I was driving down the road and I saw a "Western Union" sign and thought...why do we still have those places around?
Bitcoin could easily replace Western Union all over the world. You just become a Bitcoin exchanger in your store and if someone wants money transferred they just go to an exchanger and send their money to the recipient's Bitcoin address. You go to one of any exchangers and exchange your BTC for your currency and you are all set. The exchangers could charge a fee that is cheaper than sending a wire transfer. Then bam...good-bye Western Union.
Am I missing something here?
The person you send a WU transfer to generally gets paid in their local currency - you wire money when you want the receiver to have
instant access to funds. Bitcoin might be able to offer fast transfers, but the person receiving them still has to take additional steps to convert them to local currency - either selling them OTC or selling them on an exchange and then withdrawing the proceeds, both of which take time.
There are a ton of money transmitting services apart from WU around and plenty of them have low fees for payments which are transferred to the bank account of the receiver. These businesses are already licensed and already have the infrastructure to support smooth processing of payments.
Individual merchants aren't going to make enough from Bitcoin to justify the up-front cost of becoming licensed money exchangers/transmitters/deposit takers/whatever. Merchants in a given location could set up a company and have that company obtain a financial serviced licence under which they could all operate as money transmitters but you'd still need a lot of daily transactions to offset the cost.
People aren't going to use Bitcoin to receive funds if they can't conveniently liquidate them or spend them. Merchants operating as Bitcoin>fiat exchangers would need to locate where there's a demand for that service. If Bitcoin exchangers aren't easy to get to then people will just choose an alternate method of receiving funds.
To become competitive in the instant payment processing market, the whole fiat>Bitcoins>receiver>local currency cycle needs to happen in a much faster time frame. If people can't spend the funds they've received instantly, then Bitcoin offers no real advantages over existing low cost payment processors - it's more effort to use Bitcoin and people need a significant incentive to use a platform which requires more effort.
I think you might be missing the point.
Local store accepts fiat. He is part of the network so he has an exchange account w/ fiat already loaded (float). He uses fiat on exchange to buy Bitcoins (minus half the transaction fee) and sends them to the receiving store/merchant. He can then use some slow mechanism to refill his exchange account w/ fiat (weekly wire transfers, etc).
Receiving store/merchant account instantly sells Bitcoins once received for local currency on the exchange. The recipient comes to store shows ID and collects the funds minus the other half of transaction fee.
As long as each store has enough fiat "floating" on their exchange accounts they can process transaction in near realtime (1 hour for 6 confirms).
The technical aspects are not very hard. The legal/regulatory/reporting aspects is what is tough but not unsolvable.
People aren't going to use Bitcoin to receive funds if they can't conveniently liquidate them or spend them
Sender would pay in local currency
Receiver would get paid in local currency.
Bitcoins would only be used for internal network transfers.
Bitcoin lowers the cost of business for each local "branch" (independent merchant part of money changer network).
Each branch would only need.
a) an exchange account in their local currency.
b) enough fiat floating on exchange account to cover transactions between periodic refreshing (from money paid by sending user).
c) a secure website/console to verify transactions and record Identification provided.