Interview with journalist Harry Savvidis from Naftemporiki.

Gabriella Kindert has worked for years in the European banking sector, including in the Netherlands, and has been in Greece since 2024 as the CEO of Snappi. In our conversation, she discusses the changes taking place in the Greek banking system, the entry of new banks, competition in deposits and payments, and the role of artificial intelligence in the future of banking.

– You worked in Greece for the first time about 25 years ago. What made the biggest impression on you when you returned?

I was in Greece between 1999–2000, and I remember a country with much greater self-confidence. The economy was growing, credit was available, the stock market was rising, and there was widespread optimism. After that, however, people suffered a major blow. Confidence was lost, and a portion of the workforce left the country.

Today, I see that Greece is recovering, and quite a few people are returning. However, the country still needs significant investment in infrastructure. Growth is evident, but we need to see to what extent it is felt by the average citizen.

If I had to summarize my first impression, I would say there is a paradox: Greek consumers are digitally ready, but trust remains largely personal. Greece has made a huge leap forward in payments and digital services. I would by no means say that Greek consumers are technologically conservative.

– What could Greece “export” to the European banking market, and what could it learn from Northern Europe?

Greece can offer agility, entrepreneurial drive, closer customer relationships, and the ability to create modern services without being weighed down by decades of outdated infrastructure. From Northern Europe, on the other hand, it can learn more about operational scale, transparency, data governance, and consistency in execution.

– How does the Greek banking system compare to what you’re familiar with in Northern Europe?

There are many similarities. Greece is currently following trends that emerged much earlier in the Netherlands and Scandinavia. The use of cash, for example, is declining sharply. In the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries, cash is used very little, and the network of bank branches and ATMs has shrunk significantly.

Greece is following the same path, particularly since the pandemic. Capital controls and, subsequently, the pandemic accelerated the use of cards and electronic payments, with positive effects on combating the shadow economy as well.

Another similarity is the concentration of the banking system. In the Netherlands, there are three very large banks, while in Greece, four dominate the market. The difference is that in Greece, the public’s relationship with banks has been affected much more by the crisis.

Greek customers are not less sophisticated, but they are more demanding when it comes to trust, pricing, and personalized service. What I see is a hybrid model: they want the convenience of a mobile app for everyday transactions, but they also want to be able to speak with a person when large sums of money are involved or when something goes wrong.

– Has the relationship between Greeks and banks changed as well?

Undoubtedly. There is greater mistrust and a stronger sense that banks are not necessarily on the customer’s side. At the same time, Greeks have stronger family and social ties, and these have a greater influence on their choices.

In banking, however, trust is built slowly. We say that people change spouses more often than they change banks. This changes when customers have more options and can easily compare prices and services.

– Is the lack of competition one of the reasons why Greeks feel they are paying too much?

To a large extent. The lack of competition and transparency affects not only banks but also e-commerce. In the Netherlands, for example, it’s very easy to compare prices. When there’s greater transparency and more choices, consumers can switch providers more easily.

In Greece, many things still seem expensive relative to disposable income. That is why we need to view the economy not only through macroeconomic indicators, but also through the lens of people’s daily lives.

– What do you consider to be the greatest risk for Greek banks today?

The greatest risk is complacency. We must not assume that just because the balance sheets have been restored, we have automatically created a sustainable model for banking growth.

Greek banks must now translate the resilience of their balance sheets into productive lending, better customer service, and greater diversification. Interest rate margins will normalize, and then other risks, such as geopolitical uncertainty, cybersecurity, fraud, and potentially weaker growth, will become more apparent.

– Can Greek banks significantly increase their lending?

There is enormous potential. A large portion of the Greek population does not have access to short-term liquidity. If someone needs 500 euros, they may not have an overdraft line or an available credit card.

Of course, there are also people who have no intention of repaying. When we first started, we encountered customers who said they wouldn’t pay back small amounts. Nevertheless, we insisted on repayment, even when the administrative costs were several times the amount borrowed. There must be discipline. It’s important to be able to distinguish a good borrower from a bad one.

