The exemption should still be allowed, as it led to great banking innovations for startups.
The exemptees just need to be fucking careful with this advanced mode of operation.
The exemptees just need to be fucking careful with this advanced mode of operation.
And the pace of innovation in US banking was very slow, essentially stalled, for a generation from the consumer's POV
Here in Aotearoa we have ATMs on every street corner since the 1980s. All but the tiniest traders have had pos electronic transactions for nearly thirty years
Other countries are even more advanced (our banks are all like yous now, consumers now viewed as pests)
I want innovation in customer services, but what we get is innovations in financial engineering.
May they all rot...
The exemptees just need to be f**ing careful with this advanced mode of operation.”
This sounds tongue in cheek I know, but SVB’s situation has created real world consequences even for me, someone who has no money tied up with them. My go-to for bonded cellular networks (so i can run a livestream for my employer, a small tech start up) had to tell all of us who use them to pause payments immediately today as this unfolded and are not taking new rentals in the meantime. They’re literally not getting paid right now. This is not a holding pattern that can last long and is highly disruptive for them and, consequentially, me. A video content guy at a small start up on nearly the other side of the country.
How many times will we get burned until we learned that banks will not be careful if they are given an opportunity to not be.
You mean “need to have sheer luck in their gambling”.
Tails, taxpayers bail us out
> Tails, taxpayers bail us out
You're doing to have to define "bail us out".
SVB's shareholders got wiped out.
We asked the banker what would happen if we were robbed. He said he'd just write a new one. The thief couldn't do anything with it, as it was all on name only, and the extremely low daily volume of cheques in use would mean cashing it would stand out like a sore thumb.
https://www.helgilibrary.com/charts/what-country-has-the-mos...
... now the transoceanic cable, on the other hand, that was... anemic, we'll say.
Meanwhile, how close is the US to making Chip-and-PIN a thing?
And who still uses cheques these days?!
> And who still uses cheques these days?!
US uses them for business-to-customer payments, especially unsolicited ones, because we don't want to give random businesses we don't know our bank account numbers.
There's no inherent information risk to giving out an account number that justifies an outdated paper-based system. Especially when one considers the accompanying fraud risk thereof.
The instant I moved to Europe, I realized just how far behind consumer banking is in the US. It's pitiful.
Yes, as well as the routing number.
> There's no inherent information risk to giving out an account number …
Of _course_ there is. In the US, the account + routing number is sufficient to perform a ACH transfer, write checks against that account, etc.
The risk is enormous.
> Especially when one considers the accompanying fraud risk thereof.
I’m assuming you misunderstood the risk when you wrote the above. It is, in fact, extremely high.
Not in Europe it's not, which is monodeldiablo's point: there's no inherent risk to giving out your account number. It's only the primitive US system which makes it a risk.
So… how does writing a check remove this risk then? That was the original point, that writing a check is safer than giving out your account number.
You can pay people instantly by refunding their debit cards - that's how Uber drivers can get paid - but it's not free, which is why most transfers don't go that way.
https://ir.svb.com/financials/sec-filings/default.aspx
The depositors will get their money back, with perhaps a small delay. Which is more than you can say for scams like cryptocurrency.
Play stupid games, win 70 cents on your dollar.