banks - Gawker

posts about #banks more →
Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
Another Bank Makes Billions. Yay?
Kiss The Ring: Bank Of America Takes Mercy On Their Pitiful, Ant-Like, Broke Customers
Big Banks Are Back!
Black People Cleaning Up White Guys' Messy Citi
Maureen Dowd and Thomas Friedman Play Make-Believe
Obama Money-Fixer To Fire Actual Maverick
Banks Now Just Trying Every Possible Ad
WaMu: We're All Better Now

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Smitros
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
I'm suspecting the recipients do not include the Mother Jones Investigative Reporting Fund.
Reply

Smitros was starred Smitros was unstarred

hamburgerhotdog
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
They've always had a whole department for charitable giving - even back when I worked there round 2000-ish. This is old news.
Reply

hamburgerhotdog was starred hamburgerhotdog was unstarred

hamburgerhotdog
10/13/09

@hamburgerhotdog: You also assume that Goldman execs do not donate to charity but provide no backup on that assumption. Kinda crummy reporting here, kid.
Reply

hamburgerhotdog was starred hamburgerhotdog was unstarred

If_I_Had_a_Poodle
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
goldman giveth and goldman taketh
Reply

If_I_Had_a_Poodle was starred

son of spam
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
They screwed up by even announcing it as part of the bonus discussion. Certain companies "encourage" senior employees to support specific charities - ever heard of United Way? - but this just makes them look Machiavellian, ham-handed, and greedy.
Reply

son of spam was starred son of spam was unstarred

Unsolicited Advice
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
This is a no-win situation, PR-wise. Just give the money away. Don't issue a press release, put your middle fingers up, and try to be less successful in a society constructed out of unadulterated envy.
Reply

Unsolicited Advice was starred

nycbizbooks
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
Another ignorant rookie form Gawker. Call them what you want, but saying they're not known for philanthropy is just saying that YOU haven't bothered to investigate such. Blogger equals reporter? Not in this case.

http://www.portfolio.com/executives/features/2007/12/17/Goldman-Sachs-Foundations/
Reply

Phyllis Nefler promoted this comment hamburgerhotdog approved this comment nycbizbooks was starred nycbizbooks was unstarred

atlasfugged
10/13/09

In reply to Goldman Donations to Spark Massive Cognitive Dissonance
Even if you believe Goldman is a "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money", you have to admit that $2.2B-3.3B going to charity is an unequivocally good thing, publicity stunt or not. But, because Goldman is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, you can be certain they have a team of quants trying to model the cost vs. benefit of any such donation. So, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Reply

raincoaster promoted this comment atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred

raincoaster
10/13/09

@atlasfugged: I don't know you, but I love you.
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

BettyCrocker
10/13/09

@atlasfugged: How many of the execs and their shellacked wives are going to be doing the white boy frug at parties at the Met and the Whitney this Christmas?

Not that the Met and the Whitney should turn down the cash on principle. But the very thought of those aging frat-tards shambling around a place that they throw money at, yet don't care about and can't possibly understand makes me want to put Krazy Glue on the toilet seats.
Reply

BettyCrocker was starred BettyCrocker was unstarred

Motoko Kusanagi
10/13/09

@atlasfugged: Unless the charities themselves are equally corrupt, which is quite likely.
Reply

Motoko Kusanagi was starred Motoko Kusanagi was unstarred

atlasfugged
10/13/09

@raincoaster: Please direct all love letters to Matt Taibbi who came up with that beautifully hideous characterization.
Reply

atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred

Cheap Shot
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
My bank made a killing from me so this post is a slap of reality for me. We're talking about a $39 overdraft fee even it's for $2. The key is keeping a good amount in your savings.
Let's see what Chase tries to pull next.
Reply

Cheap Shot was starred Cheap Shot was unstarred

Magister
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
The "Consumer Protection Agency" proposed by Obama and briefly mentioned in the article would require consent for an overdraft, consumer notification at checkout and it'd redefine an overdraft as a loan, which would cap it at a percentage. (According to media reports).

Chris Dodd, chair of Senate Banking has written to the Federal Reserve asking that people be able to opt-in or opt-out of overdraft protection and he says that if the Fed doesn't change the rules, he will.
Reply

Edited by Magister at 08/10/09 10:47 AM Magister was starred Magister was unstarred

jeweltones
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
My favorite new fee is the $14.95 I just got charged by Bunch of Assholes. "Maintenance" fee because I deposited money more than 3 times last month into my savings account. I did this all by myself, online. My savings account gained an awesome $2.00 and I paid $14.95 for it.
Also, when BofA runs those cute coffee-store ads where you buy your coffee and presto, it appears in your easy-peasy online bank statement, HORSE SHIT. They regularly post "pending items" to my account, only to delete them for several days and leave me with a false balance. So if you really want to track your spending, break out your check register and document everything, including all the fees and hidden costs.
Reply

