How to clean up the banking system...

[Slashsnake]

Anyone have any ideas on how/if America will ever clean up the banking system here? It's old,outdated, the least secure, slow... Does anyone agree with my points below? I think our economy would be better off with a modern banking system.

We're charged for wire transfers, which are basically regular transfers in other countries.. Instant and free, which is the way it should be in America. Instead, banks charge $25 for outgoing transfers, and then the receiving bank charges another $15 for the incoming wire transfer, which is ridiculous. So an American has to fill out a long form, pay $40 and then they can get their money the same business day, whereas it's free and simple in other countries. We could get rid of checks with a more modern system.

We have the worst credit card payment system... We still heavily rely on magnetic stripe technology. In addition to the old mag-stripe, many payment terminals are hidden behind the counter tops which are not accessible to the consumer, so someone else has to touch your card... Unacceptable in my opinion. We rely on "signature authentication" which is also unacceptable. Not only is this worse than PIN, but the merchant doesn't even compare signatures, and many are "digitally captured" which makes them even more worthless.
Add in the fact that outside of HSBC, AMEX, and the Citi Costco, there's virtually no contactless issued cards in the U.S. Currently, merchants are to blame for the lack of chip acceptance everywhere as they're too lazy and cheap to finish terminal certification, and many (like Pizza Hut and Wendy's) haven't even purchased the correct terminals yet.

ATM's charge usage fees. If you're using another bank's ATM, good luck using it for free. In other countries ATM usage is free because the banks actually get along with one another... Which probably is one reason why transfers between banks are almost instant and free. If you're paying your own bank $2.50 to use the ATM while the other bank/ATM owner charges you $3 to use their ATM (totaling $5.50) why would anyone want to use an automated teller machine not owned by their bank?

We still use checks because of point #1 above. I should be able to instantly transfer money to my landlord, not have to pull out the checkbook once a month. Some banks give you set amount of money that day, but others make you wait up to 5 days for a check to clear depending on the amount and the bank. Checks are a target for fraud, just like magnetic stripes.

Our online billing system is a joke. CVV2's hardly work if someone has already stolen your card information from when you dropped it on the ground. We need a standard system that requires the cardholder to confirm online and foreign transactions with a text message reply first. ACH transfers to a biller such as Verizon should be encrypted and instant if done from your bank's website and also the merchant website.

 

[Andylusion]

I have not used a check in years.
My bank card, has the little chip thingy in it. I often have to put the card into the machine and screw with that wonky system.

Wire transfers don't seem to be a huge issue. I've never used it, nor seen any reason to use it.

ATM fees are actually quite common around the world.
The fact is, ATM machines are expensive, and unless the ATM Is on the property of a bank, the bank is usually paying a fee to have that ATM at some location. Not to mention paying someone to keep the ATM stocked with money, and maintained. IF that isn't enough, the ATM is usually connected to a network that costs money to operate.

It seem perfectly reasonable to pay a fee for usage if you are not even a customer of the bank that owns the ATM.

That said, your claim about there being no ATM fees around the world, is with rare exception, untrue.

Take Finland. Many people claim Finland doesn't have any ATM fees. Which as you claimed is because the banks get along with each other.

Not true. They have a completely different system. The vast majority of all ATMs in the country of Finland, are all from one company "Otto". It's not because the banks all "get along". It's because the banks don't own the ATMs. Otto owns the ATMs.

If you have a bank card, it's likely an Otto card. Thus every ATM you use, being an Otto ATM, doesn't have a fee.

Now, there are a few, just a few, small ATM chains not owned by Otto. If you use an Otto card, in one of these other chains, you'll be charged a fee. If you use one cards for the smaller chains in an Otto ATM, you'll be charged a fee.

Exactly the same as it is here.

Sweden on the other hand, does have largely free ATM usage, but nearly all Swedish cards have monthly fees. They cover the cost of using the ATM, by charging you a monthly fee.

