
Intuit tries to call Mint's bluff? Is this normal? - auston
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/02/19/quicken-online-cant-believe-mint-is-doing-so-well-sends-threatening-letter/
======
SwellJoe
One of the best days I've had since starting my current company has been
receiving an email from a C-level at our largest competitor, pointing out a
flaw in the product comparison table on our website (due to the fact that they
had released a new version that added one of the features we had that they
didn't). I imagine the guys at Mint must have been downright giddy receiving
this letter.

On another note...Whenever I get into a conversation about a business I wish
I'd started, Mint is the first one that comes to mind. It's such a _huge_
market, and Intuit has failed so miserably to make the transition to the web--
and if they ever admit that the web is a better way to solve this problem,
they'll have to accept dramatically lower per-user revenue, which is something
that very few companies have the balls to do. It's why the tech industry has
massive churn every 10-20 years--market leaders get eaten from the bottom
(mainframes by minis, minis by micros, etc. for example).

~~~
pwk
One of the sadder examples for me is Polaroid, they were doing some strong
work in digital imaging but supposedly it didn't receive internal support
because "it would undermine our film business". It's one thing to turn a blind
eye to upstart innovation, it's another to intentionally stifle it within a
company.

Any examples of companies that have done this right? Succeeded at replacing
their own obsolete technology with upstart technology?

~~~
lacker
Seems funny to talk about IBM in this context but they did start out making
punch cards in 1896. They successfully made the transition to computers,
mainframes, and then PCs, but then finally missed the shift from hardware to
software. From about 1896-1980 they were pretty on the ball, though.

Also AT&T has made the transition from fixed to cell phones, okay so far.

It's a lot easier when the new business has the same business model but new
technology. When the business model changes along with the technology, often
the established company doesn't view change as "profitable enough" and decides
to fight the future. If you're curious about this "The Innovator's Dilemma" is
a really good book.

~~~
cameldrv
Them missing the shift to software wasn't for lack of trying. They had lots of
mainframe software, and then had a huge division making PC applications
software in the eighties, which no one much liked. Then they made a major push
with OS/2 and forked DOS from Microsoft, and bought Lotus. Unfortunately for
them, for some reason IBM didn't seem to be able to make mainstream software
that people wanted to buy.

~~~
lacker
The trickiest shift is the business model. IBM could always sell software to
corporations. They never managed to sell software to consumers.

------
tptacek
I don't know if it's normal, but it's certainly an _unbelievably fucking dumb_
marketing move; your dad knows Quicken, but might not have known about Mint
--- until Quicken made sure he did.

~~~
jpwagner
It would be brilliant if Intuit is planning on buying mint...

~~~
kragen
It would be brilliant if they've already secretly signed a deal to buy. If
they are just planning on buying, then this would just drive up the price they
have to pay Mint's shareholders.

------
jupiter
What about those boxes of Quicken rotting in the shelves of
resellers/customers - doesn't Intuit count them as sold copies even if the
software was never used?

~~~
jauco
They'll count them as _sold_ copies as soon as the money is in.

Buyer != user

~~~
blurry
Depends who is the buyer. If it's the store then Intuit will definitely
account for them as purchased. I don't know how it works in shrink-wrap
software retail, but in most retail situations products are bought wholesale
by the store, not lent on consignment until the end-user purchases them.

~~~
jauco
My point was that intuit will have recieved money for the product. So they can
honestly say that it was sold. They don't claim that buyers actually use it.
(though in order to keep up sales in the long run, they probably strive for
that)

------
staunch
I can just picture a large board room at Intuit of stuffy suits all sitting
around baffled how this tiny startup is managing to totally dominate them. I'm
going to sign up for Mint right now.

Fun fact: A safer way a company can brag in advertising is called "puffing"
<http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/puffing>

------
moe
As the old saying goes: If you're worth suing then you might be doing
something right.

------
ComputerGuru
I love how Mint's reply to Intuit says "Hey, we're actually growing faster
than you think" and ends with an overt advertisement of Mint's services.

------
ComputerGuru
The reason Mint is doing so well is quite simple: it's so damn easy to use.

I just signed up now, and I was expecting to have to go through a number of
loops to get it to grab the data from my multiple bank accounts, but it was a
breeze. Just another step in the sign-on procedure - truly great work on
minimizing the number of people that default from linking their bank accounts.

And the UI is goal-oriented with a deep understanding of common tasks people
want. I saw my transactions and renamed one of them..... and was about to
groan how stupid this going to be, renaming everything else to match, when I
saw the "rename all other instances of xxx always" option. I was floored.

Great work, Mint!

~~~
sachinag
Everyone, pay attention here. _Mint doesn't have any technology._ They're just
an unbelievably well-designed front end for Yodlee.

