Stunning Number: Big Banks set to lose 70,000 accounts today

Originally posted by CookieMonster09
reply to post by NKAWTG

 

Exactly. As I stated earlier, for every small consumer account that does get transferred from a mega-bank to a credit union, there is a rapidly growing corporation that is ultimately moving their business banking relationship to a mega-bank simply because the mega-banks have the bank products, services, and personnel to better manage the relationship.

Simply put, the mega-corporations bank with the mega-banks. Think about it. If you're a mammoth business, and need to open an international Letter of Credit for your client in Venezuela, or you need to send recurring wire transfers to Western Europe, or you need a $50 million loan for a new manufacturing facility, where are you going to go? Certainly not a credit union. They won't have a clue. No, you need a mega-bank with all the sophisticated treasury, lending, and deposit services that mega-banks offer.

If you are a small fry consumer, you belong at a credit union. You don't need sophisticated banking services, and you generate little if any profit to your financial provider of choice.

Few big businesses are going to move their business banking relationship to a credit union. That's where the big bucks are. I am sorry, but your paltry $1,000 that you bring to your credit union -- Even if there are 650,000 of you, won't make one iota of difference.

Because as you move to a credit union, I guarantee you that the mega-banks are courting the next Google and Microsoft.

While in theory You are correct If the people can manage to collectively remove all their money from the Mega banks they could in theory collectively boycott these mega corporations for still doing business with the mega bank and never allow the "next Google and Microsoft" to get off the ground if the deal with a mega bank.

reply to post by Adamanteus

Well, banks make money in multiple ways. If you read the annual reports of any mega-bank, they are involved in a whole handful of different banking products and services besides the consumer arena. Investments, investment banking, commercial mortgages, international letters of credit, etc. They have their hands in all kinds of different fee-generating activities.

Consumer deposits and consumer lending are typically only one aspect of these banks. They generate income from multiple sources beyond just consumers.

If mega-corporations move their deposits from the mega-banks, you might have a case that things might change. I highly doubt this will occur, because your local credit union cannot cater to the needs of big business. They simply do not have the staff, products, and banking services to accommodate the mega-corporations.

The only people that are being hurt by this movement are the tellers, personal bankers, and retail banking managers, all of whom earn a modest income at best. These local workers will likely lose their jobs and livelihoods, but it will have no impact on Wall Street.

From: petaluma.patch.com...

"The big banks are rip-off artists and they have politicians from both parties helping them fleece the American taxpayer. Look what has happened with investment banks like Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs, who were allowed to be taken over by commercial banks like B of A. That gave them Federal Deposit Insurance Protection when they should have been allowed to fail for their poor choices. FDIC money is taxpayer money and we paid for their bad business decisions," added Hudnell.

Here's the kind of illogical fallacies and distorted truth of this movement. First, Goldman was never taken over by Bank of America. Secondly, FDIC funds are not taxpayer money. FDIC funds itself through fees charged to banks, and the bulk of the fees come from the 4 mega-banks: Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, and CITI. Theoretically, the FDIC could tap into its Line of Credit with the Dept. of Treasury, but it never has, and likely never will due to the political pressure that would be brought to bear for such a move.

Lastly, if the big banks truly have politicians in their pockets, how did the Durbin Amendment ever get passed - an Amendment that will wreak havoc on the profits of the mega-banks?

reply to post by LilDudeissocool


You're posting on this thread with advice to transfer money from Wall Street banks to banks in Dubai?



Are you Stephen Colbert? Where's the Candid Camera?

Where can I go to garner how many customers left what banks?

Tired of relying on others numbers which may be bogus.

reply to post by Riffrafter


I just closed my wells fargo account. Sorry its not capitol letters, But it is not a Text name, HEHEHE.

I tried to close it 10 years ago, but I still continued to get a balance report in the mail for years. I'm not kidding when I say that tens years ago, it took years for them close it. Yet somehow it always stayed a open account?!

Persistence is futile! Aways pain and confusion with these banks and their laws

I am now a member of MVFCU, a community minded Credit Union, they are awesome, $30 a month less fees
in savings and checking, "you mean I can take MY money as pleased, well thank you." Something never heard of a BoA.

What do you mean BoA just bought out my MVFCU, Damn. Well...... Damn....