All countries have ATM fees. Hong Kong is much like Finland, except instead of one major network, there are three major networks. There may be dozens of banks on each network, and thus you can use one card for any ATM in the network. But if you use it on a different network, you are charged a fee.

There is no free lunch. Someone has to pay for the system to work.

Ultimately, there are ways around all of your security solutions. The only real fix is going to be the Revelation fix. Put a computer chip in the hand, and have is complex unique adjusted identifier.

The only way to fake that, is to cut off the hand, and that would be a bit messy at the store for people to not notice.

 

[Slashsnake]

There's no reason for a wire transfer? I've said it's almost the same thing as an instant transfer from one bank to another, whether it's to yours or a friends. If I'm eating at a restaurant in Europe with some friends, I could just transfer money from my bank to my friend's bank before the waitress even comes to the table with their chip + pin reader to pay for the meal.

Here in America we have to wait days for the money and they take my card away from me and go swipe it in the back of the restaurant somewhere. To me this lack of technology is pretty stupid in 2017. We look so stupid compared to other countries... "Well we know magnetic stripe is the least safe form of payment, but we'll stick with that...Oh and while we're at it, why not let people walk away with our cards for a bit so they can go swipe it and write down all of the information."

My credit union (Navy Fed) reimburses ATM fees owned by others for me, up to $10 a month and doesn't charge me an ATM fee for their profit. Any bank could either reimburse or come to an agreement with the ATM owner(s) on getting rid of fees by paying the owner directly. Send a bill to my local bank so they can pay for it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Before you chide the U.S. banking industry, you may want to consider this. Whereas before the financial crisis, both US and European banks reported record profit levels, only US banks are beating those nowadays, while their European peers are struggling to sustainably stay above the zero line at all. You may not, as a consumer of retail banking services, like U.S. bank practices, but you like the returns on the bank stocks in your investment portfolio.

I'm not saying there aren't things that can be improved or that there are no ways to improve them. I'm saying you need to have more to offer than bitching about what you don't like. Offer solutions that you can quantify and that don't adversely affect profits and your ideas will be worth hearing. Short of that, however, you're just ranting and you'll be seen as such. In banking like no place else, money talks, and pretty much everything else simply doesn't matter.

 

[Slashsnake]

Before you chide the U.S. banking industry, you may want to consider this. Whereas before the financial crisis, both US and European banks reported record profit levels, only US banks are beating those nowadays, while their European peers are struggling to sustainably stay above the zero line at all. You may not, as a consumer of retail banking services, like U.S. bank practices, but you like the returns on the bank stocks in your investment portfolio.

I'm not saying there aren't things that can be improved or that there are no ways to improve them. I'm saying you need to have more to offer than bitching about what you don't like. Offer solutions that you can quantify and that don't adversely affect profits and your ideas will be worth hearing. Short of that, however, you're just ranting and you'll be seen as such. In banking like no place else, money talks, and pretty much everything else simply doesn't matter.

So because U.S banks are making more profits than others, largely because of larger interchange fees because we have a more insecure system than the rest of the world, they shouldn't have 21st century technology? Why do I care about bank stocks? I don't own bank stock, plus I'm a credit union guy. As security get improved on (with this new technology) the banks will have to pay out less in fraud costs on credit cards and because checks will disappear. Did you ever think U.S Banks make more money because of the higher interchange fees combined with more people in this country?

 

[Andylusion]

There's no reason for a wire transfer? I've said it's almost the same thing as an instant transfer from one bank to another, whether it's to yours or a friends. If I'm eating at a restaurant in Europe with some friends, I could just transfer money from my bank to my friend's bank before the waitress even comes to the table with their chip + pin reader to pay for the meal.

Here in America we have to wait days for the money and they take my card away from me and go swipe it in the back of the restaurant somewhere. To me this lack of technology is pretty stupid in 2017. We look so stupid compared to other countries... "Well we know magnetic stripe is the least safe form of payment, but we'll stick with that...Oh and while we're at it, why not let people walk away with our cards for a bit so they can go swipe it and write down all of the information."

