Talk:Revolut

Merge Nikolay Storonsky here

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Nikolay Storonsky fails WP:NBIO in that his only claim to notability is through being the founder and CEO of Revolut, while we have WP:NOTINHERITED. Also, no sources in that article are independent of the subject as required by WP:NBIO. Any thoughts? — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Oppose, I think his role in setting up Revolut and its "disruptive nature" would make him notable.Cristiano Tomás (talk) 21:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you address WP:NOTINHERITED please? Otherwise I will AfD that bio. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support merge per nominator, notability is not inherited. – Teratix ₵ 08:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment No strong feelings either way, but I'd like to point out that WP:NOTINHERITED clearly states that it is not a policy or guideline and not an argument in itself. Notability has to be decided on grounds of wether there are sufficient sources on the person himself (as opposed to the company). Averell (talk) 20:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - his article reads like a puff piece - David Gerard (talk) 06:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Revolut app.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

blanket statements

There are multiple mentions in the article of this company not reimbursing fraud victims but there are numerous examples and coverage of instances where they did reimburse some or all of the lost funds. Here are two:

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/newcastle-bar-owner-scammed-fraudsters-27515992

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/relationship-coach-scammed-over-5000-30727873

The article includes a significant amount of information about fraud claims and criticisms, which appears to be quite typical of financial institutions and large corporations in general - we must be sure there is not undue weight given to individual complaints. BridgeCityBoyz (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Correct banking license information

I have disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page and it is indicated in this edit request.

There is outdated information about Revolut's banking license. This appears in two places. First in the introduction and next under the Protection of Funds/Revolut Bank. Here are my requested edits:

Introduction :Revolut Bank UAB, the firm's European Economic Area subsidiary, is licensed and regulated by the Bank of Lithuania (replace with: the European Central Bank) within the European Union, and depositors' money is protected through deposit insurance, insured by the Lithuanian State Company Deposit and Investment Insurance.

Protection of Funds/Revolut Bank: Revolut Bank UAB, based in Lithuania, (replaced with: licensed by the European Central Bank) Provides deposit account services in 30 EEA markets.

Here is a source: https://www.pymnts.com/digital-first-banking/2021/revolut-bank-granted-full-european-union-banking-license-amid-criticisms-unfair-competition/

This source also already appears on the page: https://www.lb.lt/en/news/revolut-granted-specialised-bank-and-electronic-money-institution-licences

Assistance is greatly appreciated in this matter. Thank you. RevNeut (talk) 18:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done Likeanechointheforest (talk)

Update revenue and employee numbers

I have disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page and it is indicated in this edit request.

There are updated financials and employee count from the most recent reporting. The figures in the information box should be updated to the following:

Revenue: $2.2 Billion or £1.8 Billion (2023)

Net Income: £344 million (2023)

Number of employees: 10,000 (2023)

Here is the supporting documentation: https://www.revolut.com/annual-report/2023/ & https://assets.revolut.com/pdf/annualreport2023.pdf

Thank you for any assistance in this matter. RevNeut (talk) 18:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: The revenue was already 1.8 billion.I've corrected the net income, which was inccorrectly reported, while keeping the existing source. I can't find 10,000 employees in the given sources, could you please specify a page number? Thanks! Rusalkii (talk) 22:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you. Here is a source that can support that 10,000 employee number for the information box: https://news.sky.com/story/revolut-founder-storonsky-to-cash-in-as-part-of-500m-share-sale-13174553 It is also mentioned on page 13 of this document https://assets.revolut.com/pdf/annualreport2023.pdf

The employee number also needs updated in the introduction of the article. Right now it reads:

As of December 2023, Revolut more than doubled its headcount in two years, employing over 7,500 people in more than 25 countries.

please replace with:

As of July 2024, Revolut employs 10,000 employees and serves 38 million customers across 38 countries.

using this report: https://assets.revolut.com/pdf/annualreport2023.pdf

Finally, another editor added this to the History: Revolut has 40 million customers and 10,000 employees.

It would be accurate to read:

As of 2024, Revolut has 38 million customers and securely holds $22 billion of customer deposits in customer accounts.

https://assets.revolut.com/pdf/annualreport2023.pdf

Thank you for your thoroughness. Let me know if there are other clarifications necessary. RevNeut (talk) 15:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rusalkii Thank you for your assistance, I have added additional information and content. It would be wonderful if you would be able to complete this particular edit request to update important facts. Let me know if you need anything else to do so. RevNeut (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I think this got buried in my notifs somehow.  Go ahead and make the changes to the employee and customer numbers and their associated sources. Please do not add the "securely holds" language. Rusalkii (talk) 06:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Additional banking license update

I have disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page and it is indicated in this edit request.

