3 pages!

3/10/2011 4:18:34 PM

I'd like to do a quick poll on people who use discover card who are not a minority

3/10/2011 4:27:02 PM

uh, okay...and...go!

[Edited on March 10, 2011 at 4:31 PM. Reason : i'm white with 1/32 native american]

3/10/2011 4:30:47 PM

yeah i read the story this morning a nd was

i don't use credit cards, in fact i don't even have any so WTF am I going to do? Checks suck and you have to buy them. Plus they are talking about a monthly fee for checking account in general. WTF?!?!? This will make paying bills and making purchases online a nightmare!!

3/10/2011 4:35:00 PM

SECU FTW?

3/10/2011 4:38:11 PM

this is just gonna lead to more transactions off the radar, and less taxes for the government in the process

ProCongress

3/10/2011 4:40:37 PM

credit unions pay the same interchange fees as banks. it's not an issue that's bounded by financial institution type.

if you want to tell congress to take a second look at it, i would suggest going to the website for the electronic payments coalition. i don't work for them, but i have worked with them on the issue.

it appears they even have an issue site set up already: http://www.dontmakeuspay.org/

3/10/2011 4:42:43 PM

if anyone is to "blame" here it's the merchants associations. they wrote the language and used Durbin as the vehicle for the amendment, and inserted it during conference. it's just two opposing sides (banks as card issuers v. merchants as card accepters) trying to slice the pie so they each $profit...sort of like the NFL v. NFLPA

[Edited on March 10, 2011 at 4:49 PM. Reason : ..]

3/10/2011 4:48:48 PM

Quote :

"who in the world still uses checks?"

Landlords don't accept credit cards or cash.

3/10/2011 5:04:57 PM

Quote :

"Plus they are talking about a monthly fee for checking account in general. WTF?!?!?"

They lost all that overdraft money so now they have to charge new fees. In my opinion, having people pay for their own account maintenance is more fair than using overdraft money to subsidize everybody else's accounts.

In May, I'm closing my "free" account and moving to cash until I can either find a maintenance-free checking account online or a checking account that charges a more reasonable monthly fee (like $3 or $5).

A lot of people won't be affected by the new maintenance fees since they can afford to keep more than $1500 bucks in their account or whatever the bank requires. I cannot afford that though.

3/10/2011 5:14:44 PM

aaaaand this is what happens when the government tries to legislate prices. thank your president, folks

3/10/2011 5:24:56 PM

I'm pretty sure it's the banks that came up with this idea, not the President.

And we all knew they would do this...act like the legislation hurt them so much that they have to do something else incredibly harmful to consumers.

Thank your bank, not the president.

3/10/2011 5:34:06 PM

They should do away with interest. When I have $20,000 in my account, I only make $5 a month. Fuck that shit and keep banking free.

Never understood the concept of them paying ME to use their bank. Cut that shit out and make money by giving out loans.

3/10/2011 6:18:05 PM

Quote :

"I'm pretty sure it's the banks that came up with this idea, not the President."

Really? The banks came up with the idea for Congress to pass a law that said they had to lower their prices? REALLY?

Quote :

"And we all knew they would do this...act like the legislation hurt them so much that they have to do something else incredibly harmful to consumers."

So, having the government cut a price by 75% isn't reason enough to change how you offer that service? REALLY?

Actually, what we all knew would happen is that instead of the banks shafting people with bad credit, they would just shaft everyone instead, albeit at a lower rate. And that looks to be exactly what is happening.

[Edited on March 10, 2011 at 6:54 PM. Reason : ]

3/10/2011 6:51:03 PM

haha BridgetSPKfail

this has nothing to do with overdraft as an issue, except in that both are related because they ultimately affect the bottom line of institutions.

the banks didn't come up with the idea. merchant coalitions did.

3/10/2011 7:35:55 PM

BridgetSPK Doesn't Wachovia have free student checking accounts?

3/10/2011 7:49:44 PM

^^When I mentioned overdrafts, I wasn't responding to the thread topic. I was very, very clearly responding to sparky's comment about how banks were going to start charging monthly maintenance fees. (I will be PMing you to let you know that you fail.)

^Yeah, I may be too old for it though (I'm too old for the BB&T student account), and I won't be a student for much longer anyway. I was with a free non-student account at BB&T.

