T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
788.2 | | PACKED::COLLIS::JACKSON | DCU fees: Vote | Thu Mar 24 1994 13:38 | 21 |
| I think the loss of 10,000 members in the past year is
a bit misleading, even though it certainly is true.
There are a number of factors:
- accounts that should have been addressed for years
(because of below minimum balances) that were not
- layoffs
- relationship banking
- competitive rates
Exactly how much of a factor the last three were is very
hard to say (the first was evidently a factor in over
7,000 accounts); there is anecdotal evidence but no hard
numbers.
At any rate, I continue to be disappointed in the choices
of my credit union and this is the most important factor
for me.
Collis
|
788.3 | | TOOK::MORRISON | Bob M. LKG1-3/A11 226-7570 | Thu Mar 24 1994 14:22 | 8 |
| > - accounts that should have been addressed for years
> (because of below minimum balances) that were not
Are you saying that at the start of 1993 there was a backlog of accounts in
which people has less than the minimum balance for DCU membership but DCU
had put off closing them, and DCU closed a large number of these accounts in
1993?
If so, that changes the picture quite a bit.
|
788.4 | | PACKED::COLLIS::JACKSON | DCU fees: Vote | Thu Mar 24 1994 15:18 | 9 |
|
>Are you saying that at the start of 1993 there was a backlog of accounts in
>which people has less than the minimum balance for DCU membership but DCU
>had put off closing them, and DCU closed a large number of these accounts in
>1993?
Yes. And finding out about them was like pulling teeth.
Collis
|
788.5 | | WLDBIL::KILGORE | Time to put the SHARE back in DCU! | Fri Mar 25 1994 08:10 | 13 |
|
Well, Collis, what did you expect?
I mean, it would look pretty silly, if not downright dishonest, for
management to use a lot of small, costly, "abusive" accounts as a
justification for the "fairness" of Relationship Banking, and then
turn around and admit that a huge number of those accounts were a
result of less than optimal bookkeeping. Geez, members might get the
notion that management and all those qualified, financial-type
directors missed a really obvious problem; worse yet, they might get
the notion that all those "abusive" accounts really didn't cost enough
to raise a flag a long time ago.
|
788.6 | | PACKED::COLLIS::JACKSON | DCU fees: Vote | Fri Mar 25 1994 10:10 | 1 |
| I expect truth, honesty and fairness.
|
788.7 | On the former decline in membership | CADSYS::RITCHIE | Elaine Kokernak Ritchie, 225-4199 | Thu Aug 31 1995 18:11 | 12 |
| In note 924.11 on July 27, 1995, I noted:
>> And...for the first time in a very long time, DCU gained more members than we
>> lost for the month.
This was as of the end of June. This upward trend continued during the month of
July, with a net gain of nearly 100 members.
It is unfortunate that we have had to lure people back after scaring them away.
But it is obvious that, with proper management, it's not that hard to do!
Elaine
|
788.8 | It's the little things that count | MOLAR::DELBALSO | I (spade) my (dogface) | Thu Aug 31 1995 20:49 | 4 |
| FWIW, a good friend of mine who voluntarily left DIGITAL and DCU two
years ago, just rejoined DCU solely on the basis of there being a
convenient ATM now at Cotton Road.
|