Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Going back to a cash economy?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    saa
    Registered Users Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭saa


    irelandrover wrote: »
    I don't understand. How is it screwing money out of people to make them pay for services they use?

    You're not just paying for the cost of the service you're paying for their other activities. I don't think its screwing people over but I do think there should be a sliding scale of fee's.


  • Options
    #63
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    Kensington wrote: »
    No it's not what they are supposed to do at all! You cannot provide something at a loss indefinitely.

    You also can't charge a higher price than the competitors for a worse product and get away with it indefinitely. Is it not as simple as having a good business model here? Then don't price yourself out of the market and try and screw the customer.

    Kensington wrote: »
    The banks should never have allowed "free banking" take hold to the extent it did, allowing it to become the "standard offering" and people getting used to banking for nothing, by relying on a wobbly income source (at best) to cover losses incurred elsewhere. That income source has now plummeted and they now have no way of covering the day to day cost of providing banking facilities.

    There is no such thing as 'free banking' or "banking for nothing". They factor the 'free banking' into the price of their personal loans, mortgages, credit card rates and more recently 0% interest rate on a current account. When you have a current account with a bank you provide them with all the cross selling opportunities for these products.

    Kensington wrote: »
    Either we pay the day-to-day cost of our banking or there'll be another few billion heading into the banks.

    I will pay the cost of my day to day banking no problem, I'll just be paying it with Ulster Bank.


  • Options
    #64
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,568 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Sweden is actually moving away from cash COMPLETELY if they can!
    Sweden moving towards cashless economy

    Sweden was the first European country to introduce bank notes in 1661. Now it's come farther than most on the path toward getting rid of them.

    "I can't see why we should be printing bank notes at all anymore," says Bjoern Ulvaeus, former member of 1970's pop group ABBA, and a vocal proponent for a world without cash.

    The contours of such a society are starting to take shape in this high-tech nation, frustrating those who prefer coins and bills over digital money.

    In most Swedish cities, public buses don't accept cash; tickets are prepaid or purchased with a cell phone text message. A small but growing number of businesses only take cards, and some bank offices — which make money on electronic transactions — have stopped handling cash altogether.
    More reading here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57399610/sweden-moving-towards-cashless-economy/


  • Options
    #65
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,381 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RachaelVO wrote: »
    Good aul Irish bankers, it's no coincidence that bankers rhymes with wankers

    Well it is a coincidence.. It just happens to be fitting.


  • Options
    #66
    Kensington
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,683 ✭✭✭Kensington


    tunedout wrote: »
    You also can't charge a higher price than the competitors for a worse product and get away with it indefinitely. Is it not as simple as having a good business model here? Then don't price yourself out of the market and try and screw the customer.

    There is no such thing as 'free banking' or "banking for nothing". They factor the 'free banking' into the price of their personal loans, mortgages, credit card rates and more recently 0% interest rate on a current account. When you have a current account with a bank you provide them with all the cross selling opportunities for these products.

    I will pay the cost of my day to day banking no problem, I'll just be paying it with Ulster Bank.


    They don't factor it in. Ten years ago you paid fees and lending rates were still the same.

    What happened was the banks tried to get more customers for themselves - they all phased out transaction and quarterly fees to consumers in an attempt to remain competitive and covered it on the back of the booming lending market (people signing up to multiple credit cards, mortgages for obscene amounts of money, higher interest rates, substantial car and holiday loans). The lending market has since collapsed and they are no longer receiving the revenue required to cover the costs of day to day banking.

    FWIW: Ulster Bank are reportedly preparing to introduce transaction charges and quarterly fees shortly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    Kensington wrote: »
    They don't factor it in. Ten years ago you paid fees and lending rates were still the same.

    What happened was the banks tried to get more customers for themselves - they all phased out transaction and quarterly fees to consumers in an attempt to remain competitive and covered it on the back of the booming lending market (people signing up to multiple credit cards, mortgages for obscene amounts of money, higher interest rates, substantial car and holiday loans). The lending market has since collapsed and they are no longer receiving the revenue required to cover the costs of day to day banking.