My credit union (Navy Fed) reimburses ATM fees owned by others for me, up to $10 a month and doesn't charge me an ATM fee for their profit. Any bank could either reimburse or come to an agreement with the ATM owner(s) on getting rid of fees by paying the owner directly. Send a bill to my local bank so they can pay for it.

I can't think of any situation, where I would need to do that.

Again, I have the chip in my card. So I rarely use the magnetic strip.

Besides that, that's the policy of the restaurant you were at, not the banking system. If you go to the lower end restaurants, then they walk away with your card. The bank has nothing to do with it.

At my last expensive fancy restaurant, they had kiosks at the table, and we just popped our card in the chip reader slot, and punch our number, and it was done.

Well they could make agreements to use other ATMs, but why would they? They don't in other countries, as I detailed in the prior post.

Again, why would my bank, come to an agreement with other banks to use their ATMs, when my bank already has their own ATMs? They are already spending the money to run their own ATMs. Why would they spend money to operate on other ATMs?

Just like in Finland. If you have an Otto card, you can use any Otto machine. If you use an ATM not by Otto, then you pay a fee. Why would Otto come to an agreement with other ATM networks, when they already spend the money to operate their own?

It's the same deal everywhere. I think you are a little bonkers on this point.

Try putting yourself in that position. If you operate a network of ATMs. You are spending YOUR money to build.... install.... operate.... and maintain your own network of ATMs. Why would you give your hard earned money to pay for other people's ATMs?

That's dumb. But that is what you are complaining the banks are not doing? You wouldn't do that. Why do you expect them to?

 

[Slashsnake]

There's no reason for a wire transfer? I've said it's almost the same thing as an instant transfer from one bank to another, whether it's to yours or a friends. If I'm eating at a restaurant in Europe with some friends, I could just transfer money from my bank to my friend's bank before the waitress even comes to the table with their chip + pin reader to pay for the meal.

Here in America we have to wait days for the money and they take my card away from me and go swipe it in the back of the restaurant somewhere. To me this lack of technology is pretty stupid in 2017. We look so stupid compared to other countries... "Well we know magnetic stripe is the least safe form of payment, but we'll stick with that...Oh and while we're at it, why not let people walk away with our cards for a bit so they can go swipe it and write down all of the information."

My credit union (Navy Fed) reimburses ATM fees owned by others for me, up to $10 a month and doesn't charge me an ATM fee for their profit. Any bank could either reimburse or come to an agreement with the ATM owner(s) on getting rid of fees by paying the owner directly. Send a bill to my local bank so they can pay for it.

I can't think of any situation, where I would need to do that.

(1) Again, I have the chip in my card. So I rarely use the magnetic strip.

(2) Besides that, that's the policy of the restaurant you were at, not the banking system. If you go to the lower end restaurants, then they walk away with your card. The bank has nothing to do with it.

(3) At my last expensive fancy restaurant, they had kiosks at the table, and we just popped our card in the chip reader slot, and punch our number, and it was done.

(5) Well they could make agreements to use other ATMs, but why would they? They don't in other countries, as I detailed in the prior post.

Again, why would my bank, come to an agreement with other banks to use their ATMs, when my bank already has their own ATMs? They are already spending the money to run their own ATMs. Why would they spend money to operate on other ATMs?

Just like in Finland. If you have an Otto card, you can use any Otto machine. If you use an ATM not by Otto, then you pay a fee. Why would Otto come to an agreement with other ATM networks, when they already spend the money to operate their own?

It's the same deal everywhere. I think you are a little bonkers on this point.

(4) Try putting yourself in that position. If you operate a network of ATMs. You are spending YOUR money to build.... install.... operate.... and maintain your own network of ATMs. Why would you give your hard earned money to pay for other people's ATMs?

