In 2016 Brainworks acquired Getcash which was then known as Nettcash before rebranding. The value proposition then was that the acquired mobile money service would compliment other financial services operations within the group. Further to that the Getcash service was seen as a cutting edge due to its exclusive functionality then to process transactions across other mobile money services that is Ecocash, One Wallet and Telecash. At the point of Getcash's acquisition these services were exclusive to subscribers within each particular MNO, which restricted breadth. With Netcash you would therefore transact across these platform without restrictions while other services such as electricity purchases and other banking services were adopted and integrated to the Getcash platform earlier than other players. But 2 years after its acquisition Getcash remains a loss maker with little market visibility even as mobile money and other digital payment platforms become more popular and are driving significant transactions value relative to other settlement modes. The case for Ecocash a competitor, is particularly phenomenal and it’s symbiotic value accretion with Steward bank, a financial institution within the Econet group, satiate failed competition such as Getbucks/ Getcash with nothing but envy. Steward and Ecocash have managed to pull value from each other and this has contributed to either operations recording respective best financial performances and market leadership. Ecocash controls 98% in overall mobile money market share while Steward bank is now the largest bank in Zimbabwe by customer base and is presently enjoying exorbitant huge jumps in commission income, in turn boosting operating performance. Looking at Getcash, the service has only 267,000  subscribers according to a recent circular, which is just 5.5% of the total 4.7 million mobile subscribers in Zimbabwe, making it the smallest among 3 other service providers. The company says its primary source of income, unlike other services, is not money transfer but mobile electricity vending. The total market for prepaid electricity vouchers market is estimated at $30 million monthly and if split between retailers, banks and MNOs, Getcash’s market share come in even smaller. Whereas this may have been lucrative business for the company in past years the game has shifted as banks, through mobile apps now offer their clients such services with seamless efforts. Same can be said of MNOs as in late 2016, Ecocash the market leader, secured a deal to sell electricity directly on its platform diminishing the allure of third parties such as Getcash. So going forward it is likely that the going will get tougher for Getcash and the revenue lines deplete with little solace from the intersegment business. The phenomenal growth at Getbucks can be leveraged as the micro bank increases its footprint through growth in deposits and loans. These direct customers are likely to find the Getcash service handy thus contributing to its survival, same can be said of Getsure, an  insurance service operation under Brainworks. Lessons to be drawn from these market developments include the fact that most customers find it more appealing to utilise online or mobile services overriding on the basic service they presently use, for example the basic telecoms offered by MNOs which everyone demands. It therefore makes more sense for customers to accept and prefer other overlay services coming in seamlessly on the background of their existing telecoms services without having to switch providers. The crux of the matter is however that Brainworks has already initiated the disposal of its Getbucks’ interest, which means all else being equal it will retain a shareholding in a company that is without a competitive edge in the space it operates because without Getbucks, the future of Getcash is a nightmare since Getcash is not likely to remain competitive in the electricity vending space, worse still the failed money transfer model. In negotiating an exit deal, Brainworks need to have pushed for disposal of both units since they are complimentary to some extend. Retaining the failed $5 million investment implies sustained and worse ff losses which should however be mitigated either through a negotiated sell or immediate impairement.