    FWIW: Ulster Bank are reportedly preparing to introduce transaction charges shortly.

    But you're contradicting yourself, on one hand you are disagreeing with me and saying they don't factor it in to the prices of loans credit cards etc, but then you go straight on to say the banks were trying to get more customers so they offered a free current account and covered it using the lending market. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Is it true about Ulster Bank? I'll take your word if you have internal info or whatever but would be nice to see something written. Do you have a link?


  • Options
    #68
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,568 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    tunedout wrote: »
    But you're contradicting yourself, on one hand you are disagreeing with me and saying they don't factor it in to the prices of loans credit cards etc, but then you go straight on to say the banks were trying to get more customers so they offered a free current account and covered it using the lending market. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Is it true about Ulster Bank? I'll take your word if you have internal info or whatever but would be nice to see something written. Do you have a link?

    Just on info regarding a Ulster personal account, here is a PDF: http://www.ulsterbank.com/documents/NI/Guide_to_Personal_Account_Fees_Interest.pdf


  • Options
    #69
    bnt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,957 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    the groutch wrote: »
    A bank? Charging fees? For providing a service???
    What has the world come to? :rolleyes:
    irelandrover wrote: »
    I don't understand. How is it screwing money out of people to make them pay for services they use?
    Because the bank has your money, and doesn't pay you interest on it? The money doesn't just sit there, a bank uses it to make more money for itself, by investing it or lending it out as e.g. mortgages. They have to pay interest when borrowing money from other banks, yet they get your money for negative interest.

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Options
    #70
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    Biggins wrote: »
    Just on info regarding a Ulster personal account, here is a PDF: http://www.ulsterbank.com/documents/NI/Guide_to_Personal_Account_Fees_Interest.pdf

    Thanks even Ulster Bank state themselves in this document that the reason they can provide free banking is due to
    a) Premium account options
    b) Overdraft rates
    c) Unpaid fees (on overdraft etc)

    Like I said no such thing as free banking, you're paying for it one way or another. Ulster Banks method just happens to be the better deal for me after AIB change their structure.


    "As long as you stay in credit or within your agreed overdraft limit, you can enjoy the
    services listed in section 3 of this leaflet without us making any separate charge.
    This is possible because our pricing structure allows us to charge for providing the
    account through the fees, charges and interest set out in sections 4, 9 and 10, and
    through setting the interest rates shown in sections 7 and 8 at a level which allows
    us to benefit from using any money (credit balance) you have in the account."


  • Options
    #71
    Kensington
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,683 ✭✭✭Kensington


    Apologies, I guess I am contradicting myself in a way, increased overall lending allowed them to pass on savings, that is true.
    However there were other factors involved like better ability to invest the money held in deposits, a better return on these investments, reduced risk while out investing on the markets, easier access to credit for the banks themselves.

    Overall lending has fallen through the floor since then, the markets are in tatters, access to credit is much harder, deposits and returns are down, down, down. So what they implemented on the backshot of the upturn (no quarterly or transaction fees) they now have to roll back as a result of the downturn.

    RE: Ulster Bank, it was reported on RTE News a while back and there was also an article in The Sunday Times - unfortunately I can't link to or post the article here as their website is behind a paywall :(
    It's inevitable really, the UK Gov owns over 80% of their parent, RBS Group, who have seen substantial losses over the past few years.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    Actually AIB should not be allowed say "you can avoid fees by keeping €2500 in the account". There is no possible way now that you can avoid account fees with AIB. Just consider the opportunity cost of keeping €2500 in a 0% rate account as the maintenance fee (that is all it is).
    So everyone is paying it, in one form or another. (except for the exempt accounts).

    It's just a way of charging everyone whilst still being able to say 'you can avoid charges'..