That's dumb. But that is what you are complaining the banks are not doing? You wouldn't do that. Why do you expect them to?

(1) You must not be from the United States, 90% or more of the entire merchant base doesn't use the chip yet.
(2) Actually it is because the banks let magnetic stripe cards without PIN authorization go for so long.
(3) Again, we don't have those in the U.S.
(4) My credit union doesn't charge me a fee to use another owner's ATM and reimburses me for their fees, so others can too.
(5) Many credit unions do this but banks can't figure it out yet.

 

[usmbguest5318]

So because U.S banks are making more profits than others, largely because of larger interchange fees because we have a more insecure system than the rest of the world, they shouldn't have 21st century technology?

If you rephrase that question so that it is (1) coherent and (2) not loaded, I may answer it.

Before you do endeavor to ask a neutrally coherent question, you should probably take a look at the chart found in this document. Payment-related non-interest banking income amounts to about 21% of revenue.

Why do I care about bank stocks? I don't own bank stock, plus I'm a credit union guy.

I'll take your word for that, but therein, at least in part, lies your problem. You see the matter of U.S. banking industry operations only in terms of how you want it to work.

Did you ever think U.S Banks make more money because of the higher interchange fees combined with more people in this country?

Truly, as an owner, I care about the rate of return on my investment, not on whether that return comes from interchange fees or anything else.that's legal. The ratio of fee income to non-fee income on the other hand may play a role in whether I'll maintain a given position in a given bank.

 

[Andylusion]

There's no reason for a wire transfer? I've said it's almost the same thing as an instant transfer from one bank to another, whether it's to yours or a friends. If I'm eating at a restaurant in Europe with some friends, I could just transfer money from my bank to my friend's bank before the waitress even comes to the table with their chip + pin reader to pay for the meal.

Here in America we have to wait days for the money and they take my card away from me and go swipe it in the back of the restaurant somewhere. To me this lack of technology is pretty stupid in 2017. We look so stupid compared to other countries... "Well we know magnetic stripe is the least safe form of payment, but we'll stick with that...Oh and while we're at it, why not let people walk away with our cards for a bit so they can go swipe it and write down all of the information."

My credit union (Navy Fed) reimburses ATM fees owned by others for me, up to $10 a month and doesn't charge me an ATM fee for their profit. Any bank could either reimburse or come to an agreement with the ATM owner(s) on getting rid of fees by paying the owner directly. Send a bill to my local bank so they can pay for it.

I can't think of any situation, where I would need to do that.

(1) Again, I have the chip in my card. So I rarely use the magnetic strip.

(2) Besides that, that's the policy of the restaurant you were at, not the banking system. If you go to the lower end restaurants, then they walk away with your card. The bank has nothing to do with it.

(3) At my last expensive fancy restaurant, they had kiosks at the table, and we just popped our card in the chip reader slot, and punch our number, and it was done.

(5) Well they could make agreements to use other ATMs, but why would they? They don't in other countries, as I detailed in the prior post.

Again, why would my bank, come to an agreement with other banks to use their ATMs, when my bank already has their own ATMs? They are already spending the money to run their own ATMs. Why would they spend money to operate on other ATMs?

Just like in Finland. If you have an Otto card, you can use any Otto machine. If you use an ATM not by Otto, then you pay a fee. Why would Otto come to an agreement with other ATM networks, when they already spend the money to operate their own?

It's the same deal everywhere. I think you are a little bonkers on this point.

(4) Try putting yourself in that position. If you operate a network of ATMs. You are spending YOUR money to build.... install.... operate.... and maintain your own network of ATMs. Why would you give your hard earned money to pay for other people's ATMs?

That's dumb. But that is what you are complaining the banks are not doing? You wouldn't do that. Why do you expect them to?