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Boy, you guys are annoying. This has happen over a 4 week period. It's a huge trend that you're both conveniently forgetting. It won't stop here. Even if it's just 1%, in a year it could be 12%, or if it goes exponentially like previously stated in the thread, it could be a lot more.

To anyone else, 650,000 customers were lost - does it specify anywhere that it was just accounts and not people? Could those 650,000 also have multiple accounts?

It was time this happens, but we don't have to forget, what results this will bring to people, who are not a part of any protest.

Wouldn't be the best thing if these banks would kick out their workers.
Thousands of people can become unemployed...

Originally posted by AtticusRye

But, let's go with the "conservative" (

) $2.5 billion number for sake of argument ...

You realize that banks aren't losing $2.5 billion in revenue, right? Banks don't earn 100% off deposits. Earnings usually come in around 1-cent on the dollar (a very tidy amount when taken across the value of all deposits). So, in your fantastically pie-in-the-sky scenario, banks will be losing around $25 million in revenue. When split between 10 or so banks you're looking at a single major, national losing around $2.5 million. Obviously that's not going to make Wells Fargo happy, but - in the grand scheme of their $19 billion in annual operating income is probably not too big of a deal.

In your scenario, this beginning isn't a beginning at all. It's the entire effort itself - just a few months of the most irritated among the people who already hate their banks, deciding to support their own home areas with investment capital by transferring their money.

And if you're wrong, and it catches on?

I remember Cheney dismissing the Iraq insurgency "as a few deadenders" years before that insurgency grew, strengthened, and outlasted his and Bush's administration. The competitive mind isn't a learning mind. It expends too much time and effort on trying to win, to ever learn anything of value outside the specific theater of combat it's confined within. Some never even survive long enough to learn what it feels like to lose. And then, it's on to an eternity of crippling ignorance for them.

Good luck on your personal (or maybe it's a professional) crusade to convince us that we American citizens have no power and no business trying to defend ourselves and our families from these predatory banking institutions. A lot of Americans have finally realized how insane the banking system has gotten, and while you may have an accurate view of the short term impact of this fledgling effort to diminish the widespread and destructive impact these banks have had on our nation as a whole, your glib dismissals of the frustration that your fellow citizens feel is simply feeding fuel to the small pockets of fire that have begun to break out in every corner of the union.

If the American society decides that the big banks - and the corporations that serve those big banks in many subtle and not-so-subtle ways - are a threat to its very existence, then the people of that society will eliminate them. And all it'll take is to have a clear choice presented to them, as to which banks and corporations to target with their passive disengagement. It's easy to walk across the street and do business with a company's competitors. People do it all the time over less compelling reasons.

These big banks have forgotten how people are free to vote with their feet. And if they try to lobby Congress to make it illegal to do so, then God help those businesses that have been outed as being part of that effort. That'll be seen as a direct assault on our society and everyone who is a member of that society. They and their flacks will have a tough time staying in this country. It's not against the law to ask another person to please stop upsetting the others (let's say, within a restaurant or public venue) with their disturbing presence.

You see, once their professional careers have been obliterated, their own names, and the names of their family members, will be mass marketed as the human faces of the damage they and their professional organizations inflicted on our efforts to survive as a society. Outing these names and their affiliations via Twitter or Facebook or a wide range of other social media platforms is really easy now days. Passing them on is even easier. This is when the real hell will begin for the bankers and their officers and managers. Same with the hedge funders and big stocks/commodities speculators. We can't get Congress to regulate them, but that doesn't mean that we have to treat them with any respect when we run into them in our streets or neighborhoods.

There are many ways to make someone wish they'd never been born. Most of them are perfectly legal and do not involve touching a hair on their heads. Sometimes life goes on, long after the thrill of living has gone (sorry for the bad paraphrase Mr. Mellencamp). Then again, we are all presented with the chance to do the right thing.

reply to post by Riffrafter


Credit Unions which are non-profit, offer a very nice, local and more personalized place to keep your money. I can if need be bank any where in the world. But for the most part I like to keep my (and companies) money local. I have the advantage of knowing everyone at the local credit union I use on a almost daily basis. I always make an effort to get to know the people in the business's I deal with. I was very pleased when the guys at he credit union I moved my money to went out of their way to get to know me. I was even more pleased to see they treated others the same, including my retired neighbor who has little money but was given the same consideration. Now that my friends is the right way to do business.

reply to post by Adamanteus

Once again someone doesn't read the thread before posting.

and once again, someone is missing the point in general because they're too set in their own ways to see that they're wrong.

