If it's limited to the targeted account holders, the unprofitable ones, then it is winning.
Vodalus Send a noteboard - 01/10/2011 04:53:20 AM
That is what that amounts to, right? I agree with Tim: As long as account holders are in the black, the bank owes them, not the reverse.
People can vote with their feet, find another bank, stuff their mattresses or whatever. I'm not defending BoA so much as pointing out the obvious.
Fair enough, but it seems like both account holders and investors are voting with their wallets; in terms of making money, this seems another huge gaffe.
All banks are down right now. The scary thing is whether the media makes it such a PR disaster that the non-targeted customers start withdrawing money to go elsewhere.
Banks are not down; that is why we have a federal government: To give them money when they steal what their investors and account holders gave them.
Steal isn't the right word, but yeah, I more or less agree. Private profit and public loss is ridiculous. However, some of BoA's troubles stem from the takeover of Countrywide, which was done on the orders of the government.
南無阿弥陀仏!
Bank of America faces outrage over debit card charge
- 30/09/2011 06:27:03 PM
970 Views
I'm so glad I don't bank with them.
- 30/09/2011 07:01:32 PM
570 Views
I just went to TD for my personal acount today...we are still looking for our joint account... *NM*
- 30/09/2011 08:15:57 PM
207 Views
screw all the big banks
- 30/09/2011 07:19:36 PM
517 Views
I love my credit union, so drama free. I would never switch to a bank. *NM*
- 01/10/2011 03:04:39 AM
247 Views
Yeah, do more of what made folks mad enough to pass a federal law and kill your stock price. 
- 30/09/2011 08:35:19 PM
502 Views
- 30/09/2011 08:35:19 PM
502 Views
Hopefully this means no-one will dare do that here, having seen the reaction.
- 30/09/2011 11:11:29 PM
515 Views
Can't believe they're still in business. They are a shame to the human race. *NM*
- 30/09/2011 11:26:32 PM
225 Views
You mean BoA, not banks in general, right? 
- 01/10/2011 02:41:36 AM
626 Views
- 01/10/2011 02:41:36 AM
626 Views
Maintaining a modest sum of money in checking/savings/CDs obviates this charge and most others
- 01/10/2011 02:02:51 AM
564 Views
Hm?
- 01/10/2011 02:12:41 AM
507 Views
Right. It's not an issue if the combined total meets BoAs requirement.
- 01/10/2011 02:33:15 AM
666 Views
The bank may have the right to protect itself from losing money
- 01/10/2011 03:15:52 AM
584 Views
Yes, but griping about pains arising from symptoms does nothing to cure the disease.
- 01/10/2011 03:25:29 AM
562 Views
I'm still right. 
*NM*
- 01/10/2011 04:23:06 AM
213 Views
*NM*
- 01/10/2011 04:23:06 AM
213 Views
As long as account holders indefinitely surrender enough of their money for the bank to invest?
- 01/10/2011 02:35:49 AM
494 Views
No. I mean BoA doesn't want to have clients who cost money rather than make money for the bank.
- 01/10/2011 02:57:20 AM
563 Views
Well, charging people $5/month to use their own money will not accomplish that goal.
- 01/10/2011 03:24:07 AM
514 Views
Sure it will. They'll pay the fees or they'll leave. Either way BoA wins on that front.
- 01/10/2011 03:31:23 AM
618 Views
I suppose, if turning the departure of account holders into a stampede counts as "winning."
- 01/10/2011 04:18:11 AM
588 Views
If it's limited to the targeted account holders, the unprofitable ones, then it is winning.
- 01/10/2011 04:53:20 AM
575 Views
But the targeting is determined by how much money account holders semi-permanently loan banks.
- 01/10/2011 05:49:57 AM
638 Views
Love my credit union, I would never use a bank if I absolutely didn't have too. Go CUs! 
*NM*
- 01/10/2011 03:06:21 AM
214 Views
*NM*
- 01/10/2011 03:06:21 AM
214 Views