This does not make much sense to me. Why would they "use" bitcoin but not make either party aware of it? Unless the receiver is vulnerable to exchange rate movements then bitcoin is not really being used. They are likely only saying they use bitcoin as a marketing ploy
This makes perfect sense. Bitspark just acts as an instant BTC/fiat exchange.
Sender gives $100 (+fee?) to the BitSpark agent -> agent sends $100 in BTC to another agent --> they convert to the local currency --> recipient gets $100 (equivalent)
Bitcoin is used as a transfer tool. The parties (sender, receiver) don't really have to know what's going on in the background.
I don't know how would that work on converting BTC to local currency, they'd need to either accept the risk of exchange rate changes, or have an option to 'lock' the rate.
This is just adding an extra step. Unless each BitSpark agent is separate from all the others then there is no reason why BitSpark could not just have the money move internally just like Western Union does. However if each agent is independent then you would essentially be sending bitcoin to an unknown person with no real way of knowing if they can be trusted (and knowing how many bitcoin related scammers are out there, they probably cannot be).
Also much of the world (even in 3rd world countries) have internet access and smartphone access and I imagine that it would not be difficult to get a BTC ATM installed in places that tend to receive a lot of money from overseas
I think you overestimate internet/smartphones accessibility in the poor countries. There are still wide areas where people have no access to electricity (or very limited).
If someone does not have access to electricity then I can't see how any company would be able to be setup to know when it is appropriate to disburse money to someone else.