3/10/2011 8:22:18 PM

haha you actually did PM me. hysterical.

still, you're fundamentally incorrect.

Quote :

"They lost all that overdraft money so now they have to charge new fees. In my opinion, having people pay for their own account maintenance is more fair than using overdraft money to subsidize everybody else's accounts. "

this assertion is wrong. "all that overdraft money" was basically icing on the cake for a lot of banks. it wasn't built into the base equation of what they expect to earn for a profit. Interchange is a whole different ball game. Large and small banks alike depend on these costs being a certain amount in order to be able to feasibly offer "free checking" and "free debit cards". A permanent change in interchange rates is the forcing function that will realign cost models for most of the services that banks offer customers as they will be forced to make up the income somewhere.

I am just like any other consumer. I've had debit cards so long I basically just consider them a right when I open a checking account, probably the same way people used to think of checks. Unfortunately someone has to pay for the cards, the point of sale systems, and the infrastructure that quickly and seamlessly processes the transactions, and thanks to the payment system relationship between banks, card issuers/processers and merchants, there's basically been a redistribution of wealth with this bill language/proposed Fed rule.

Thanks for the PM though, it was adorable.

3/11/2011 7:49:50 AM

lol. This thread has me loling.

3/11/2011 8:05:04 AM

i'm surprised that people don't realize that the banks (generally) make money on YOUR money when you park it in their accounts...hence the interest payments

why shouldn't they give me a small cut AND pay to support the very infrastructure that makes them money?

3/11/2011 8:08:49 AM

Quote :

"Why? Because of a tricky thing called interchange fees. Right now, every time you swipe your debit card your bank charges the retailer an average fee of 44 cents, which it shares with its partners. Those little fees, however, add up to about $16 billion per year, according to 2009 data from the Federal Reserve."

Ha, then there should be a minimum purchase of $50, not a maximum. Put that rule in place and I'll just divide the grocery cart up into three separate transactions and cost you $1.32 instead. Oh wait, the banks are pushing for this? So that's what they want people to do. Divide up into several smaller purchases to get more transaction fees or get everyone on a credit card and hope people start falling into the credit trap.

[Edited on March 11, 2011 at 9:07 AM. Reason : -]

3/11/2011 9:05:55 AM

Quote :

"Agent 0: this assertion is wrong. "all that overdraft money" was basically icing on the cake for a lot of banks. it wasn't built into the base equation of what they expect to earn for a profit. Interchange is a whole different ball game. Large and small banks alike depend on these costs being a certain amount in order to be able to feasibly offer "free checking" and "free debit cards". A permanent change in interchange rates is the forcing function that will realign cost models for most of the services that banks offer customers as they will be forced to make up the income somewhere. I am just like any other consumer. I've had debit cards so long I basically just consider them a right when I open a checking account, probably the same way people used to think of checks. Unfortunately someone has to pay for the cards, the point of sale systems, and the infrastructure that quickly and seamlessly processes the transactions, and thanks to the payment system relationship between banks, card issuers/processers and merchants, there's basically been a redistribution of wealth with this bill language/proposed Fed rule. Thanks for the PM though, it was adorable."

You should have just admitted that you misunderstood my post and maybe apologized for getting uppity.

Cause now we're going to have to compare evidence. My very simple statement (banks lost some money from this fee so they're going to add this fee) isn't that hard to prove.

Quote :

"Starting this summer, banks must receive customer permission before they can charge for overdrafts. But Bank of America has decided to drop most of its program altogether. The nation's largest bank, as measured by assets, said largely because of recent changes to its overdraft policy, it will forgo $600 million in revenue this year. To generate new revenue, Bank of America is quietly testing new pricing models throughout the U.S., with most changes expected in early 2011."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703513604575311093932315142.html

Bank of America is the only big bank to have eliminated overdrafting altogether so it's going to suffer the biggest losses in revenue in that area. Still, 600 million is a lot even when compared to the 1.8 billion they anticipate losing in interchange fees. To act like it doesn't make a difference, and it's all about interchange fees is just wrong. And, finally, whether it's overdraft fees or interchange fees, it's the banks that have chosen to pass along their losses to us--it's not some merchant/government conspiracy. The banks were taking exorbitant amounts of money from small merchants, and the government had to do something about it. But it's not like I'm a huge advocate for the guy who runs the corner store--I don't actually expect that he will drop his prices to reflect the lower cost of doing business.