(1) You must not be from the United States, 90% or more of the entire merchant base doesn't use the chip yet.
(2) Actually it is because the banks let magnetic stripe cards without PIN authorization go for so long.
(3) Again, we don't have those in the U.S.
(4) My credit union doesn't charge me a fee to use another owner's ATM and reimburses me for their fees, so others can too.
(5) Many credit unions do this but banks can't figure it out yet.

1. Columbus, Ohio since I was born, age 39.

Looks like a chip to me.

2. No, it's because that is the policy of the restaurant. Even without the magnetic strip, they still take your card, and pop it into the machine. If the policy of the restaurant is to have the waitress take your card, it doesn't matter if the card has a chip or not.

3. Hilliard Ohio, is the restaurant I was at that had kiosk at the table.

4 and 5. Yes they can. And if your credit union does, great. Most, if not yours, do not do that. My credit union, as pictured above, does charge fees for using other ATMs. I can't think of a single credit union, or bank, that does not charge a fee in this area. Your, the bank eats the cost. Great. Peachy for you. That is exceptionally rare.

And just because they can, doesn't mean they will. There are many things you can do. I can buy random people on the street a full meal at an expensive restaurant. The last guy who delivered a pizza to me on Christmas weekend, I gave a $20 tip for a $12 pizza.

You can do the same. Did you? No? Why not? Because most people don't.

Most banks do not pay a fee to other banks, for use of their ATMs, when they are already paying to have their own network of ATMs. Maybe yours does, that's great, but most are not, and it is unreasonable to expect them to.

 

[Slashsnake]

Your #1 is completely inaccurate. What does a debit card with a chip have to do with the actual merchant taking a chip? A merchant is the actual store, i.e. Lowes, Wegmans, McDonald's, etc. I still swipe my card or use Samsung Pay at 90%+ of merchants I visit.

For #2, "it's the policy of the restaurant"... Well, kinda hard for the cardholder to use a PIN from the opposite side of the restaurant don't you think? The restaurant would physically be unable to have current USA norms for a policy if we were 100% chip and PIN. In fact, the current restaurant norms for card payment in the USA are absolutely retarded.

For #3, congrats, probably the only restaurant in the U.S with 21st century technology... It still doesn't do me any good if I'm at Applebees or Pizza Hut.

Many credit unions have partnerships with other credit unions to expand their network of ATM's. I have two credit unions, one partners with certain merchants like 7/11, Wegmans, etc for free ATM usage, along with other credit union ATM's. Navy Fed reimburses ATM fees and doesn't charge a fee that goes into their pocketbook when I use another bank's ATM, plus they network with other credit unions as well.. Banks on the other hand? Not so much, they hate talking to each other so they only go through the federal reserve.

 

[Slashsnake]

Truly, as an owner, I care about the rate of return on my investment, not on whether that return comes from interchange fees or anything else.that'sal. The ratio of fee income to non-fee income on the other hand may play a role in whether I'll maintain a given position in a given bank.

As you should. As a "partial owner" of a bank I'd like my company to gain as many customers as possible by investing into technology that can be used for marketing to gain new customers. Invest into contactless card technology, chip and pin, instant peer to peer payments, and an online and ATM banking platform with great technology that other banks don't have...

Examples of technology a lot of banks lack: Contactless card ATM's (I know BoA is starting to roll this out), ATM's that can spit out exact change and $1, $2, $5, $10, $25, and $50 bills, ATM's that can print cashier's checks, ATM's with video teller technology, stamp printing, regular check printing (for one to just sign and write the person they're paying on to use somewhere), EMV ATM's, ATM's that can use a QR code from your phone to access your account, etc. Imagine going onto your bank's website and being able to use a video camera to talk to a live teller rather than some idiot from from India who doesn't understand what you're talking about over just words on a screen.

Just imagine how much the average consumer would absolutely love instant transfers and all of the powerful technology at their bank. I would switch to a bank that had more technology and more innovation than any other bank in America. Business owners would love instant transfers, the ability to get a cashier's check after hours, and 24/7 access to a live teller or customer service rep.

