "migrated three times": moving from Mexico to Canada at the age of 8; later, she immigrated to the UK and the US. In the UK, she experienced the cycle of not being able to rent without an IBAN and not being able to get an IBAN without a house; in the US, she found that without e-Transfer, which allows for easy electronic transfers, paying rent resulted only in a directive to mail a check—this is legacy.

The AWS of money movement Ria's technology was initially built for its own use: to support its products and fill the gaps in service. Thirty years later, they realized that many banks and fintechs do not have this network but could truly benefit from it. Just as Amazon built infrastructure to sell books and eventually expanded to sell other products, they productized their core capabilities, which is Dandelion. The application scenarios have also expanded from C to C to C to X, B to X, B to B to X—the fastest-growing segment in cross-border payments is businesses paying consumers, which is a huge gap in low- and middle-income countries.

AI compliance: the constraints of real-time payments Without real-time compliance, there can be no real-time payments. Cecilia's data science team built an AI platform that can detect financial crimes and manage them with surgical precision. AI brings threefold value to compliance: accuracy (reducing both false positives and missed detections), speed (truly achieving real-time payments and decisions), and labor costs (scaling accurately). The companies that can truly win are those that almost do not need to intercept or restrict quality customers—the less we do these things, the more successful the company becomes, and the more satisfied the customers are.

The future of work: work migrates, not people The pandemic and remote work have changed a default assumption: that immigration is for work. Since remote work is feasible, perhaps work can "migrate" to people. Meanwhile, AI has tightened immigration policies—governments are concerned about unemployment and want to keep jobs for their citizens, but the demand for talent from other countries does not disappear just because borders close. Companies still need to fill in-demand positions like data science, and when Cecilia hires, she looks for talent and availability, not where they come from. Money still needs to move across borders, so embedded payments and global payroll infrastructure allow anyone to receive compensation regardless of where they live.

Cecilia:

When we talk about expats, we refer to them as money transfers; but when it comes to remittances, we call the sender a migrant. I think there are too many preconceived notions when distinguishing between migrant workers and expats. In fact, as an expat, I am essentially a migrant worker.

Historically, remittances have always been informal payments, so they have not been counted or seen, completely invisible. Financial institutions that do not serve this market may miss out on a very large segment of the reachable market. I think many institutions are beginning to realize this, and they are starting to see the gaps. I believe our mission is to help those who need international connections financially—to be the financial partner next to our clients, supporting their chosen lifestyles for whatever reasons they need.

Host:

Hello everyone, welcome to another episode of Money Travels brought to you by Visa. In this show, we explore extraordinary innovations in the digital finance space and how they are changing the lives and livelihoods of people around the world. I’m Max. Today, we are discussing how to bridge the gap between legacy banking and rapidly developing emerging markets, allowing economic opportunities to reach anyone, anywhere.

Joining me to delve into this question is Cecilia Tamez, Chief Strategy Officer and Head of Data Science at Euronet Worldwide, overseeing a vast global network covering brands like Ria, XE, and Dandelion.

We will talk about why legacy banks have historically avoided the remittance market; how emerging economies have successfully leapfrogged the West; and a grand vision of connecting the two systems—transforming a remittance network into the AWS of money movement. Cecilia, welcome to our show.

Cecilia:

Thank you.

Host:

Before we officially start, we have a new quick Q&A segment. First question: if you had the chance to abolish one financial infrastructure overnight, what would you choose?

Cecilia:

I would choose legacy correspondent banking. A payment should not have to jump three times to go from one country to another. This model does not work.

Host:

What do you think is the most outdated financial practice that people still take for granted?

Cecilia:

I think it is that a payment takes longer than sending a text message. It uses the same internet and the same technology. There is indeed a lot of coordination and arrangement to be done in between, but all of this can be automated. It should be as fast as texting.

Host:

Is there any industry buzzword that you can't stand hearing?

