Stunning Number: Big Banks set to lose 70,000 accounts today

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


Hmmm.....makes sense. I guess I'll reserve judgement on what affect this ultimately has until I see some numbers in the coming weeks. The 650k number previously quoted, while large, is really just a drop in the bucket for these large corporations. If this is intended to cripple the big banks, that number will have to come up considerably.

OK. finally found a percentage.

According to the Credit Union National Association, its members have added over 650,000 new customers since the movement started, which equals about 1 percent of the country’s total bank accounts.

Source.

I have a feeling one percent is not a significant number to banks like B of A, especially when it comes to the type of accounts being transferred. I have a feeling multi-million dollar corporate accounts aren't the one's moving.

Actually they lost 650,000 totaling 4.5 billion in accounts:

money.cnn.com...

Using fractional reserve banking, this means they wont be able to do 45 billion dollars worth of business lending. haha. Sucks for them.

Originally posted by 2NDAR
The 650k number previously quoted, while large, is really just a drop in the bucket for these large corporations. If this is intended to cripple the big banks, that number will have to come up considerably.

650,000 account closures/transfers

@ $1 ea. == $650,000

@ $10 ea. == $6,500,000 million

@ $100 ea. == $65,000,000

@ $1000 ea. == $650,000,000

@ $10,000 ea. == $6,500,000,000 billion

@ $100,000 ea. == $65,000,000,000

@ $1,000,000 ea. == $650,000,000,000

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


That's exactly what I'm thinking. If these accounts are indeed primarily personal accounts instead of business accounts, that number is going to have to be much higher to have a similar affect. Just my two cents.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Actually they lost 650,000 totaling 4.5 billion in accounts:

money.cnn.com...

Using fractional reserve banking, this means they wont be able to do 45 billion dollars worth of business lending. haha. Sucks for them.

45 billion? Really?

Total Assets of U.S. Commercial Banks for Oct 26, 2011: 12,444.7 billion dollars

Source.

So 4.5 billion dollars versus 12.4 trillion dollars. Yup, that'll hurt considerably!

reply to post by Annie Mossity


Nice breakdown. I'd like to know the total sum. Sadly, I don't think these banks will ever divulge that kind of information to the public.

While the 650,000 closed accounts may be a measly 1% of the total bank accounts, If through telling their friends/family how much happier they are with a credit union people can get even 1 person each to switch then we have what they call Exponential Growth. 1% becomes 2%, 2% becomes 4%, 4% becomes 8%, then 16,32,64 etc..

We didn't get into this mess over night and We will not get out over night but it's a start.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II

Total Assets of U.S. Commercial Banks for Oct 26, 2011: 12,444.7 billion dollars

Source.

So 4.5 billion dollars versus 12.4 trillion dollars. Yup, that'll hurt considerably!

12,444.7 BILLION

Brought down to

12,440.2 BILLION

Devastating.

Of course it comes back to them one way or another.

Expect branch closures and layoffs in high numbers soon to offset the localized losses and prevent any impact in this year's bonuses at the corporate levels.

Congratulations for sending more working class people into unemployment and poverty.

Just in time for Christmas.

Well done.

Originally posted by Adamanteus
While the 650,000 closed accounts may be a measly 1% of the total bank accounts, If through telling their friends/family how much happier they are with a credit union people can get even 1 person each to switch then we have what they call Exponential Growth. 1% becomes 2%, 2% becomes 4%, 4% becomes 8%, then 16,32,64 etc..

We didn't get into this mess over night and We will not get out over night but it's a start.

Exactly! Rather than doing the "mission completed" dance today, keep the word moving. Too many people are celebrating this extremely minor victory without knowing how little was actually accomplished, such as this thread displays.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


I think that this is good idea. If legislator/regulator listen more to the banks then to the public, public have to influence the banks directly. 4 billions will hurt enough to make a point without crushing the thing down. And since accounts simply drift to other banks people who might be fired will be needed in places the accounts will drift to.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


Actually Fractured, that 4.5 billion will make jobs in the credit union sector. That money didn't just disappear as happens in the stock market, it moved over.

I know some people that have written checks to open new accounts.

They are leaving .99 in the old accounts

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


I'll bet you now, the credit unions will do very little hiring.

Not enough to offset the lost low end banking jobs resulting from this, not by even 10% ultimately.

Care to make a substantial wager?

Yep go right ahead and move all those accounts and end up doing what?

Creating the same thing again.

Golf clap.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


I don't think they will be arrested. It's the free market at work, "I am dipleased with your busines, I shall take my capital elsewhere."
It happens every day.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


Sorry. I don't bet online, especially with strangers on a conspiracy forum.

I personally see this as a positive sign of Americans finally waking up to what commercial banking is. So far it's small, but hopefully it grows as more and more people see the benefits of doing business with credit unions. I learned this lesson back in the 80's and have not used a commercial bank since.

Originally posted by neo96
Yep go right ahead and move all those accounts and end up doing what?

Creating the same thing again.
Golf clap.

Well if people took their money from BoA,Chase and SunTrust and moved them to Credit union A,B and C then I could see the problem but if they are moving them to credit union A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K, etc.. all the way to Z then I can see the benefits.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


I don't blame you... and just to be clear, I think you and I can agree when it comes to things like this, its always the hard working underpaid little guys and gals at these big banks that get hurt by this, those at the top will not be impacted, they will make cuts and adjustments buy into credit unions they don't already own or influence, or leverage to own them one way or another.

Sorry, for the realism... The sentiment is great, it just completely missed the target and hit the wrong people here... Ultimately.

In my opinion, of course.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


I feel businesses, including banks, here in the US should have to succeed or fail on their own merits; and nobody should be guaranteed a job but also succeed or fail on their own merits. That is why I was opposed to all of these government bailouts Bush and Obama have been handing out. If the lower employees in a bank are let go because the bank is losing customers, then so be it. I've lost a few of my jobs in the past due to the same factors. But I've always found another job to replace it.