quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

Banking is a business, just like any other publicly held business, it is there to make money for its shareholders.  It's not operating solely as a public service to save consumers (who are too dumb to shop around) money.  I have yet to see a robot who transfers the money in and takes the reciepts out an an ATM machine.  I know it's not like that where I live.

quote:

some banks are charging teller fees if you actually wish to speak to a real person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy


The ATM costs money to run, advertise, keep up etc. I understand banks wanting to re-coupe that and I do not begrudge them. As for the robot argument, no bank should be required to have a teller on duty so someone can come in at 3:47 in the morning and withdrawal 20 bucks for a doughnut jones or what have you.

There is a simple way around these fees...

Use your own bank's or credit union's ATM or one who networks your bank or credit union. That way, Bank of America doesn't get your $3.00.

This is a classic example of caveat emptor.  The bottom line is that ATM machines are modern convinces. No won is being forced to use them at gun point and certainly, no one is being forced to use a Bank of America ATM.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

quote:

some banks are charging teller fees if you actually wish to speak to a real person.

Yes, my bank does that, if you call them and request a money transfer, but in order to get to that point you have shown that you are: unable to transfer your money via the telephone, unable to manage the intracacies of filling out a  withdrawal and deposit slip or unable to manage your account through their on-line service.  How much easier can they possibly make it? 

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

      Thompson:  Be glad the checks weren't for over a certain (but not to be revealed) dollar amount.  I tried to cash a payroll check drawn on their bank once, and was told I would have to take it to the particular branch where the account was based so they could compare signatures on the card.  Given that I had over 170 hours on that two week period, and the branch in question was on the other side of 100 miles of LA traffic late on a Friday, I think my reaction was remarkably restrained (and the security guard was intelligent enough to believe me when I told him he wasn't paid well enough to do anything but go sit his ass down). 

   I now do business with a very nice local bank.  And no matter how far I may be from one of their ATM's, BofA NEVER gets my business.

quote:

My point was that the bank saves a ton of money by having ATM robots dispense money as opposed to flesh and blood tellers that they have to pay and who get to go home at night.

quote:

ORIGINAL: happypervert

quote:

My point was that the bank saves a ton of money by having ATM robots dispense money as opposed to flesh and blood tellers that they have to pay and who get to go home at night.

Unfortunately, you are talking from an intuitive guess at how it works but you obviously have no experience in the banking industry; I do, and it didn't work that way.

Back when ATMs were first installed the industry thought it would be a great labor saving and cost cutting device, but they realized very little savings at all. What happened instead was something called "transaction inflation" -- instead of going to a teller to get $100, people go the a machine 5 times getting $20 each. Furthermore, that does nothing for people making deposits -- almost nobody uses ATMs for deposits. Yet others ignore the machines altogether -- for example, a lot of old folks LIKE going to the bank and will do so more than once per week just for a nice little chat with that teller because she is always so nice. As a matter of fact, with some customers opting for machines the reduction in crowds encouraged them to visit MORE!

So, this huge cost saving you claim is just a figment of your imagination.