Cecilia:

Well, I’ll be straightforward; this might sound a bit controversial—I would choose banking the underbanked. I know the intention behind this term is good, but I think the perspective of underbanked itself is a bit flawed because those we refer to as underbanked actually live in areas where payment infrastructure is highly modernized. They are building alternative channels and leapfrogging various legacy systems.

So my argument is that the ones truly becoming underbanked are the banks themselves—they are being excluded from modern economic activities because they have not connected to new systems.

Host:

I must ask you, how would you refer to them?

Cecilia:

In many cases, they are alternatively banked—receiving banking services in another way. Kenya is a great example, where 95% of households can use mobile wallets, allowing them to participate in the digital economy without being excluded from the various activities needed to sustain their lives. But I think this term hides a presumption: that "having banking services" is the key; in reality, the key is whether you have access to the digital economy and the modern economy.

Host:

This question is probably related to your next question—what is the most common misconception about remittance?

Cecilia:

It is the belief that remittance is just niche payments, a small, troublesome, inconspicuous payment business. I think this view is changing, but historically, remittances have indeed been informal payments, so they have not been counted or seen, completely invisible. Because of this, many legacy financial institutions have not truly met these needs, as it is too difficult to do so.

But the reality is that three-quarters of global consumer payments flow to low- and middle-income countries—meaning that financial institutions that do not serve this market may miss out on a very large segment of the reachable market. So this is truly an opportunity; these payments are very important. I think many institutions have started to realize this and are beginning to see the gaps.

Host:

I have to ask you this question. I have talked to many people, especially those whose first language is not English, and the term remittance means nothing to them—they would never use that word to describe sending money. This is really interesting, isn't it?

Cecilia:

Yes. I think this stems from a notion of "division." You see, when we talk about expats, we say that is money transfer; when we talk about remittance, we call the sender a migrant. There are too many preconceived notions when distinguishing between migrant workers and expats—yet in reality, as an expat, I am a migrant worker.

This way of thinking has continued, leading us to treat money transfer and remittance separately. However, I think recognizing that the two are indeed different is valuable. When it comes to remittance, it usually refers to immigrants sending money back from high-income countries to low- and middle-income countries. I originally came from XE, where we primarily did transfers between high-income countries, and these customers usually sent money to themselves; while remittance customers typically send money to help family members and support their livelihoods.

So our terminology is indeed different. This word carries some burdens, but it also carries meaning—they are indeed different.

Host:

Absolutely, I completely agree. Alright, the last question in the quick Q&A segment: what gives you hope for the future that we can make the money in people's hands work more efficiently for more people?

Cecilia:

The fact that we can sit here and talk about interoperability itself shows that everyone has recognized that coordinating globally and connecting everyone is a very important opportunity. Those who have traditionally been in an underbanked state, as well as those who now receive banking services through alternative channels, we connect them with opportunities; at the same time, we also connect high-income countries with the opportunities these people can bring.

So I think all of this is ultimately the friction on the journey of making things better. And honestly, when we see how quickly emerging markets are evolving, I believe this is a very exciting opportunity for everyone.

Host:

Great. The first question is about financial inclusion. We have talked about remittances; cross-border remittances are the cornerstone of financial inclusion, right? I remember you said that 78% of retail cross-border payments flow to low- and middle-income countries, right? And those legacy banks have probably retreated from this market, while companies like yours have grown because of this abandoned market.

So my question is, why are they neglecting such a large group of customers?

Cecilia:

I think there are three layers of reasons. First, it is really complex. You know, the more corridors you directly support, the more regulatory environments you have to deal with, and banks are inherently risk-averse. So remitting to low- and middle-income countries where local banking services are poor is indeed a very tricky issue for them. The second issue— as the situation begins to shift towards alternative channels—I think is technology.