There is information available concerning recent bank license and availability. Here are the requested edits:

Under History:

In June 2019, Revolut expanded to Australia, the company’s first expansion outside of Europe. (source to support: https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/12/revolut-launches-in-australia-as-a-beta/)

In 2024, Revolut secured a Mexico banking license to establish itself as a bank in Mexico, Latin America's second largest economy. (source to support: https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/revolut-banking-licence-mexico-jobs-disrupt-its-67bn-remittance-market-20240410)

Thank you for your assistance. RevNeut (talk) 13:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: Australia added. I'm not sure it makes sense to add the Mexico content given that it's just a license, not them actually releaseing a product in that market yet. Rusalkii (talk) 06:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Rusalkii Thank you for your help. Regarding the banking licence update in Mexico, it's very similar news to the UK banking licence they've been granted. It's a significant milestone in providing them with a permission to go ahead and offer products soon in these geographies.

Adding here a content piece from Reuters as a source which talks about the same which talks about the same: https://www.reuters.com/technology/fintech-revolut-receives-mexican-banking-authorization-eyes-expansion-2024-04-09/#:~:text=Fintech Revolut receives Mexican banking authorization, eyes expansion,-By Reuters&text=MEXICO CITY, April 9 (Reuters,a press release on Tuesday. RevNeut (talk) 10:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Please let me know if the wording needs to change, or if there's anything else I can help with on this. RevNeut (talk) 10:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

"The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United Kingdom..."

I'm not seeing a strong focus on the UK in the article as it stands. There are references to over a dozen other countries. Besides, it's a UK-based bank and not a "UK-based bank" in the sense of a HSBC, which is a global megabrand, so I also don't see why there'd be a problem with UK-leaning content in the first instance. Can we remove the template yet? Elliott-AtomicInfinity (talk) 02:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I support this. Nobody I've met outside of the UK and Ireland seems to ever have heard of Revolut, so it makes sense that most events involving it would involve the UK and Ireland. AengusB (talk) 19:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect and misleading statement on the number of fraud complaints in Summary and UK Fraud victims section

I have disclosed my conflict of interest on my user page and it is indicated in this edit request.

I’d like to request to modify and move an inaccurate and misleading statement related to fraud complaints figure that appears both in the Summary and UK Fraud Sections of the article.

Current statement: In October 2024, a report found that Revolut was named in more fraud complaints in the UK than any major bank in the country, sparking a debate on the effectiveness of its security controls.

Arguments for modification:

1. The statement is factually incorrect as Revolut is NOT the highest in terms of the customer complaints number according to the official Financial Ombudsman Service data(Factual Numbers in the Source). https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-13996833/Complaints-big-banks-surge-69-past-year-does-rank.html

2. The article's current statement refers to figures from a report by Action Fraud. This figure reports regardless of whether the financial institution was at fault, whereas FOS fraud complaints are recorded only after consumers have attempted to resolve the issue directly with the financial institution. So, this needs to be explicitly mentioned.

https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/faq

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/data-insight/annual-complaints-data/annual-complaints-data-insight-2023-24

Hence I propose the statement be modified as below and moved to the UK Fraud Victims sub-section for relevance:

Proposed edit: According to Financial Ombudsman Service data for 2023/24, Revolut received 3,158 fraud complaints, fewer than traditional banks like Barclays (6,876), HSBC (5,432), and Vanquis Bank (16,067). https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-13996833/Complaints-big-banks-surge-69-past-year-does-rank.html

In October 2024, a report by Action Fraud, found that Revolut was named in more fraud complaints in the UK than any major bank in the country. This figure, includes reports regardless of whether the financial institution was at fault, whereas FOS fraud complaints are recorded only after consumers have attempted to resolve the issue directly with the financial institution.

https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/faq

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj6epzxdd77o

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. RevNeut (talk) 08:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

@Rusalkii , can you please have a look at the above, and help in the correcting the statement and move it to the UK Fraud victims sub section. Thank you in advance. RevNeut (talk) 08:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I'd consider your request fairly biased and to be promotional content.

The source of "thisismoney.co.uk" is only mentioned twice across all of wikipedia. Your mentioned source mentions 4.000 cases for only a first half of the year 2024. You cannot compare the data of a full year only to the data of half a year. Comparing the statistics with other companies could be considered promotional. The BBC, a notable source, stated that Revolut has been named in the most fraud reports and had the highest amount of money paid via authorised push payment fraud.[1] Snarkyalyx (talk) 04:58, 21 December 2024 (UTC)