The big banks aren't going to suffer. They've created the debacle that we're in. Get people pissed off to the point of demonstration, then loosen the chains a little bit and they lay off.

But you're still in more power than you were before. They give a little to get a whole lot more.


The gas companies do it too.

They jack the prices up to $4.30 a gallon so that we dont bitch and complain when they lower it to $3.30

because we, as a collective, easily forget that it was $1.30 before it went up to $4.30 and that nothing changed with the gasoline its self to make it go higher other than THEY WANTED IT TO.

And, just like gasoline, people in this country are too bleeping stupid to do anything about it. They'll complain until the pressure dials down a little bit, then they'll go right back to their Mojitos and Reddit posts.

One of the funniest threads I've seen in a long time. Moving your money will have very little impact on the big banks, if any. Look who is moving their money? People with no appreciable net worth anyway, people who are not exactly profit centers for the banks. If I were a bank, I would welcome getting rid of these folks. These guys are not Jed Clampett and no one cares where they deposit their $2,371.42.

Besides, the monetary system in this country is like a large round building with teller windows around the outside. One window says "Bank of America." Another says "Wells Fargo," and another says, "Podunk Credit Union.' All those windows lead to exactly the same place. So y'all, being in a protesting mode and against "Big Banks," withdraw all your money out of the Bank of America window and rush as fast as you can over to Podunk Credit Union to deposit your money there. It goes back into PCU's window and into the big round building where it was a few minutes before. Net effect: Zero. You guys are like the Keystone Cops, running everywhere, using up a lot of your own energy, and accomplishing nothing at all,

except for the entertainment value, of course.

reply to post by schuyler


$2,371.42 leveraged at the rate Lehman Brothers used of 37 to 1 comes out to $87,742.54 they can't loan to some body. That adds up when a million people have moved thier money out. And the million people have already moved 4.5 billion dollars. Leveraged at 37 to 1 that is 166.5 billion dollars they can't loan.

reply to post by Riffrafter


I really don't understand why people use big banks in the first place. my parents always advised me to use a credit union.

reply to post by schuyler
Big banks will loose service charges, etc, even if people transfering out have little money

reply to post by Riffrafter


Somehow, I doubt it.

The banks will survive tomorrow just fine. youmadbro? vote. call your representative/senators. You'd be surprised.

reply to post by schuyler

You guys are like the Keystone Cops, running everywhere, using up a lot of your own energy, and accomplishing nothing at all, except for the entertainment value, of course.

Actually watching the people who keep saying it won't have an impact and accomplishes nothing is pretty entertaining for me.

The mere threat of Bank Transfer day caused all of the big banks to pull back from their $5 month debit card fees. LOL - No impact? They folded like a cheap suit. Did you forget that already? Just happened last week...

Now that the money and accounts are actually moving in large numbers (over 1 million people and their accounts and counting so far according to ABC news), I bet we'll see a few more changes from the screw-the-customer folks at BofA, Wells Fargo, Citibank and the like.

But you guys keep right on saying it won't have an impact. The rest of us will vote with our feet and our wallets and do business with people that actually give a damn.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by Riffrafter

 

Because they want to charge service fees for handling your money, transactions cards etc.

Some people may get laid off, maybe even some small affiliated branches will be closed... But the big bank will carry on with the big business as usual... It wont hurt them, just the little guys working for them.

Let me know when major investors, shareholders and those with the real money start make huge withdrawals and transfers... If that happens, maybe they'll start to get worried.

Isn't OWS asking for a 1% financial transaction fee? I guess that is just for Wall Streeters......when it comes to them they are squirming...either that or they didn't understand it's what the Elite wanted all along. Bilderbergs want a Global Tax and OWS is demanding it....

Originally posted by CookieMonster09
From: petaluma.patch.com...

"The big banks are rip-off artists and they have politicians from both parties helping them fleece the American taxpayer. Look what has happened with investment banks like Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs, who were allowed to be taken over by commercial banks like B of A. That gave them Federal Deposit Insurance Protection when they should have been allowed to fail for their poor choices. FDIC money is taxpayer money and we paid for their bad business decisions," added Hudnell.