Banks are tied to legacy technology, making it difficult to modernize their systems. It’s not that they can’t do it; many banks have adapted quickly in recent years, but for a long time, technological transformation has been very challenging for them, so this is just one more item on a long list waiting for modernization, and they do not see it as very important. As I said before, they do not value it because there are many informal components in these payments that banks cannot see.

So they think they have always been focusing on high-income countries—these are my customers, this is what they need. And now they are realizing that, first, there is a large group of customers they could have served but missed because they did not establish those connections; second, even some of their own customers are starting to use other services, which is also lost revenue for them.

So I think—based on our conversations with many banks—many banks have realized this is a gap, and it is indeed very important; at the same time, awareness is rising, and the G20 is actively promoting ensuring better interoperability between real-time payments and alternative channels within the ecosystem.

Host:

That makes sense. However, this is both a huge opportunity and a huge demand for everyone using remittance solutions, right? We released a report—actually, later this year, in September, we will release a new version—the number of people globally relying on remittances is growing. I feel we should no longer call it emerging markets; it is more like a growing market, and technology has made amazing progress in this market. You just talked about how technology has evolved and how innovative those markets are.

So I want to ask you: how have these emerging markets achieved leapfrogging over the West?

Cecilia:

If we look back at these markets, they have historically been underbanked—in those areas, banks were almost the only option. They had technological issues, internet connectivity issues, and even simple things like identity verification in rural areas were problematic. So I think the starting point is Kenya, where M-Pesa emerged around 2007, and the government created a new banking license. They realized that this telecom operator had so many people connected through a single mobile phone.

So the government introduced this new light banking license, allowing people to store value on their phones, just like topping up their phones—but they repositioned it as a wallet. This achieved remarkable success in Kenya: in 2007, the bank penetration rate was only 17%, and today, as I mentioned, 95%-96% of households have a mobile wallet.

Later, India saw this and built its own India Stack, continuously developing since 2009. So I think it is innovation building on innovation, step by step creating all of this. But I believe a large part of it is also due to the deep involvement of governments and regulatory agencies in driving this transformation. This is not just a business matter; it is an effort by governments to modernize their economies and connect opportunities. So I think that is probably its starting point.

The reason it has really worked in those areas is that they have usable infrastructure, and they were addressing some very basic issues—issues that are easy for us to solve but are significant and challenging for them. Things evolved little by little, and today it has transformed into them having the most advanced payment technologies in the world, advanced enough that high-income countries are now trying to catch up.

Host:

Hmm, that’s interesting. Back to remittances: they also need to interface with the West's legacy systems, right? So what happens when this interfacing really has to take place?

Cecilia:

So I think when bridging this gap, we need to hold the fundamental perspective that this is a financial opportunity for every participant. This is not charity, nor is it about us doing something to save people. It is about connection, bringing people together. So I think the truly key point is: how do we solve interoperability? How do we envision the extensibility between legacy systems and modern systems to establish those connections?

This is precisely the source of our Dandelion product—it essentially does interoperability from legacy systems to modern systems. So now it can do even more: not only does it enhance interoperability between various channels, but it can also modernize the traditional correspondent banking system we have historically dealt with.

Host:

I think now is a good time to ask you this question—what is RIA to our audience? What do you do? What is the purpose behind it? I love this story, and I hope you can elaborate on it for the audience.

Cecilia:

RIA is one of the largest money transfer companies in the world. We serve 200 countries and regions, which is a very large scale. We can make real-time payments to banks, to wallets, and also cash payments—we have the largest cash payout network globally. The idea that truly drives this business is to bridge the gaps in financial inclusion.

It originally focused on cash payments, meaning allowing those without bank accounts to go to a place to deposit money and then withdraw it in cash in another country, where their families are. However, as low- and middle-income countries began to modernize, we also started to diversify our channels. In places where cash payouts were difficult, we began to open bank accounts, support debit cards, and connect mobile wallets. So I think the most wonderful aspect of this business is that we can provide services to all these regions through a single API.

