T1B

BofA surrenders on ATM card fees.

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/1 ... &seid=auto

Lets not forget to give the Occupy Wall Street movement its proper share of credit. Two months ago this fee hike was a fait accompli. Now it and other fee hikes are political poison for banks. Not bad for a bunch of directionless, leaderless hippies eh?

Yeah, had nothing to do with local banks/credit unions laughing off the fees and welcoming the disgruntled big bank customers with open arms.

Nope, the free market had nothing to do with it, it was all about a bunch of street-shitters with some signs.

Well, there's that, B...

But I'm thinking that the virtual run on the bank after they announced their new fee structure might've had just a bit more to do with it.

But that's just me. I'm only in the industry. But if it makes you feel better to give props to OWS, then by all means, be my guest.

Truman wrote:Well, there's that, B...

But I'm thinking that the virtual run on the bank after they announced their new fee structure might've had just a bit more to do with it. But that's just me. I'm only in the industry. But if it makes you feel better to give props to OWS, then by all means, be my guest.

Who the fuck do you think was behind the run on big banks? Congress? CEOs? Or maybe the near constant drumbeat of OWS and affiliated groups that got the ball rolling?

Take some time Tru. Think about it.

BSmack wrote:Who the fuck do you think was behind the run on big banks? Congress? CEOs?

Customers of that bank, you pathetic dumbfuck.

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:Who the fuck do you think was behind the run on big banks? Congress? CEOs?

Customers of that bank, you pathetic dumbfuck.

BANKS you ignorant twat. The big bank withdrawal movement is part and parcel of OWS and encompasses more than just BofA.

Truman wrote:Well, there's that, B...

But I'm thinking that the virtual run on the bank after they announced their new fee structure might've had just a bit more to do with it.

But that's just me. I'm only in the industry.

And doing a bang-up job, no doubt.

BSmack wrote:

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:Who the fuck do you think was behind the run on big banks? Congress? CEOs?

Customers of that bank, you pathetic dumbfuck.

BANKS you ignorant twat. The big bank withdrawal movement is part and parcel of OWS and encompasses more than just BofA.

BANK, dumbfuck. BofA rolled out a new fee hike and their customers (not stinking, street shitting fucktards) howled in outrage, so they backed down. Other banks considering such fees noticed the backlash and declined to move forward.

Nobody bases their banking decisions on street theater from a bunch of filthy degenerates.

A rare moment of candor from BMonica...

Just a jaw-dropping display of ignorance/stupidity from BSchmuck.

Nope, wasn't market forces... it was outcry from people who didn't (or shouldn't have been, according to their mantra) do business with BoA.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Unfreakingbelievable that someone would actually think up something so Bmoronic.


Yup, people took financial advice from a bunch of people who claim they can't afford a roof over their head, can't get a job, and can't amass savings.

Dinsdale wrote:Nope, wasn't market forces... it was outcry from people who didn't (or shouldn't have been, according to their mantra) do business with BoA.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? OWS and market forces are not mutually exclusive. Tell me you knew?

88 wrote:How do people who do not bank with BofA have any market influence on the business decisions of BofA?

Don't make his head explode.

88 wrote:How do people who do not bank with BofA have any market influence on the business decisions of BofA? If banging on a plastic bucket with a stick was successful in changing corporate behavior, the chimps at the Columbus Zoo would have completely different living conditions, I suspect.

Yep, they're all stoners in drum circles. BofA underestimated the will of the people too.

KC Scott wrote:So Dins, what do you think the effects will be of Greece potentially defaulting on it's soverign debt as it relates to global economy?

I'm not making any judgements until I hear from the paragon of financial advice known as OWS.

I thought this was going to be about putting a small business owner out of business and 21 people out of work.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/11/01/ ... nstration/

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – The Occupy Wall Street movement, which says its goals include improving the economic lot for 99 percent of Americans, may have some explaining to do to some cafe workers now out of a job.

Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.

The reason? The barricades police have set up throughout Wall Street as a consequence of the ongoing demonstration.

In June, he opened the New York branch of the Boston shop, which has a 30 year history. Epstein says he leased the space on Wall Street because it was next to a pedestrian plaza – and his was the only restaurant along that plaza.

“The opening was perfect,” Epstein told CBSNewYork.com. “The food was delicious, the customers were happy, and the line was out the door.”

Customers kept coming back, Epstein said.

“Everything was going in the right direction. Sales continued to grow. We started to build our catering business. Costs were going down. I felt that by October or November we would break even.”