DahlELama promoted this comment jeweltones was starred jeweltones was unstarred

oneinsixbillion
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
It's bullshit too because most banks will honor your largest payment first, then your smaller ones. So, say you have $400. You make a a $398 purchase, a $2 purchase, a $5 purchase and a $10 purchase, they'll start with the largest one, so you get hit with an overdraft fee on everything after the first large purchase. If they did it the other way, you'd only get one overdraft fee, since you could cover the $17 of the smaller three purhcases. Anyway, if the bank doesn't want to take a risk in covering your overdraft, here's an idea, DONT LET ME OVERDRAFT. "Card denied" would not be so hard to program into ATMs and card machines.
Reply

skt.smth promoted this comment oneinsixbillion was starred oneinsixbillion was unstarred

skt.smth
08/10/09

@oneinsixbillion: Well I mean, that's what banks used to do. Growing up in a not-so-well-off household, there was routine talk of bounced checks and things like that. They don't need to program the ATMs to do this, because ATMs used to do it all the time before the banks discovered the overdraft revenue stream.
Reply

skt.smth was starred skt.smth was unstarred

badasscat
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
So, what ever happened to keeping track of how much money you have and, you know, not spending money that isn't yours?
After all, that's what credit cards are for!
Reply

badasscat was starred badasscat was unstarred

jerusalemcricket
08/10/09

@badasscat: Amen. I've had to live paycheck to paycheck, and I've never bounced a check or gotten an overdraft fee in my life. The guy who wrote the letter said he "thought" the landlord had cashed the check, and he had "quite a bit of money left over"? I'm not saying the banks aren't shady and that the fees aren't ridiculous, but is it so hard to keep a balanced checkbook? There's no excuse for not keeping track of what must have been several hundred dollars.
Reply

pumpkinsoup promoted this comment jerusalemcricket was starred jerusalemcricket was unstarred

pumpkinsoup
08/10/09

@jerusalemcricket: Here's the thing. I also live paycheck to paycheck and therefore very mindful of keeping track of my purchases, not overdrawing, etc. and for that reason I check my bank balance via their online banking site everyday. However, I also recently ran into the trap of overdrawing against my so-called "available balance."

This what happened. I bought a comforter at Target, paid for it with my Chase debit card. Saw another one at a competing store I liked better. Returned comforter at Target and had $85 credited toward my checking via my debit card. Went home, logged onto my account, saw that even though said credit was listed as pending, the $85 was added to my balance. Thinking I had enough funds to cover my car payment, I logged onto Carmax and paid my bill.

Well, the next morning I was in for quite a shock when my car payment had put me in the red. There was my $85 Target credit -- still pending, still credited toward my balance, yet my Carmax payment had cleared and there was a negative $14 in the column next to it. Hello $39 overdraft charge.

Two lessons: Now I know not to count pending payments until they are cleared, which according to Chase's customer service can take up to 48 hours. And to just pay cash, because then I could have gotten cash back, which I could have spent right away. However, as I said here in a different comment, Chase is now going to charge me an $8 maintenance fee unless I use their debit card at least 4 times a month.
All I'm saying, even though I consider myself a careful consumer I was duped. It happens, and I think large banks like Chase are purposely trying to mislead their customers.
Reply

Edited by pumpkinsoup at 08/10/09 1:43 PM pumpkinsoup was starred pumpkinsoup was unstarred

pumpkinsoup
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
I just found out our Chase savings account is charging us $3 every time we withdraw money from an ATM. I somehow missed that bit of fine print and got a real shock when I got our last bank statement. We opened that account 12 years ago when we got married as a place to keep our spending or "mad money" with a portion of our paychecks going into that account. So much for savings. Now we're going to have to close that account and pool our money in one single checking account. However, I also just found out that our checking account will be charging us an $8 monthly fee unless we use their debit card at least 4 times a month. I did see the fine print on that notice, and I do use a debit card regularly, but there are still people (like my mom) who cling to using cash for all her store purchases and pays her bills with those old-fashioned things called checks. She doesn't trust debit cards and I kinda see her point.
Reply

Edited by pumpkinsoup at 08/10/09 3:49 AM pumpkinsoup was starred pumpkinsoup was unstarred

skt.smth
08/10/09

@pumpkinsoup: Personal finance-related shit is one of the things I love about Korea vs. the US. Here, you are issued a bank book. When you use the bank book to withdraw money at an ATM (there is a special slot for it), all of your transactions are printed onto it by the machine at the same time. If you run out of money, your shit is denied, plain and simple. For paying bills, all the companies use the same scan-able billing forms. You just put them into a machine, which tallies up the various amounts and routes payments to the bank accounts of each biller. Of course, because American institutions always have to be "independent," even when doing their own non-standard shit is really obnoxious and annoying, people are forced to mail in payments, or navigate all the separate websites of their billers, or use their bank's billpay system, which usually consists of the bank cutting a check to the biller for you so it still takes days for the transaction to occur. It's bullshit, and the system really needs to be regulated and streamlined so it's easier for customers.
Reply

skt.smth was starred skt.smth was unstarred

pony_express
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
Personally, this guy is my hero.
Reply

The Cajun Boy promoted this comment Edited by pony_express at 08/10/09 3:21 AM pony_express was starred pony_express was unstarred

BaldwinPeriphetes
08/10/09

In reply to Banks Getting Back in the Black With Ridiculous Overdraft Fees
Interestingly, three of the "big four" banks in Australia have now agreed to dump overdraft fees. "Evil bank fees" have been a staple of current affairs shows and talking heads here for years, but the government has been making noises about doing something about bank fees so they've clearly decided to pre-empt it (with the benefit of some good publicity, particularly for the first bank to move). Money for nothing, overdraft fees, atm usage fees, all that jazz. The Australian personal banking market is a cartel, so there's no competition that doesn't have the fees... should have been slapped down as anti-competitive years ago.
Reply

The Cajun Boy promoted this comment BaldwinPeriphetes was starred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment