WU
#The vast majority of the business is still paid out to an agent location.
However, the bank payout and the bank funding of those transactions is one of the faster-growing areas.
It's still a small portion of the business, but still the largest use case is to pay out in cash.
And again we're trying to create this omnichannel capability where consumers have an opportunity to use us however they want.
Whether it's cash at a retail location, or mobile, or bank or online business.
So however they want to transact with us, that's really what we're driving towards.
So cash is still obviously a very important component of the equation, but bank payout and bank funding are going to become more a part of the mix as we move forward.
Especially in the sense ---+ it really depends on the country, depends on the corridors, right.
In countries where you send money where the people need to pay out in cash, the corridor, it's extremely high growth rates.
But on the send side, there is a different use case.
The people want to use online.
Maybe sometimes credit card funded, sometimes ACH, sometimes, especially in Europe, debit cards and debit accounts funded.
On the receive side, we see a huge ---+ the agent locations advantage is huge to cash payout.
But as <UNK> said, it's small, but we see also very fast growth rate on the bank account and mobile wallet payout.
So that's something that we are also focused.
It's largely an incremental opportunity for us, the bank payout.
We typically don't see a shift of preference there.
It's really an incremental opportunity for us.
I mean, <UNK>, we're always looking for opportunities to take some cost out and optimize, and we continue to evaluate opportunities.
As you said, we've done quite a bit already.
We still are looking at ways of optimizing our overall distribution costs, so we really look at the mix of that business and how that's going to drive distribution costs down over time.
And that is our single biggest cost item in our cost structure, as you know.
Then compliance has certainly become more stable, I would say, this year, than we've seen in the last few years.
We have a better handle on it.
And then in our fixed and variable cost structure, other variable costs, we're also looking at opportunities.
So certainly if there's something of significance, we would definitely call it out to you at some point in the future.
<UNK>, on the compliance we ---+ if I understand your question correctly, we have compliance activities that are ongoing in nature.
So we have many markets and geographies where we're implementing programs.
Even if we complete those activities, we know that we have more regions and more markets in which to go to, and so that's why we continue to see some higher level of spending on the compliance side.
That's where we are today, but things don't necessarily just drop off.
<UNK>.
I think if you're referring to the industry in general, <UNK>, we do think costs are going up for competitors, and that's probably playing into pricing in the industry.
It's early in the relationship.
It's within our B2B business that we've entered into this relationship, and it allows us to deliver mass payments around the world in an easier way.
Hyperwallet has a receive-oriented portal that ultimately requires the beneficiary to input their own information, so it makes it easier.
The center doesn't have to know every single beneficiary detail.
And so, instead of having to put thousands of data points into a system, you can rely on the beneficiary to actually pull the payment to wherever they want to.
It's easier for mass payments and it's applicable in the B2C space mostly, and pension payments or payroll.
I think it fits into our strategy, also.
It's not only what we do, it's not only sender decision, it's also should be a receiver decision, how to pull out the money, where to direct the money, and these kind of relationships help us as we expand our receiver-driven products also to different countries.
One thing we realized that receiver wants also to have the choice, sending money as cash or account or even sometimes dividing the money, half of the money to an account, half of it paying out in cash, so something like that.
The relationships like Hyperwallet helps on our future strategy.
The business grew 11% in the first quarter and 12% this quarter on a constant currency basis.
The drivers have been the same that we've seen for the last few quarters.
We had good growth in our Argentina business, and we also had good growth in our electronic payments business here in the US.
And we had a little bit of offset from the declines in our cash walk-in business in the US.
But pretty similar components of growth, as we've seen in the last few quarters.
Yes, the business continues to execute.
That's the fourth quarter in a row that we've had good constant currency growth acceleration.
They are focusing on driving continued expansion of our hedging and risk management capabilities, as well as driving growth in our integrated payments vertical.
So university payments, financial institutions, NGOs, these are typically more sticky relationships.
They require a little bit more of an integrated solution.
We've been quite successful and we continue to expand that into more markets.
Laura, I think we have one more person in the queue, so we'll take the final question.
So our pricing actions that we put in place in 2015 are working and we've been seeing good response to our pricing actions.
But really corridor and corridor specific, the pricing actions we put in the US is in the higher band.
And we see the early transaction growth, it will take some time, and you need some quarters to understand really the response on the pricing actions.
But we see early signs of good transaction growth on the higher bands.
Other than that, we did the usual pricing actions corridor by corridor and country by country, but it's not that big, and the current business model is pretty much working, and we are satisfied with that.
We didn't price very much of the higher bands.
If you recall, it was 25% of the above $200 principal band, which half of the business roughly is below $200 and half is above.
And we only priced 25% of the above, above $200 principal band.
So a relatively small amount of the business that was priced and we've seen good results, as <UNK> said.
Thanks, everyone.
Have a good day.
