Comments on: Bank Analyst Doesn’t Believe Customer Service is Worth It

By: Foo Schnickens@facebook

Foo Schnickens@facebook — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 13:35:09 +0000

thats true in a sense but when i went to refinance my house i talked to a crap load of banks and ultimately the one i choose is the one with the friendliest guy i talked to..the one who explained the advantages of doing certain things and not doing certain things rather than the one who is just trying to sell me a loan..as far as bad customer service for everything else..i won’t use certain airlines certain cable providers or phone companies and no longer will buy computers if the people are from india or another country who i can’t understand or they can’t understand me on the phone…if they don’t care about their customers i have no use for them..and never use them again..

By: Dana Sands@facebook

Dana Sands@facebook — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:35:44 +0000

@stuffisthings When you (as a company) take out a loan, it’s a liability because you owe someone money. When you deposit your money at a bank, they have an obligation to give you that money back. They owe you money, hence, it’s a liability for them.

The other way to think about is that two entries are made. You hand them $100 cash so they increase their cash account by $100. For the balance sheet to stay in balance, there has to be either an off-setting decrease in another asset account or an increase in a liability account.

As far as the article is concerned. The products that a bank sells (or any products really) are solutions to problems. So, people who “waste time solving customer’s problems” ARE SELLING THEM PRODUCTS AND SERVICES YOU NIT WIT!

By: bitzy

bitzy — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:20:58 +0000

@Vicky Johnson@twitter I would be pretty cranky if I looked like a guy with an island full of dinosaurs and had no dinosaurs to speak of. Hmmm…someone needs to ask him what his amber investments look like…

By: stuffisthings

stuffisthings — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:23:43 +0000

@redheaded&crazy It’s because it can be withdrawn at any time. In the traditional model of banking, loans would then be the primary assets, as you’d want to have more money loaned out than you had on deposit (otherwise you wouldn’t be a bank, you’d be a free money warehouse).

It’s really just an accounting convention, but it’s sort of evocative when you think about it.

By: redheaded&crazy

redheaded&crazy — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:20:44 +0000

@stuffisthings Is that because people can just withdraw money at any time, or because it’s such a minimal amount, or because it has to be insured? why are they listed as liabilities?

I fucking hate banks.

By: stuffisthings

stuffisthings — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:57:36 +0000

He is right, in a way — consumer banking is such a tiny portion of how big banks make their money now that it’s almost peripheral. Back in the day the brick-and-mortars bank evolved into basically a producer of feedstock (mortgages) for the financial alchemy with which the real (fake) money was made. Nowadays even that is not necessary, since banks can just borrow unlimited amounts of money from the government at 0% interest to gamble with as they see fit.

(I’d also point out that when you deposit money in a bank, those deposits are listed on their balance sheet as liabilities, not assets.)

By: Vicky Johnson@twitter

Vicky Johnson@twitter — Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:27:20 +0000

He’s probably just cranky about being constantly mistaken for John Hammond.