Then the Occupy Wall Street movement launched.

“I came one Monday morning and I found the exit by the 2 or 3 subway station closed. I saw all these barriers – barricades – all up and down my street,” Epstein said. “At first I thought nothing of it, but after a week… it’s been six or seven weeks now.”

Mark Epstein ?

Probably a Jew.

21 workers, probably not earning a "living wage", so they're better off without jobs.

I not only don't think OWS had much to do with this, but think it was something else totally undrelated (and this answers your question, 88).

I think that BofA saw how Netflix committed hari kari & saw the writing on the wall. I think BofA's reaction is a case of tooo little too late, but they saw how customers can leave en masse if they think they're getting screwed by a business.

I'm betting that BofA has lost a lot of customers permanently to cu's.

Tom In VA wrote:Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.

The reason? The barricades police have set up...

The police have consistently overreacted. Blaming people exercising their legitimate 1st Amendment rights for the actions of the NYPD is nothing short of idiotic.

Been a BofA customer for years (checking, savings, HELOCs, mortgages), but am in the process of moving all of my accounts out. This fee was just the straw that brought the camels back (for all intensive purposes), because I've wanted to get out for a long time. I'm not about to just up and go on 11/5 though, that would be fucking stupid. It takes some effort to move everything and you don't want to jump to some outfit that might be even worse. Got a new checking account at another bank, moved the wife's direct deposit over there and will try it out, including their e-bills service, to see how it works. If everything is cool I'll be closing out by 12/1. Cancelling the fee is not going to change my mind.

Used to be a happy customer but for the past 10 years at least they've sucked goat testicles. Prolly had something to do with the merger with Nations Bank and moving their HQ from San Francisco to Charlotte. They fucked me over royally in 2002 with a black mark on my credit history, through no real fault of my own, that lasted for 7 years.

I'll be very happy to finally say fuck you to Bank of America.

(nobody from OWS told me to do this)

Stop lying, Mikey. Your decision to leave BofA had nothing to do with shitty customer service and ridiculous fees. It was all about OWS and "sticking it to the man" and "power to the people."

mvscal wrote:Stop lying, Mikey. Your decision to leave BofA had nothing to do with shitty customer service and ridiculous fees. It was all about OWS and "sticking it to the man" and "power to the people."

Not into sticking it to men. You may have me mixed up with Toddowen.

Mikey wrote:the straw that brought the camels back

I look at it this way,

If society needs protesters to tell them only a Goddamn retard would stand for being charged Five bucks a pop to make a withdrawal, then douse your campfires. We are fucked beyond all repair it that was the case.

It IS a big win for OWS. They just had nothing to do with it.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.

The reason? The barricades police have set up...

The police have consistently overreacted. Blaming people exercising their legitimate 1st Amendment rights for the actions of the NYPD is nothing short of idiotic.

The owner cites both as being responsible the "people exercising their legitimate 1st Amendment rights ..." and the police.

He has a point. The police overreacted ? So the protestors have always cooperated, moved off streets they weren't supposed to be on ? Didn't block traffic so the rest of the 99% who have jobs and do them can get to and from work to live their life ? Their rights don't matter I guess.

88 wrote: If banging on a plastic bucket with a stick was successful in changing corporate behavior, the chimps at the Columbus Zoo would have completely different living conditions, I suspect.

:)

88 wrote:And damn you DiS, I was planning to give OWS credit for the Netfix reversal.

The Netflix fee hike was the cause of OWS. Shun-ins couldn't afford to stay at home having gay foreign language films and Mystery Science Theatre 3000 episodes streamed to them and they took to the streets.

88 wrote:The law provides that you cannot camp out in an urban park with no toilet facilities. Does the First Amendment give you the right to shit on public property? Educamate me.

Zuccotti Park is private property.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.

The reason? The barricades police have set up...

The police have consistently overreacted. Blaming people exercising their legitimate 1st Amendment rights for the actions of the NYPD is nothing short of idiotic.

So what part of the 1st Amendment covers this felony stupidity?

Diego in Seattle wrote:

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.

The reason? The barricades police have set up...

The police have consistently overreacted. Blaming people exercising their legitimate 1st Amendment rights for the actions of the NYPD is nothing short of idiotic.

So what part of the 1st Amendment covers this felony stupidity?

What part of Denver is in NYC?

Van wrote:

Mikey wrote:the straw that brought the camels back

Forgot this one.