A particularly beautiful aspect of our culture is that this is a company "founded by us, for our own people." Look at the people who make up RIA—we are all immigrants. A large part of our business is supported by the people we serve. So every morning when I wake up and start working, thinking about who I am helping—I used to be that person. So the work we do is truly meaningful and mission-driven because we are working to solve the very problems we faced during our own cross-border migrations.

And this runs throughout the company, all the way to the leadership level. I often say it’s like a United Nations meeting—we have representatives from Africa, Asia, and all over the world in significant leadership positions that can influence the direction of the company's business.

Host:

I want to make sure our audience understands—after all, clarity is key—can you give us a few real, specific, tangible examples of the problems you solve every day?

Cecilia:

We help people transfer funds. But when you look deeper into what this means for a person, you find it is something that truly touches the heart. If you are sending money to help someone in a medical crisis who cannot help themselves; you are sending money to ensure there is food on the table, to give people educational opportunities so they can escape poverty—we are helping people improve their living conditions. This mission is truly inspiring and powerful, and we carry this belief with us; many of us have personally experienced and understood these situations.

It is precisely this that fills everyone in this industry with passion. Let me tell you a recent real example—the earthquake in Venezuela. When the earthquake happened, one of the biggest challenges was how people could access money. If the banking infrastructure collapses, how do you help people get what they need to survive—buy food, get supplies, obtain water? So as soon as it happened, we immediately took action: we waived fees, allowing people to send money to Venezuela without incurring additional costs.

We did this because we know we can make a difference in the world, and this is truly meaningful; people need it—they still need it now. So quickly mobilizing and finding ways to help those in need is a very powerful and meaningful thing for both our company and for me personally. I truly believe that is very precious.

Host:

Wow, I didn’t know you did that. This… I mean, you are truly remarkable. My next question is actually more personal, because you have faced these challenges as an individual, right? So I really want to learn more about your background and how that background shapes everything you do today and your determination to solve these problems.

Cecilia:

I am a "three-time immigrant." I was born in Mexico, so my first encounter with immigration was when I moved to Canada at the age of 8. The experience of immigrating as a child is completely different from that of immigrating as an adult because children are shielded from many pressures and pains—those are what your parents or those who immigrate with you are enduring. So children experience more cultural shock, language barriers, and those kinds of things. As an adult, I have immigrated to two different countries. I lived in the UK for a while, then moved back to Canada, and later moved to the US.

Each country has different issues. For example, I remember that the bank coverage rate in the UK was about 98%, but as an immigrant with a job, company support, and legal support—I had all the support I needed—I found it extremely difficult to open a bank account. Without a bank account, everything else becomes extremely difficult. Without an IBAN, I cannot rent a house, and without a house, I cannot get an IBAN; then because I have no address, I cannot get a phone number; and because I have no phone, I cannot open a bank account.

So this is a vicious cycle—when you try to move to a new country, everyone assumes these things should already be in place. But the reality is, you have to coordinate all these things at the same time. This was the first lesson I learned as an adult: how difficult it is to deal with these administrative matters—and that was with all the support from my company. After I moved to the US, I managed to open a bank account, but I think it is even harder now. At that time, banks were willing to open accounts for me, but figuring out the different payment systems was still very cumbersome.

Because I had just moved and was not ready to buy a house, I rented a place. In Canada, we have e-Transfer, which allows you to send money with an email. I was very accustomed to that feeling of being able to send electronic payments easily without any cost. But once I moved to the US, that did not work—unless it was within the same bank, it was completely useless.

Once, I needed to pay rent to my landlord, and I thought I had sent the payment, but it turned out to be just a directive to mail a check—America is still using checks to this day, you know, this is what we call legacy. So the real challenge is adapting to the cultural habits of different countries' payment systems; beyond that, I think every aspect is also highly challenging because you have to build a life from scratch at the same time, and you will be surprised to find that there are so many administrative trivialities that we take for granted.

