Who knew that free market capitalism depended so critically on the ability of institutions to levy unfettered punative fees?? With this one lynch pin removed, the connection between prices and costs is completely gone: whereas before, banks could offer a bounty of services at existing merchant fee levels, now they will offer consumers only a kick in the stomach, which they will then bill you for. Prices will skyrocket to service ever higher transaction fees, yet banks will still lose money on every purchase. Sure, some people might say that banks could just make money from “profits” on the “services” they offer, but they’re ignorant fools. Fees are the only path to profitability, the only way to avoid a dystopian hellscape where banking services are available only to the richest elite.
No. Not in the least. The article and the op are talking about debit cards used for purchases having a five dollar surcharge tacked on. That has little if anything to do with overdrafts which is a whole other subject than debit card fees.
Credit and debit card companies have always always charged merchants to process transactions.
Seriously you are calling me a dick, but your posting all snarky and acting like an arrogant asshole, and at the same time the things that you are same make no sense whatsoever, and demonstrate a basic and fundamental ignorance of the subject matter.
What you don’t get is that banks do not make money on checking accounts and debit cards off of the consumer, as a rule. The accounts and the cards are loss leaders. They are viable because when the consumer goes to the grocery store and swipes the card for a ten dollar purchase, the grocery store pays the bank 30 cents or so. That let’s the bank administer the card, provide the services, cover the fraud, and make a profit.
Since credit and debit cards have existed so have these fees.
This thread is about retail consumer banking and new policies about fees being charged for debit card usage. Not mortgage lending and investment banking. I’m well aware of the mortgage situation and nothing I’ve said so far in any way condones or excuses that behavior on the part of banks and our government in allowing it. If you think that banks are trying to recoup their losses on mortgages/investments by charging a debit card fee you are nuts. They are completely separate units within large banks with separate P/L. This is a direct reaction to the loss of revenue within retail/consumer banking as a result of legislation - particularly Dodd-Frank and Durbin. Banks are businesses, if regulations take away one revenue stream they will find new revenue streams to replace them.
You might want to read the link on the second post again…
“Chase and Wells Fargo are also testing $3 monthly debit card fees in select markets. Neither bank has said when it will make a final decision on whether to roll out the fee more broadly.”
Use to be, businesses did that by innovating new products and services. Now, business just adds new fees without adding any value. They think they are entitled to that revenue stream, and they can do whatever they want to preserve it. They think the market won’t notice; and they are right, up to a point.
I think they miscalculated on this one, though, the push back is going to huge. Debit cards and the way they are paid for are too well integrated into the market, and people won’t stand for it.
If banks want to preserve their profit margin, they need to offer new products with value to the consumer.
I do. There’s no inherent reason for a bank to be able to cheat their customers by arbitrarily re-ordering debits, and if preventing that idiocy breaks their business model such that they have to up fees, so be it.
For that matter, my credit union? Made a point of advertising that they did transactions by time, even retroactively–they would reverse overdraft charges if you’d had a deposited check in the system that hadn’t cleared yet.
Still no fee on checking, ATM, debit card, or online services.
I think the big banks are profiteering wherever they can at this point. :rolleyes:
I agree - I haven’t heard of such a thing. I’d be interested to know what percentage of “debit” cards have a float. Mine, from several different banks and credit unions, never have.
I would argue those new products are the technology that enables their customers to easier access their DDA accounts, such as mobile banking. Banks are obviously under revenue pressure. Adding fees to once free services is a quick hit. The longer term win is through technology to meet the needs of customers (value adds) that also reduces operational costs. Bank’s can’t invent a new “account” here, they need to maintain their legacy account/customer base but reinvent their services around that account to align them with the changing usage and expectations and lower internal costs to the bank.
Even if they do this, successfully lower operational costs, etc., they’re still going to go for revenue streams where they can to maximize revenue/profits and shareholder value. I’m all for government regulation of banks and stronger regulations than current proposed. I’m also realistic, these are not altruistic charities out there. They are profit-driven business entities and I’ll say it again - if regulations dry up one revenue stream, the banks will find new streams to replace them (and hopefully new technology and services to lower internal operational costs).
MeanJoe
They don’t. Bankers don’t want to be bankers anymore, dealing with nickel dime bullshit for the average consumer. They want to be financiers, swim in the deep water with the big fish, where the action is!
Used to be, they positively depended on being boring and dull, which equated to reliable. Its like that *Monty Python *sketch about the deadly dull accountant who’s decided he wants to be a lion tamer.
I have no idea what percentage of debit cards offer a float, but I know that most every institution has offered these debit cards with perks to their high end clients. The idea is that they compete with American Express cards (the original of which I believe you had to pay off every month, making it conceptually the same,) and other high-end reward cards.
The target market is people who spend big on their credit cards but pay off their balance every month.
I have a card of this ilk and I try to use it to pay for everything, knowing that I’m getting 1% back in terms of points, evacuation insurance, extended warranties and other buyer protecticons, free upgrades, etc etc.
These are the benefits that the top tier of a debit card issuers customers received.
THe bottom tier could still get free checking, atm, service, buyer protection and sometimes a few other things if they shopped for the best deal.
Now the Durbin act means that the high end debit cards will become true credit cards with an option to float a balance, but really nothing else will change. But those that actually have debit cards because they specifically want or need a debit card will have no such option. The banks will either have to maintain them at a loss or pass on the costs of the purchase protections mandated by law.
I have been informed that the nearly 13k I have in my BoA accout will not be enough to keep them from charging me a fee if I use my debit card as a debit card. I was also informed that I was “lucky” :rolleyes: (and yes, that was the term the guy who only has his job at BoA because taxpayers were charged to bail his company’s ass out) it was only five bucks as I could be charged as much as $25. This is the same fucking bank that spent four months treating my eight year old’s savings account as a regular bank account and stealing $5 a month from her until I finally got them to stop.
Fuck them. We have dozens of other banks around here. I shall transfer my money elsewhere. They want 20k in a non-interest bearing account to avoid such fees. They’re greedy piggies and I hope they go out of business.
Overdrafts have been discussed as the reason behind the $5 fee increase from the very beginning of the thread. Posts #7, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 were all on the subject of overdraft fees, before you chimed in at post #21 to claim that government regulation helped no one. Bricker made the explicit argument that regulation limiting overdraft fees was costing him money:
I’m arguing that government regulation of debit card fees is a good thing, even if it means that banks have to seek other sources of revenue. I’m also making fun of you for your dramatic, Fox News-esque pronouncements of how regulations actually hurt the poor, honest working man. I look forward to more self-important bluster about what’s really important and how the evil government is stealing all your money.