    Is it any wonder AIB left a few months between their 0% interest rate announcement and account balances < €2500 pay fees announcement. People would have much more easily spotted exactly what was going on if they announced these together.

    Screwed if you do, screwed if you don't.


  • Options
    #73
    irelandrover
    Registered Users Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    bnt wrote: »
    Because the bank has your money, and doesn't pay you interest on it? The money doesn't just sit there, a bank uses it to make more money for itself, by investing it or lending it out as e.g. mortgages. They have to pay interest when borrowing money from other banks, yet they get your money for negative interest.

    The way I read it is if you leave 10 euro in your account then the bank do not make enough on this to justify your free fees. On leaving 2500 in your account the bank can make enough off this to cover your free fees.


  • Options
    #74
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    Kensington wrote: »
    Apologies, I guess I am contradicting myself in a way, increased overall lending allowed them to pass on savings, that is true.
    However there were other factors involved like better ability to invest the money held in deposits, a better return on these investments, reduced risk while out investing on the markets, easier access to credit for the banks themselves.

    Overall lending has fallen through the floor since then, the markets are in tatters, access to credit is much harder, deposits and returns are down, down, down. So what they implemented on the backshot of the upturn (no quarterly or transaction fees) they now have to roll back as a result of the downturn.

    Some good points you have raised here alright. I see what you'r saying about them not being able to do as much with your deposit now as they could previously. I thought the new 0% current account rate covered for that, but of course this may simply not be enough.


  • Options
    #75
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    irelandrover wrote: »
    The way I read it is if you leave 10 euro in your account then the bank do not make enough on this to justify your free fees. On leaving 2500 in your account the bank can make enough off this to cover your free fees.

    But on leaving €2499 in your account they can't seem to justify it atall?

    What about a guy with €10 in his current account and paying 10-15% on a 3k credit card. Do you think they can't justify his fees either?


  • Options
    #76
    irelandrover
    Registered Users Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    tunedout wrote: »
    But on leaving €2499 in your account they can't seem to justify it atall?

    What about a guy with €10 in his current account and paying 10-15% on a 3k credit card. Do you think they can't justify his fees either?

    They have to have a cut off point. 2500 is that cut off point. Special situations for special people does not work.


  • Options
    #77
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    irelandrover wrote: »
    They have to have a cut off point.

    No they don't.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sliding_scale_fees


  • Options
    #78
    irelandrover
    Registered Users Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    tunedout wrote: »
    No they don't.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sliding_scale_fees

    Even with a sliding scale there is still a point when someone gets free fees. If you don't agree with the fees then move to Ulster Bank. In a few months when Ulster Bank bring in fees too then move somewhere else.
    AIB need to raise money and charging customers for the service they use seems like the fairest way to me instead of getting another bailout.


  • Options
    #79
    phasers
    Registered Users Posts: 18,159 ✭✭✭✭phasers


    Heh, I still have a children's account with PTSB. Bastards charge me €10 a year for some reason though. Bastards.


  • Options
    #80
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Kensington wrote: »
    banking on property tax and VRT to keep the money flowing through the coffers so they could up social welfare rates and cut taxation. The arse fell out of the property and motor markets and now they've a huge shortfall to make up for but people haven gotten used to generous welfare and low rates of taxation.

    No, they have a shortfall on VRT and motor tax because THEY changed the tax system for the worse. Which they are reversing in the next budget.


  • Options
    #81
    tunedout
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 448 ✭✭tunedout


    irelandrover wrote: »
    Even with a sliding scale there is still a point when someone gets free fees.

    Semantics. Of course there is a point where no charges become charges and vice versa. The idea of a sliding scale is this point is more diluted and the method is fairer (so you are wrong saying their current strategy is the fairest way). It is not a case where one week you take €5 out of your bank account and now you are liable for full maintenance and transaction fees for an entire 3 months.
    irelandrover wrote: »
    If you don't agree with the fees then move to Ulster Bank. .