Host:

Indeed. I love the personal touch in your experience because I truly believe that when you give meaning to work, your work will be much better and more valuable, right? You went to Ria, and while doing all this, you are also building this interoperability system—what is the big picture? What is the grand goal behind it? Yes, you are solving the problems of immigrant communities, and you want to make it simpler and more accessible. But what is the overarching thought process behind the "how"?

Cecilia:

Speaking of "how," it is actually quite interesting because when we built our technology, it was for our own use. We built this infrastructure with the real purpose of creating better products and serving our customers in a way that otherwise would not be possible. We have always been filling gaps, and the essence of this business is to find those underserved corners. But as we continued to invest in this, we developed Dandelion into a truly amazing network.

We initially built it for Ria, but later we realized that others might want such services. Many banks and fintech companies do not have the network we have built over 30 years, and they could truly benefit from it.

So, you know, it started with remittances, but later we really began to evolve into this idea: anyone needing to make payments to anywhere in the world—whether through traditional rails or legacy rails—we can do it for them. Thus, we have truly evolved from a remittance company into a cross-border payment company.

We are also continuously expanding application scenarios, supporting not just C to C, which is person-to-person, but also C to X, B to X, B to B to X. In other words, we are enabling those fintech companies and banks to serve their own customers well, and this truly gives us the ability to help many more people in the world, such as small businesses needing to pay foreign suppliers or merchants wanting to remit money to their consumers.

The fastest-growing segment in cross-border payments is businesses paying consumers, and in low- and middle-income countries, this is a huge gap and a major driving force pushing many financial institutions to fill it.

Host:

Actually, while preparing for today’s conversation, you mentioned that you are building "the AWS of money movement." Can you elaborate on that?

Cecilia:

When we first launched this business, we were really excited. We knew it was a huge opportunity, but at that time, there were not many companies doing what we do, so people were a bit confused because they did not realize the problems they were facing. Once they discovered this gap, they realized they truly needed our services. And when we explained it, for many people, it was an "aha" moment. For example: our payment network to us is like AWS to Amazon.

Amazon initially built infrastructure to sell books, then they decided to sell things beyond books, and later they realized—look, the infrastructure we built to support our scale is actually remarkable technology, and we can sell it. The "aha" moment we experienced with the Dandelion product was similar: we built the rails to support our products, and then we realized that the infrastructure, rails, and connectivity we built are powerful enough for other companies to use.

So we productized our core capabilities, and now it is called Dandelion.

Host:

I want to touch on complexity, but more importantly, the importance of compliance—because you just mentioned those legacy banks, and we know that compliance and regulatory burdens or responsibilities are extremely important, and sometimes they are precisely the barriers that prevent services from being implemented or make it difficult for people to be pioneers. How do you solve this problem? Maybe starting with Dandelion, but perhaps also expanding to a broader scope?

Cecilia:

Yes. I mean, in our core business, we handle these payments, so we must ensure we are preventing fraud and money laundering. This is a huge risk in the industry, and we must take it seriously. And we are fortunate that we have always been on the right side of compliance. But it is not just luck; it is also strategy and investment. We have a very strong compliance team, and there is a very capable leader in the compliance project who truly recognizes that to address this complexity and scale, we must be able to support real-time payments.

And that is the constraint—without real-time compliance, there can be no real-time payments. But the complexity and scale of this matter are immense, so we teamed up with my data science team to build an AI platform that allows us to detect financial crimes and manage them with surgical precision, thereby reducing friction. So, the companies that can truly win are those that almost do not need to intercept or restrict quality customers: the less we contact, intercept, or impose restrictions, the more successful the company becomes, and the more satisfied the customers are. Another layer is pure scale.