Structural barriers, however, remain. There are issues regarding borrower quality, collateral, incomplete financial data, the informal economy among small and medium-sized enterprises, and legacy debt held by households and businesses.

We need more data-driven underwriting, credit guarantees, alternative lenders, and deeper capital markets. The goal should not be “more lending at any cost,” but rather faster and responsible financing for viable businesses and consumers.

– Can neobanks also change the landscape of deposits?

Absolutely. The biggest challenge for banks will be competition for deposits and the value they offer to customers.

When you offer better returns on deposits, lower fees, better exchange rates, or cashback, customers now have a reason to shop around. Digital infrastructure also enables much lower costs.

The logic is simple: if a customer can earn a higher return while keeping their deposits safe and secure, why would they keep their money at a bank that offers them less?

– Do you think Greek banks are underestimating the threat posed by neobanks?

To some extent, yes. Large banks have strong balance sheets and very strong relationships with their customers, and this can create a sense of security.

But competition won’t be limited to deposits. It will extend to payments, investments, and financing for businesses and small and medium-sized enterprises. In Western Europe, we’re already seeing the rise of private debt and greater diversification of funding sources.

– Does this mean that banks will play an even greater role as intermediaries?

Yes. Customers now use wallets and services such as PayPal, Wise, and other platforms. Money can remain in a digital wallet and be used for the next transaction without necessarily going through a bank.

Twenty years ago, the average European had about 1.2 banking relationships. Today, they have more than 3, and this trend is set to continue. The more options a customer has, the less exclusive their relationship with a single bank becomes.

– Will this work in Greece, where the relationship of trust with the bank remains important?

Greek customers are very rational. Trust is essential, but once it is ensured through licensing, supervision, and deposit protection, customers will focus on the value they receive.

And because disposable income is lower, Greek consumers are even more cost-conscious. If someone realizes they can get a better return or better services without compromising the safety of their money, they will consider it.

– Traditional banks are now investing heavily in digital transformation. Is there room for neobanks in the long run?

Not everyone will survive. Three years ago, many would have said that a new digital bank didn’t stand a chance against the big banks. Today, we have more than 200,000 users and a fully-fledged banking model.

Size matters, but it isn’t everything. The speed of technology adoption and the ability to execute are just as important. The redistribution of market share is happening in many industries, and it will happen in banking as well.

A digital bank doesn’t just have a good app; it has a different operating model. Established banks can copy a feature of a digital bank, but it is harder for them to replicate its speed, culture, architecture, and decision-making process.

The ultimate competitive advantage will be the combination of trust and speed. Speed without trust has no long-term value.

– A prime example is Revolut, which started out in a relatively small European market and grew to become one of Europe’s biggest players. Could this model be replicated in Greece?

Why not? I’ve known Revolut’s founder since the early days. When he was just starting out, no one could have predicted that within a decade it would become Europe’s largest fintech player.

Greece has a wealth of human and intellectual capital. Greeks are smart, creative, and hardworking. The question is, why couldn’t a Greek tech company or a Greek bank achieve something similar?

The biggest problem is self-confidence. Over the past 20 years, Greece has lost some of its self-confidence. That needs to change.

– Is the European market integrated enough for a bank starting out in Greece to become a European bank?

Yes, thanks to the European passport. You don’t have to set up a separate bank in every country from scratch.

But a European license doesn’t automatically create a European customer. Credit databases, collateral law, taxation, language, fraud patterns, and customer expectations remain largely national in nature.

So, Europe is integrated enough to create platforms that can operate across multiple countries, but not so integrated that every banking model functions exactly the same way everywhere. Technology and risk management mechanisms can be scaled, but the customer offering, service, and credit assessment often require local adaptation.

– What will be the biggest change that artificial intelligence will bring to the banking industry?

Personalization. The bank will be able to understand its customers much better and offer them products, investment options, benefits, and credit terms that truly match their profiles.

For example, it doesn’t make sense for a very good customer to pay the same interest rate as a high-risk customer. One might have to pay 2%, while the other pays 15%. Today, much of the market operates in a way that good customers subsidize bad ones.

Artificial intelligence can make pricing much more personalized and fair.