Mikey wrote:for all intensive purposes

88 wrote:...break the law?

Laws are broken every day in your country.

By white dudes in dreadlocks and stock traitors* in suits.

You want to multiply the OWS movement ten-fold? Start being selective about enforcement like you propose.


* NOT a typo

Martyred wrote:
By white dudes in dreadlocks and stock traitors* in suits.

* NOT a typo

Let's have fun with mondegreens!

mvscal wrote:

Van wrote:

Mikey wrote:the straw that brought the camels back

Forgot this one.

Mikey wrote:for all intensive purposes

Nah, that's a common one that's been bandied about on this board for a long period of time, along with old saws like "self of steam."

I'd never heard "the straw that brought the camels back," which made me laugh out loud.

Van wrote:I'd never heard "the straw that brought the camels back," which made me laugh out loud.

I think I heard Archie say that to Meathead one time.

Van wrote:Nah, that's a common one that's been bandied about on this board for a long period of time, along with old saws like "self of steam."

Maybe. I never take anyone's intelligence for granite around here.

Irregardless, I could care less.

Van wrote: I'd never heard "the straw that brought the camels back," which made me laugh out loud.

Can't say nobody's ever used that before but it pretty much just popped into my head when I was using the original version in my post. Cracked me up too.

Definitely wouldn't put it past Aaaahchie.

BSmack wrote:

Truman wrote:Well, there's that, B...

But I'm thinking that the virtual run on the bank after they announced their new fee structure might've had just a bit more to do with it. But that's just me. I'm only in the industry. But if it makes you feel better to give props to OWS, then by all means, be my guest.

Who the fuck do you think was behind the run on big banks? Congress? CEOs? Or maybe the near constant drumbeat of OWS and affiliated groups that got the ball rolling?

Take some time Tru. Think about it.

Oh, I thought about it... October 1st, the day the Durbin amendment kicked in. All things considered, you have to be trolling.

In case you care, the Durbin amendment applies to debit card issuing banks with assets over $10 billion – approximately the top 100 banks in the country. In essence, Durbin capped big bank PIN debit interchange rates at 0.05% + $0.22, a significant decrease from the 0.76% + $0.16 to 0.95% + $0.29 range that your local credit union still enjoys on PIN debit transactions run through the various debit networks.

In plain terms, a $20 transaction that might have earned a big bank $0.48 in fees has now been capped at $0.23. In an industry whose profits are determined by basis points (tenths of a percent) and pennies - that's a whole bunch of pennies.

The number one bank card in America is a Visa debit card. Guess which bank issues the most Visa debit cards, and currently enjoys a 25% share of the market? That’s about 100 million cards, 4 billion annual transactions, and $80 billion in sales.

Do the math. Even at the lowest old PIN debit interchange rate (applied mostly to pay-at-the-pump and supermarket transactions), BOA would still stand to lose about $88 million in annual debit card fees. Care to explain a $100 million-$500 million shortfall in revenues to your shareholders, B?

Can’t say I blame BOA for trying to recoup this shortfall through monthly consumer card fees – but that doesn’t make me sympathetic. As a BOA account holder since 1989, I decided I had better use of my $60 annual indignation than BOA did – and closed my account. As did LOTS of other folks I know. So I’m gonna have to call “bullshit” on you and your link, and that a little band of maggot-infested, fly-blown anarchists had anything to do with BOA’s decision to yank their fees. They’ll figure out another way to recoup their lost revenues. After all: Banks ARE smarter than Dick Durbin and Congress.

*Edit - Only 20% of merchants accept PIN debit. Regardless, it is still a sizable chunk of cayshe legislated into ether...

Van wrote:

mvscal wrote:Forgot this one.

Mikey wrote:for all intensive purposes

Nah, that's a common one that's been bandied about on this board for a long period of time, along with old saws like "self of steam."

Credit where it's due. Shoalzie started that one. I just brought it up relatively recently.

I'd never heard "the straw that brought the camels back," which made me laugh out loud.

I don't think I've seen that one on this board before.

What would have been even funnier, given the context: the straw that bought the camel's back.

Terry in Crapchester wrote: Credit where it's due. Shoalzie started that one. I just brought it up relatively recently.

It was all a roost to make people think he was an inbred idiot.


Jeebeez, maybe we should just start calling those abuses "shoalzies."

Dinsdale wrote:Jeebeez, maybe we should just start calling those abuses "shoalzies."

I thought that was when you're molesting your cousin.