Customers get sick and tired of the shit systems our current banks have and the lack of quality customer service. The first bank who invests into all of this technology and customer service will make a bigger profit than everyone else. Why? Customers will want to utilize these features and will begin opening credit cards, lines of credit(s), mortgages, etc. with a bank who provides these services; thus, profit. Apple innovated in their sector and look how well off they were... I'm waiting for a bank to do the same thing.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Truly, as an owner, I care about the rate of return on my investment, not on whether that return comes from interchange fees or anything else.that'sal. The ratio of fee income to non-fee income on the other hand may play a role in whether I'll maintain a given position in a given bank.

As you should. As a "partial owner" of a bank I'd like my company to gain as many customers as possible by investing into technology that can be used for marketing to gain new customers. Invest into contactless card technology, chip and pin, instant peer to peer payments, and an online and ATM banking platform with great technology that other banks don't have...

Examples of technology a lot of banks lack: Contactless card ATM's (I know BoA is starting to roll this out), ATM's that can spit out exact change and $1, $2, $5, $10, $25, and $50 bills, ATM's that can print cashier's checks, ATM's with video teller technology, stamp printing, regular check printing (for one to just sign and write the person they're paying on to use somewhere), EMV ATM's, ATM's that can use a QR code from your phone to access your account, etc. Imagine going onto your bank's website and being able to use a video camera to talk to a live teller rather than some idiot from from India who doesn't understand what you're talking about over just words on a screen.

Just imagine how much the average consumer would absolutely love instant transfers and all of the powerful technology at their bank. I would switch to a bank that had more technology and more innovation than any other bank in America. Business owners would love instant transfers, the ability to get a cashier's check after hours, and 24/7 access to a live teller or customer service rep.

Customers get sick and tired of the shit systems our current banks have and the lack of quality customer service. The first bank who invests into all of this technology and customer service will make a bigger profit than everyone else. Why? Customers will want to utilize these features and will begin opening credit cards, lines of credit(s), mortgages, etc. with a bank who provides these services; thus, profit. Apple innovated in their sector and look how well off they were... I'm waiting for a bank to do the same thing.

All well and good. I have no objection to banks deploying innovative technology. Prior to the post above, however, you were complaining about that and the fact that banks charge fees for various transaction processing activities. The latter is what I responded to.

As for the processing aspects you mentioned, well they are nice, but quite frankly, they are not what most concerns the banking industry. The innovations you have identified are low level transaction processing "goodies." The technological innovations bank executives focus on these days are those that put at risk the economic competitive advantages banks have enjoyed since the Babylonians invented the basic concept of banking.

Banks today teeter on a precipice from which is seen material diminutions in the traditional barriers to entry into the banking industry. Managing their businesses so as to take advantage of the tech that as brought banks and modern society to that point is vastly more important to bank managers than is whether, say, their ATM dispense exact change. Blockchain is one of those technologies.

​

Do you see a bank in that process? Do you see an ATM machine in there? I don't, and neither do banks. They see buyers and sellers engaging in trade and no bank is involved. Thus, bank managers rush to figure out where they can insert their institutions into that process to add value to it and then secure that place, and they aim to do so, moreover, before others for whom information technology and AI make it possible to deny them a place in it.

​

So what I'm saying is that while all those things you mentioned are nice, they are small fry in an ocean patrolled by whale-sized technology issues that matter considerably more.

 

[Slashsnake]

Truly, as an owner, I care about the rate of return on my investment, not on whether that return comes from interchange fees or anything else.that'sal. The ratio of fee income to non-fee income on the other hand may play a role in whether I'll maintain a given position in a given bank.

As you should. As a "partial owner" of a bank I'd like my company to gain as many customers as possible by investing into technology that can be used for marketing to gain new customers. Invest into contactless card technology, chip and pin, instant peer to peer payments, and an online and ATM banking platform with great technology that other banks don't have...