"[T]he UI is goal-oriented with a deep understanding of common tasks people
want". Is your site doing the same?

~~~
RK
Is that why they can make dubious security/privacy claims like:

 _Mint uses only your account login credentials for access to your account
information and Mint does not store these credentials._

Clearly that information needs to be stored somewhere, but Mint can make it
sound to the users that it is magically not stored (because it's technically
not stored by Mint).

I haven't actually used the service. I have a general aversion to services
that ask me for my password to a 3rd party account. The import-your-contacts
types are bad enough, but bank account access is just too much for me to
potentially give up.

------
dkokelley
I love mint. I actually caught fraud on my credit card while checking my
balances on my iPhone through mint's app while at work. I was thinking of
writing them a thank you letter.

I would have been tempted to reply something like this:

"At Mint, we have an algorithm to calculate the number of users we have. This
function is defined as follows:

mint users = (average logins during the past 7 business days / (registrations
- closed accounts)^last business day's S&P 500 closing price - average
rainfall of the Amazon basin during the past 6 months[in inches]) * 0 + number
of Intuit customers ^ 2

As you can see, here at Mint we may have even underestimated the number of
users we have"

~~~
jrockway
_I actually caught fraud on my credit card while checking my balances on my
iPhone through mint's app while at work._

Don't you read the charges on your statement before you pay it?

~~~
snprbob86
I caught an accidental double charge when checking my balances on my iPhone
through mint's app while at work.

I use auto bill-pay, but the bill wasn't due for two weeks anyway.

~~~
Hexstream
Is it fraud if it's accidental??

~~~
snprbob86
Philosophy aside: who cares?

I caught it early and corrected it before it was a problem. That kicks ass in
my book.

------
paulgb
_As you are no doubt aware, all advertising claims must be verified and
substantiated before they are used in advertising._

Now that's a novel idea. Nine out of ten doctors agree.

~~~
tallanvor
Sure, but nobody said you had to say what the other 90 doctors you asked
thought.

------
gruseom
Why would Mint even respond to a letter like that? I could understand if, say,
it were a reporter asking, but what right does a competitor have to demand
such figures? Let alone so rudely.

Though I suppose if the competition is determined to make themselves look like
assholes, furnishing a polite reply and then leaking the whole thing isn't a
bad way to help them out.

~~~
froo
Hmm, I suppose if someone wanted to be truly a dick to quicken, they could
have the publicly available figures printed onto a large billboard (the ones
that go on the back of trucks) and park it in front of intuit's HQ.

That's one way to present the info :)

~~~
gruseom
That's funny, but it would be a big mistake. If they start acting arrogantly
themselves, people will say "they're no better" and they'll lose the advantage
of the contrast. The last thing to do when experiencing success is flaunt it
and act entitled.

------
thinkcomp
I signed up sometime last week to check it out, and my six-digit bank account
ID numbers in Mint's database are 6079xx and 6079xx+1. They're sequential, so
there are 600,000ish rows in the table, but that's not necessarily proof that
they're all active.

I don't use Mint for anything really, but technically I'm a user.

~~~
atish
Mint's user data is sharded across multiple DB's. So if you're the first user
on a fresh DB, your bank account will have ID 1. Also, users usually have
multiple bank accounts as well, so accountId isn't a good indicator of # of
users.

------
newmediaclay
If you've used both Quickbooks Online and Mint, it's no surprise at all that
Mint is doing so well. Mint just blows it out of the water in terms of UI,
features, and ease of use.

~~~
blurry
I've used both Quickbooks online and Mint and as much as I agree with you on
interface, I must completely disagree on features. I wish I could use Mint but
after trying it out there are several showstopper issues. Just one example,
Mint lacks the ability to import or even manually enter past transactions so
it's really useless if you want to get all of 2008 in there.

~~~
jaaron
Exactly. Without the ability to enter in other transactions (for example for
cash), Mint is just _read only_. It's a great and useful read only view of
your finances, but there's little other functionality.

------
sown
I wonder if this was some kind of botched overture for a sort of partnership.

~~~
jacquesm
That happens more frequently than you think. I was once 'sued' by a F500
company for exactly that purpose, a 'softening up' round before negotiations.

------
adsyoung
So annoying we don't have mint in Australia I hate doing the finances
manually.

Is anyone here able to describe how their interface to your bank account works
in more detail? I haven't heard a great explanation of it.

Part of me is still amazed that many people have happily typed in their
banking passwords.

~~~
krschultz
There really isn't an interface. Mint uses your login to get the state of your
accounts but does not allow you to transfer money or anything else, it is read
only. Then it tried to catagorize all the transactions you have based off
their database of companies. You can track your spending over time in
different categories. It sounds like nothing but unifying all your accounts in
one place is very useful.

------
ars
Why use mint? Why not register with yodlee directly?

~~~
madh
Mint is lightweight and has a nicer UI, but Yodlee has more features and can
track more types of accounts. I have both set up and find myself using Mint
more often.

------
anuraggoel
Maybe it's just me, but this article felt a lot like something I would see on
valleywag. Just replace tech companies with tech individuals.

There is, of course, shallow technical discussion about how users are counted;
even a comScore chart; but the tone of the article and the ludicrousness of
the whole affair felt no less voyeuristic.

------
vaksel
so I can just email any company and demand them to give out their proprietary
data? Mint should have told them to go to hell.

~~~
Elepsis
This is essentially data Mint publishes on its front page, and has mentioned
in press releases before. I don't think that really qualifies as proprietary.