    Of course I'll move to Ulster Bank. Common sense and basic financial sanity would tell me to switch instantly.
    irelandrover wrote: »
    In a few months when Ulster Bank bring in fees too then move somewhere else.

    Are you planning on changing much else about the way Ulster Bank operates?

    In a few years, when Ulster Bank are still giving free fees (not free atall by the way just fairer), I will give myself a pat on the back having used my common sense and after making a sound financial decision.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Biggins wrote: »
    Sweden is actually moving away from cash COMPLETELY if they can!


    More reading here: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57399610/sweden-moving-towards-cashless-economy/

    And this is what worries me about it. It's in both the bank and the government's interests to be able to track your money. Doing so, they can track your movements, your purchases and gain more access to your affairs than I am happy to have them access.

    It also, yet again, marginalises the worst off in society.


  • Options
    #83
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    Millicent wrote: »
    It also, yet again, marginalises the worst off in society.

    Explain? Stopping people from doing cash nixers hardly counts as discrimination.


  • Options
    #84
    Africa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭Africa


    This is a really, really stupid move. Thousands are going to leave their bank and go to Ulster Bank. And rightfully so. I wont have to pay cause Ive a student account, but out of principle because this is a state owned and heavily bailed out bank laying off thousands of employees, there is no way I am staying with them if they are introducing fees like this. Never mind the fact that they are outrageous.

    Why doesnt our absolutely useless government do something about this...


  • Options
    #85
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    srsly78 wrote: »
    Explain? Stopping people from doing cash nixers hardly counts as discrimination.

    Em, because they are imposing charges only on people with less than €2,500 in their account who are less able to absorb additional charges. How would that not marginalise the less well off?

    Someone who is on minimum wage, even working a full-time week, will only have €1,384 passing into their account a month (40 hours a week for four weeks).

    Someone who is on the dole will only have access to €752 a month, not counting any other payments like rent allowance, etc.

    How, pray tell, are they reasonably expected to absorb an additional €100 a year while someone who is on a well-paid job does not have to?


  • Options
    #86
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    The context of your post was with regard to a cashless society. How would a cashless society be discriminatory?

    Note that other countries (without lousy banking sectors like ours) do not charge fees for current accounts. My UK current account even pays 1% interest. If the government WAS to mandate a cashless society, then I would hope they would also mandate free banking for everyone.


  • Options
    #87
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    srsly78 wrote: »
    The context of your post was with regard to a cashless society. How would a cashless society be discriminatory?

    Note that other countries (without lousy banking sectors like ours) do not charge fees for current accounts. My UK current account even pays 1% interest. If the government WAS to mandate a cashless society, then I would hope they would also mandate free banking for everyone.

    How many homeless people do you know with a bank account?


  • Options
    #88
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    There is absolutely nothing stopping them from opening a bank account. They also need an address to claim social welfare, and they don't seem to have any problems with that (use hostel address). They don't have bank accounts because they have no need.

    Do I sense a "&%^($&£*£%$£*(^ BANKERS" post coming up?


  • Options
    #89
    Africa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭Africa


    Millicent wrote: »
    How many homeless people do you know with a bank account?

    How many homeless do you truly know?


  • Options
    #90
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    srsly78 wrote: »
    There is absolutely nothing stopping them from opening a bank account. They also need an address to claim social welfare, and they don't seem to have any problems with that (use hostel address). They don't have bank accounts because they have no need.

    You may have missed my point. You need money to put into a bank account. Homeless people do not have money and rely on change from others. Take cash out of the market and how will the homeless fund themselves? And if they manage to put small amounts into a bank account (which by the way, the setting up of is much more difficult than you believe), how are they going to cope with €100 coming out of it a year?

    As to social welfare, there are plenty of homeless who have had difficulties attaining it and are in no man's land. Diaspora, as just one example.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Africa wrote: »
    How many homeless do you truly know?

    I'd say maybe a good handful. Why?


Advertisement