Examples of technology a lot of banks lack: Contactless card ATM's (I know BoA is starting to roll this out), ATM's that can spit out exact change and $1, $2, $5, $10, $25, and $50 bills, ATM's that can print cashier's checks, ATM's with video teller technology, stamp printing, regular check printing (for one to just sign and write the person they're paying on to use somewhere), EMV ATM's, ATM's that can use a QR code from your phone to access your account, etc. Imagine going onto your bank's website and being able to use a video camera to talk to a live teller rather than some idiot from from India who doesn't understand what you're talking about over just words on a screen.

Just imagine how much the average consumer would absolutely love instant transfers and all of the powerful technology at their bank. I would switch to a bank that had more technology and more innovation than any other bank in America. Business owners would love instant transfers, the ability to get a cashier's check after hours, and 24/7 access to a live teller or customer service rep.

Customers get sick and tired of the shit systems our current banks have and the lack of quality customer service. The first bank who invests into all of this technology and customer service will make a bigger profit than everyone else. Why? Customers will want to utilize these features and will begin opening credit cards, lines of credit(s), mortgages, etc. with a bank who provides these services; thus, profit. Apple innovated in their sector and look how well off they were... I'm waiting for a bank to do the same thing.

All well and good. I have no objection to banks deploying innovative technology. Prior to the post above, however, you were complaining about that and the fact that banks charge fees for various transaction processing activities. The latter is what I responded to.

As for the processing aspects you mentioned, well they are nice, but quite frankly, they are not what most concerns the banking industry. The innovations you have identified are low level transaction processing "goodies." The technological innovations bank executives focus on these days are those that put at risk the economic competitive advantages banks have enjoyed since the Babylonians invented the basic concept of banking.

Banks today teeter on a precipice from which is seen material diminutions in the traditional barriers to entry into the banking industry. Managing their businesses so as to take advantage of the tech that as brought banks and modern society to that point is vastly more important to bank managers than is whether, say, their ATM dispense exact change. Blockchain is one of those technologies.

​

Do you see a bank in that process? Do you see an ATM machine in there? I don't, and neither do banks. They see buyers and sellers engaging in trade and no bank is involved. Thus, bank managers rush to figure out where they can insert their institutions into that process to add value to it and then secure that place, and they aim to do so, moreover, before others for whom information technology and AI make it possible to deny them a place in it.

​

So what I'm saying is that while all those things you mentioned are nice, they are small fry in an ocean patrolled by whale-sized technology issues that matter considerably more.

So who is the third party in this situation? And who approves the transaction?

 

[eflatminor]

Anyone have any ideas on how/if America will ever clean up the banking system here?

Not going to happen as long as statists at the federal and state level continue to meddle in the market for money, from the central price control that is the Federal Reserve, to interest rate and fee restrictions, to lending guidelines and onerous paperwork requirements, to thousands upon thousands of regulations that impede banks from meeting customer demand, all while protecting the big banks from new competition.

You want a bank to respond to your demands as a customer, get government out of banking.

Or, you can just sit back and take it, reassured in the comfort that our central planners know what's best for us all...

 

[usmbguest5318]

Truly, as an owner, I care about the rate of return on my investment, not on whether that return comes from interchange fees or anything else.that'sal. The ratio of fee income to non-fee income on the other hand may play a role in whether I'll maintain a given position in a given bank.

As you should. As a "partial owner" of a bank I'd like my company to gain as many customers as possible by investing into technology that can be used for marketing to gain new customers. Invest into contactless card technology, chip and pin, instant peer to peer payments, and an online and ATM banking platform with great technology that other banks don't have...

Examples of technology a lot of banks lack: Contactless card ATM's (I know BoA is starting to roll this out), ATM's that can spit out exact change and $1, $2, $5, $10, $25, and $50 bills, ATM's that can print cashier's checks, ATM's with video teller technology, stamp printing, regular check printing (for one to just sign and write the person they're paying on to use somewhere), EMV ATM's, ATM's that can use a QR code from your phone to access your account, etc. Imagine going onto your bank's website and being able to use a video camera to talk to a live teller rather than some idiot from from India who doesn't understand what you're talking about over just words on a screen.