Now there is a lot of discussion about what AI can do; some people have positive views, while others have negative views. Our view is that AI can bring threefold value to compliance. It enhances our accuracy, reducing both false positives and missed detections; it enhances speed, and thanks to AI, we can truly achieve real-time payments and real-time decisions; it also lowers labor costs, allowing us to scale accurately. So this has truly been a fantastic experience. Our self-built compliance AI platform has achieved outstanding results, and this is indeed the direction of the future.

Host:

I want to change the topic and ask you this question. Because the geopolitical environment is changing every day and may be more uncertain than ever. Restrictions on the convenience of physical immigration or cross-border movement are becoming more and more prevalent. So how does solving the payment infrastructure issue pave the way for future global work? How does it help people around the world continue to perform their best work, regardless of where they live?

Cecilia:

I think this is a very interesting evolution, and I believe it started with the pandemic and remote work. In the past, it was taken for granted that immigration was for work—people from low- and middle-income countries would immigrate to high-income countries in search of opportunities. But one of the things we learned is that remote work is entirely feasible; you can have a distributed team across different locations while still maintaining efficiency. From this, if we have the right technology—and due to the circumstances, a lot of investment has flowed into supporting remote work technology; if it weren't for the pandemic, we might still be exploring this today.

So suddenly, we have the infrastructure to support remote work, allowing us to have conversations like this while being in different countries. From that point on, I felt that perhaps workers do not need to immigrate anymore; perhaps we can let work "migrate" to people. This is a very significant shift in thinking, and I believe it is meaningful. At the same time, with the emergence of AI, immigration policies have begun to tighten significantly because governments are concerned about unemployment. There is a lot of discourse about AI causing unemployment, so governments suddenly start thinking: we must restrict immigration and keep jobs for our citizens.

But the reality is that this idea is a bit flawed because the demand for talent from other countries still exists; the demand does not disappear just because borders close. But ultimately, I think what we are seeing is that "work" is migrating, not "people." And fundamentally, money still needs to cross borders. So one of the things we do is serve a full spectrum of clients, allowing businesses to pay consumers, achieving fluidity in payments across the spectrum. On the other hand, businesses still need to fill these positions and attract this talent.

In some fields, like data science, hiring is really difficult; these skills are in high demand. When I hire, I look at their talent and availability; where they come from does not matter. So the idea that "work itself is internationalizing" is changing our traditional views on immigration.

Host:

So how do you solve this problem? How do you ensure that no matter where a person lives or which company they work for, they can receive their compensation in their place of residence?

Cecilia:

I think this is precisely the power of our product: we provide embedded payments in collaboration with partners who do payroll, and we also establish partnerships with banks and fintech companies to enable payments to occur. So the real key is—if you have a payment rail that can achieve interoperability across various application scenarios, then you are solving problems for everyone: not just our direct consumer business, but we are also addressing it from a wholesale level, allowing any company or financial institution that needs to fill this demand to achieve these payments.

The demand in this area is extremely diverse, and there are many ways these payments can be embedded, integrated, and co-created. This is the beauty of our solution—Dandelion takes an API-first approach, but we can integrate in many different ways to meet all the evolving needs. These needs change rapidly, but fundamentally, this means: a company can have multi-currency wallets, make local payments, or receive local payments; it can pay to mobile wallets or to cards, allowing the payee to choose their preferred payment method.

Host:

I think this brings us back to your mission, right?

Cecilia:

I believe our mission is indeed to help those living international lives—those who need international connectivity financially—to be the financial partners for our clients, truly supporting their lifestyles, regardless of the reasons they need this help.

Host:

Cecilia, thank you very much for joining the show today. I really enjoyed this conversation. Once again, thank you deeply.

Cecilia:

Thank you, Max.

Host:

That wraps up my content for this week. If you want to continue the conversation, you can follow me on LinkedIn. And of course, don’t forget to follow this show on Spotify and subscribe on YouTube. In the next episode, I will continue to explore those life-changing innovations in digital finance. So wherever your journey takes you, remember to tune in to the next episode of Money Travels presented by Visa.