The first major results, however, will likely be seen in fraud detection, customer service, credit risk monitoring, and operational efficiency. We will then move on to truly personalized financial services and new products based on actual customer behavior.

Artificial intelligence can make financing fairer because it can make better use of data and assess people who are currently underserved by traditional models. However, it can also reinforce biases. That is why transparency regarding decision-making processes, human accountability, continuous oversight, and the ability to challenge an automated decision are necessary.

– Will it result in job losses?

Some professions will change or disappear. Just as the automobile did not immediately replace the horse but radically transformed transportation, so too will artificial intelligence.

The model of “I study, find a job, and climb the corporate ladder” is no longer enough. Knowledge becomes obsolete very quickly. A young employee may know more about a new technology than their manager, while the manager has more experience in handling complex situations.

Continuous learning, adaptation, and experimentation will be the new reality.

– What is the greatest risk?

Cybersecurity and fraud. Risks are shifting from traditional operational and credit risks to cyber risk and fraud.

Banking is a public utility and is based on trust. A serious cyberattack can have much greater consequences than the loss of money. It can undermine customer confidence itself.

– Is Europe at risk of falling behind the U.S. in technology?

I am European, and I want to see European companies succeed. We have companies like ASML and strong European firms in the payments sector. However, the largest artificial intelligence models today come mainly from the U.S.

Europe does not lack talent or technological expertise. Its greatest weakness is fragmentation and a lack of scale. The integration of the banking and capital markets has not been completed, which makes it difficult to create truly pan-European financial institutions.

The U.S. has a much larger single market and deeper capital markets. Europe may have excellent technology, but it cannot always deploy it effectively across all countries.

Europe has lost ground in several sectors and must regain its technological independence. The same applies to payments, where much of the infrastructure is controlled by American companies.

The digital euro can help in this regard by creating a stronger European payments infrastructure.

– If you could design the European banking system for 2030, what would be the key change?

I would like banking to be much more personalized, with lower costs and a much better understanding of the customer. The bank must be able to leverage the customer’s history, better assess risk, and tailor prices and products accordingly.

I wouldn’t carry over product silos, manual processes, and opaque pricing into 2030. Customers shouldn’t have to understand a bank’s internal structure to manage their money.

For Greece, I would like to see, by 2030, faster access to responsible financing, stronger competition in the deposit market, and greater household participation in investments. The Greek banking system must move beyond the phase of recovery from the crisis to financing growth and creating wealth.

At the same time, we need to invest more in financial literacy. There are people who make very important decisions without fully understanding the risks involved.

My sister, for example, took out a mortgage in Swiss francs without having any income or assets in Swiss francs. Decisions like these show just how important financial education and proper market regulation are.

– Which banking service do you consider outdated, and which one do you think will disappear first?

The most outdated service is visiting a branch or filling out paperwork for a simple, everyday transaction. The first thing to disappear will be manual service: paperwork, signatures, the constraints of bank hours, and repetitive documentation.

However, I don’t believe that physical branches will disappear. They will shift their role and become spaces for consulting, complex decision-making, and serving vulnerable customers.

Cash transactions may decline, but trust and human contact will not disappear.

– And how does this relate to the concept of financial wellbeing?

The bank should help customers make better financial decisions. For example, if someone invests 50 euros a month for 18 years, they can set aside a significant amount for their children’s education. Consistency is more important than the amount itself.

In practice, financial wellbeing means helping the client understand their cash flow, save money, avoid unnecessary fees, and stay ahead of financial pressures. It can mean a timely warning before a payment is overdue, automatic savings, a clear explanation of the true cost of a loan, or greater flexibility in repayment.

There is indeed a tension between financial well-being and profitability. However, this can be addressed if the bank builds its business model around the long-term value of the customer rather than around short-term over-lending.

The same applies to saving and managing unexpected expenses. A small amount of available liquidity can make a huge difference in a difficult moment. We had the case of a woman with a sick child who didn’t have the money to pay the doctor. That’s when you realize what it really means for a bank to be helpful.

That’s the kind of banking I want to see: banking that makes sense for the customer and does the right thing.