Just imagine how much the average consumer would absolutely love instant transfers and all of the powerful technology at their bank. I would switch to a bank that had more technology and more innovation than any other bank in America. Business owners would love instant transfers, the ability to get a cashier's check after hours, and 24/7 access to a live teller or customer service rep.

Customers get sick and tired of the shit systems our current banks have and the lack of quality customer service. The first bank who invests into all of this technology and customer service will make a bigger profit than everyone else. Why? Customers will want to utilize these features and will begin opening credit cards, lines of credit(s), mortgages, etc. with a bank who provides these services; thus, profit. Apple innovated in their sector and look how well off they were... I'm waiting for a bank to do the same thing.

All well and good. I have no objection to banks deploying innovative technology. Prior to the post above, however, you were complaining about that and the fact that banks charge fees for various transaction processing activities. The latter is what I responded to.

As for the processing aspects you mentioned, well they are nice, but quite frankly, they are not what most concerns the banking industry. The innovations you have identified are low level transaction processing "goodies." The technological innovations bank executives focus on these days are those that put at risk the economic competitive advantages banks have enjoyed since the Babylonians invented the basic concept of banking.

Banks today teeter on a precipice from which is seen material diminutions in the traditional barriers to entry into the banking industry. Managing their businesses so as to take advantage of the tech that as brought banks and modern society to that point is vastly more important to bank managers than is whether, say, their ATM dispense exact change. Blockchain is one of those technologies.

​

Do you see a bank in that process? Do you see an ATM machine in there? I don't, and neither do banks. They see buyers and sellers engaging in trade and no bank is involved. Thus, bank managers rush to figure out where they can insert their institutions into that process to add value to it and then secure that place, and they aim to do so, moreover, before others for whom information technology and AI make it possible to deny them a place in it.

​

So what I'm saying is that while all those things you mentioned are nice, they are small fry in an ocean patrolled by whale-sized technology issues that matter considerably more.

So who is the third party in this situation? And who approves the transaction?

What situation is "this" one about which you've asked who is the third party?

• The competitive landscape in which banks today find themselves?
• Blockchain transaction processing methods?
• The business and transaction partners who find it easier to enter the financial services/banking industry?

In my post and its linked documents, there are many "situations." Should I just pick one and start discussing it?


The short answer to your second question is "no one" and "everyone."

• Blockchain in Banking: A Measured Approach
• BlockChain Technology
  
• Distributed ledger technology in payments, clearing, and settlement

 

[Jomama]

Of all the problems with America's banking system, OP mentions those?

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions? I'd prefer a highly regulated deposit banking system like Canada and a robust commercial finance industry that gets the tougher deals done.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of all the problems with America's banking system, OP mentions those?

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions? I'd prefer a highly regulated deposit banking system like Canada and a robust commercial finance industry that gets the tougher deals done.

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions?

What's wrong with the casino aspect?

 

[Jomama]

Of all the problems with America's banking system, OP mentions those?

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions? I'd prefer a highly regulated deposit banking system like Canada and a robust commercial finance industry that gets the tougher deals done.

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions?

What's wrong with the casino aspect?

Merely the occasional financial crisis, loss of trillions of dollars in wealth and unrecoverable damage to many families.

.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

[

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions?
.

did depositors lose money or something??

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of all the problems with America's banking system, OP mentions those?

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions? I'd prefer a highly regulated deposit banking system like Canada and a robust commercial finance industry that gets the tougher deals done.

How about we take away the casino aspect of our deposit institutions?

What's wrong with the casino aspect?

Merely the occasional financial crisis, loss of trillions of dollars in wealth and unrecoverable damage to many families.

.

The financial crisis wasn't caused by the casino aspect.