Here's the kind of illogical fallacies and distorted truth of this movement. First, Goldman was never taken over by Bank of America. Secondly, FDIC funds are not taxpayer money. FDIC funds itself through fees charged to banks, and the bulk of the fees come from the 4 mega-banks: Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, and CITI. Theoretically, the FDIC could tap into its Line of Credit with the Dept. of Treasury, but it never has, and likely never will due to the political pressure that would be brought to bear for such a move.

Lastly, if the big banks truly have politicians in their pockets, how did the Durbin Amendment ever get passed - an Amendment that will wreak havoc on the profits of the mega-banks?

wow, i've read all of your posts in this thread and at this point all i can say is, really ??
do you really think such a simplistic view and poorly attempted explanation of such an inter-twined, multi-tiered complexity would fly here?

truth is, you are sadly mistaken.
you're far too generalized in your commentary and not attributing any value to the long-term effects of a continued exodus.

you mention deposits of "rapidly growing corporations" ... and i have to ask, in which country?
certainly not in the US. and, if these deposits are in actuality decreasing (thanks to the "shift" of community support back to the communities), what makes you think the exodus won't have an exponential impact by this time next year?

as for the Durbin amendment ... don't you think it's about time the retailers had a voice in DC?
it's not like the amendment eliminated bank profits from said acts, it just capped them ... it's not really a big deal or relative to who has which politician in their pocket.

when you state "FDIC funds are not taxpayer monies" ... i have to ask, did they get those funds directly from the Federal Reserve?? if not, they are ONLY taxpayer funds !!!
yes, they are paid by the financial institution but those funds come from whom?
and also, banks convey their costs to whom?
(taxpayers = customers)

the only reason the "bulk" of those fees can be attributed to the 4 you listed is because of their volume, not anything else ... the FDIC insures ALL the institutions and collect fees from EACH, accordingly.
______________________________________

to those who are worried about the employees, aren't we all ??
but then again, where was the concern when hundreds of banks fell between 2007-2009 ... which also included thousands of ppl who became unemployed.
what about when the Savings & Loan collapses occurred years earlier?

please don't misunderstand me, i am not saying this current exodus will sink the big boys, i know better but it will have a definite, long-lasting impact.
and like any good ground battle, kick'em when their down and End the Federal Reserve.
that would be a victory worth celebrating world-wide.

Where can I go to garner how many customers left what banks? Tired of relying on others numbers which may be bogus.

All you would have to do is look at the year-end 2011 Annual Reports of the 4 mega-banks - Bank of America, CITI, Wells Fargo, Chase -- and compare their 3rd quarter deposit balances to their 4th quarter deposit balances.

To anyone else, 650,000 customers were lost - does it specify anywhere that it was just accounts and not people? Could those 650,000 also have multiple accounts?

To the mega-banks, who have hundreds of millions of bank accounts, this is a drop in the bucket. Most of these accounts are consumer accounts, which carry small deposit balances. Few businesses will move their accounts, though some will. And most consumers will keep their accounts where they are, if only out of sheer complacence. Most people don't want to go through the hassle of switching banks.

These big banks have forgotten how people are free to vote with their feet.

No, I think most of these big banks are more than happy to get rid of clients with paltry deposits.

The clients that complain the most are oftentimes the ones that are the least profitable to the bank. The mega-banks are more than happy to get rid of the unprofitable consumers and send them over to their competition.

Let the credit unions deal with the clients with bad credit, long histories of overdrafts, and people that are always in collection for missed payments. I am sure the mega-banks can't wait to get rid of these kinds of clients.

Outing these names and their affiliations via Twitter or Facebook or a wide range of other social media platforms is really easy now days. Passing them on is even easier. This is when the real hell will begin for the bankers and their officers and managers.

Pure communism rubbish. I hope you "out" all the real estate speculators and mortgage brokers that committed mortgage fraud against these banks as well.

Why do you think the banks were collapsing in the first place? Fraudulent mortgage loans from sub-prime borrowers and speculative real estate brokers, both of whom lied on their mortgage applications and inflated property values with bogus appraisals.

I am sure your local teller will appreciate being "outed" on Twitter.

Net effect: Zero. You guys are like the Keystone Cops, running everywhere, using up a lot of your own energy, and accomplishing nothing at all,

So true. The most that might happen is that the low-level worker bees at the retail bank branch level - the tellers, personal bankers, and branch managers - will lose their job. You know - the worker bees that actually live in your local community and survive on very modest incomes.

The senior management of these banks will not likely be impacted.