And, to be clear, I'm definitely not trying to say that banks need this fee money. I think they could get along just fine without it, but, if they're taking the money, it makes sense for bank customers with small balances to pay a small monthly maintenance fee on their accounts instead of having their accounts subsidized by unfair fees from overdrafters (and merchants or the customers of merchants).

[Edited on March 11, 2011 at 4:01 PM. Reason : ]

3/11/2011 3:59:56 PM

Quote :

"Bank of America is the only big bank to have eliminated overdrafting altogether so it's going to suffer the biggest losses in revenue in that area. Still, 600 million is a lot even when compared to the 1.8 billion they anticipate losing in interchange fees. To act like it doesn't make a difference, and it's all about interchange fees is just wrong. And, finally, whether it's overdraft fees or interchange fees, it's the banks that have chosen to pass along their losses to us--it's not some merchant/government conspiracy. The banks were taking exorbitant amounts of money from small merchants, and the government had to do something about it. But it's not like I'm a huge advocate for the guy who runs the corner store--I don't actually expect that he will drop his prices to reflect the lower cost of doing business."

So BoA is suddenly the spokesperson for all banks everywhere? Bank of America is very large, yes, but it’s also one bank. There are like ~7,000 banks in the US, and BoA is one of the only, if not the only one, that pursued that course of action. The assertion that

Quote :

" banks lost some money from this fee so they're going to add this fee"

doesn’t follow simply because bank of America chose that course of action…however, saying that Bank of America lost some money from this fee so they’re going to add another fee does. But there is a big difference between the two. Everyone isn’t jumping off the cliff just because BoA jumped off the cliff.

sparky never made a distinction between overdraft or interchange as the source of his complaint, nor is overdraft even referenced in the original article. So while one could presume the intent of what he was saying to be about either, it’s much more likely a general complaint, and my point is that while BoA CHOSE that course of action (while other banks did not), with interchange, there is no choice. Either the banks make you eat the cost directly for the raise in fee proscribed by the pending rule or they just stop offering the programs all together to preserve their profits. No one wants their debit card messed with (reference sparky’s post), but banks are banks and, to quote Avon Barksdale, "i guess ain’t shit for free, nahmean?". so the only option banks are left with is to alter their product offerings to make up for the lost revenue which was, again, mandated by Congress and the Fed and not optional like the overdraft choice.

Quote :

"And, to be clear, I'm definitely not trying to say that banks need this fee money. I think they could get along just fine without it, but, if they're taking the money, it makes sense for bank customers with small balances to pay a small monthly maintenance fee on their accounts instead of having their accounts subsidized by unfair fees from overdrafters (and merchants or the customers of merchants)."

No one is taking anything here. This is capitalism. There are costs associated with providing services. And the pie is only so large. When an adjustment is made of this magnitude, someone eats a bigger piece and someone eats a smaller piece, and it’s not appropriate for Dick Durbin to be deciding who eats which one.

3/11/2011 5:14:48 PM

^You're correct that Bank of America is the only one that chose to eliminate them altogether (a fact I already stated), but other banks were required by the federal government to change their overdraft policies in such a manner that does decrease revenues, and you know as well as I do that they all bemoaned the overdraft regulation and claimed they'd have to add more fees to make up for the lost revenues.

Just to clear up any more confusion you may have: I'm single-mindedly obsessed with the injustice of overdraft fees. I scanned this thread and found a place to reasonably insert my comments about how overdraft fees were used to subsidize "free" accounts, which they were, and I found a fine spot to make my comments. I don't really care all that much about interchange fees and how banks are cynically threatening to limit debit card transactions. If anything, I'm more concerned about the fact that a boatload of irresponsible idiots actually opted in for overdraft "protection," and now they'll be even more likely to overdraft given the new fees set to hit their previously "free" accounts in the coming months.

Do you see now? I'm eager to talk about overdraft fees, and you're eager to talk about interchange fees. The big difference being that I didn't jump the gun and go, "OMG, HAHAH, AGENT0FAIL, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTERCHANGE FEES! IT'S ALL ABOUT OVERDRAFT!!!!"

[Edited on March 11, 2011 at 6:12 PM. Reason : ]

3/11/2011 6:09:38 PM