Funny to see this pop up again (I'm the author). The year is now 2025 and I still use Chase as a personal bank and I'm now discovering new funny banking behaviors. I'll use this as a chance to share. :)
My company had an exit, I did well financially. This is not a secret. I'm extremely privileged and thankful for it. But as a result of this, I've used a private bank (or mix) for a number of years to store the vast majority of my financial assets (over 99.99% of all assets, I just did the math). An unfortunate property of private banks is they make it hard to do retail-like banking behaviors: depositing a quick check, pulling cash from an ATM, but ironically most importantly Zelle.
As such, I've kept my Chase personal accounts and use them as my retail bank: there are Chase branches everywhere, its easy to get to an ATM, and they give me easy access to Zelle! I didn't choose Chase specifically, I've just always used Chase for personal banking since I was in high school so I just kept using them for this.
Anyways, I tend to use my Chase account to pay a bunch of bills, just because it's more convenient (Zelle!). I have 3 active home construction projects, plus pay my CC, plus pretty much all other typical expenses (utilities, car payments, insurance, etc.). But I float the money in/out of the account as necessary to cover these. We do accounting of all these expenses at the private bank side, so its all tracked, but it settles within the last 24-48 hours via Chase.
Otherwise, I keep my Chase balance no more than a few thousand dollars.
This really wigs out automated systems at Chase. I get phone calls all the time (like, literally multiple times per week) saying "we noticed a large transfer into your account, we can help!" And I cheekily respond "refresh, it's back to zero!" And they're just confused. To be fair, I've explained the situation in detail to multiple people multiple times but it isn't clicking, so they keep calling me.
I now ignore the phone calls. Hope I don't regret that later lol.
chao- 1 days ago [-]
The fraud story is interesting, but something I had hoped would be addressed by the end of the post, wasn't. You wrote:
>Someone out there is probably mentally screaming at me "you fool!" at this point. With hindsight, I agree...
I was hoping the piece would end with what you would do now (or what should you have done) when Alex called you. Did I fail to understand something in the piece, and simply staying on the phone with Alex would have somehow avoided the fraud situation down the line? It doesn't seem so?
If I were to get such a call, today, my instincts would be to engage in the same "I'm fine" get-off-the-phone-fast actions. What is the alternative?
trillic 22 hours ago [-]
I would imagine this phone call's primary goal is trying to sell you higher margin financial products/services.
chao- 22 hours ago [-]
The way you phrase that, it sounds like these services are more advantageous to the bank, but possibly not to the account holder? If so, that goes against the tone of the article, where Mitchell implies (I think?) that he would have benefited more from speaking to Alex than the other way around.
xp84 16 hours ago [-]
This reminds me of a call I got from Schwab, which is my brokerage and one of my two banks where I keep checking accounts as well. I had a bunch of money that I had transferred in and stupidly, lazily, just left sitting around earning basically nothing. A nice guy called me one time and pointed out that I could be earning a few hundred bucks (maybe $800?) a month just by putting it all into a very safe money market fund. I did do that (and also got around to investing most of it at a later date).
I'm sure Schwab would rather me have my money in a mutual fund than have a bunch of cash, for the reasons the other commenter pointed out (more complex arrangements and a view of the bank as a partner rather than an interchangeable "money box" is 'stickier') but this was a real double win for me and one of the handful of stories I call upon when I am asked why I do most of my financial business with that company.
thimkerbell 7 hours ago [-]
Do they have anyone charged with security of mailings? Which seem tacky for such an organization.
aetherson 20 hours ago [-]
Not really, these are probably mutually beneficial. Having $35 million sitting in a cash account is, as Mitchell recalls in the article, pretty bad -- you're forgoing a lot of benefit for yourself.
What the bank is probably mainly trying to do is not "extract a higher margin" from you, but rather to "maintain your business." While Alex might not have recognized that a startup that took in a bunch of financing and plopped it into a cash account and then didn't do much with it is a customer who might disappear at any time, on some institutional level the bank is aware of it. They want you to regard them not as an interchangeable place that money sits, but as a valued partner who helps you do things with your money, and as a result you feel like it would both be a risk and a bother to extract all your money and go to some other bank.
robocat 20 hours ago [-]
> but rather to "maintain your business."
If banks want to keep a customer, you might think the most important thing is to just not annoy or screw over their customers.
Why do they continually treat good customers like shit? I'm in New Zealand and my bank just continuously pisses me off. I don't want any upsell (the arseholes tried to upsell insurance when I got a credit card the other day). I've got a six figure facility at risk (US:HELOC?) and my bank's security practices are shockingly bad (we're way too trusting in New Zealand). Little things like access blocked from oversees for a month (phone banking was theoretically available but I couldn't call international so it wasn't). Aside: I would like to block phone banking because it feels so insecure. I've been looking for a better bank, but I wouldn't get the same mortgage facility, soooooooo I'm kinda stuck (maybe that's the reason they don't need to be good to customers).
Mitchell kept getting annoyed by the bank's activities. They wanted him as a customer but their internal systems didn't know how to make it easy for him. Systems with negative impacts are too common even when you're the guy making them money...
I hand the cashier my credit card. She looks at me like I’ve just asked her to barter goats for spices. “Can I have your name?” she asks. “No,” I reply. “You can have my money.”
Then comes the phone number. Then the email. [] Finally, after this interrogation, I’ve spent $300 and she asks if I’d like a bag. Of course I want a fucking bag: “That’s 25 cents,” she says. Why can’t stores just build the damn bag into the price instead of insulting me at checkout? I’m not asking to be hand-fed grapes like Julius Caesar.
And God forbid I need to call anyone about anything. Changing an airline ticket? Calling my credit card company? Forget it. Every road leads to an automated voice system with the warmth of a Soviet switchboard.
astrange 20 hours ago [-]
It can also be to maintain the bank. They don't like it when accounts get several more million dollars in them than expected and sometimes it can be too much to handle.
sneak 21 hours ago [-]
Perhaps not directly/immediately - banks like others know that “relationships” drive long term repeat sales.
bigstrat2003 1 days ago [-]
I read the whole story and I'm still struggling to understand what you did wrong here. You indicated many times "I know, that was a mistake" (or similar phrases), but each time I was baffled because I saw no mistakes. It was your business, and you had every right to move around the funds within your account. What gives anyone at Chase the right to say diddly squat about how you manage your business' finances?
gspencley 24 hours ago [-]
I don't think he was trying to imply that he did anything wrong. He was admitting the ignorance regarding how banks and banking work... plus acknowledging that a lot of readers will have had experiences that would make them think "Oh you young fool."
In 2022 I lost my business banking and had to shut down a business that I owned for 20 years because it was related to the adult entertainment industry and, despite being completely legal and aboveboard, a single wire transfer that got a little bit of scrutiny resulted in them asking questions about what we did and, knowing that I was doing absolutely nothing wrong, I answered all of their questions truthfully and completely. A few months later I was told that we "fell outside of their risk appetite", our accounts were being closed... and for two months we searched for any bank or credit union in Canada but none would take us.
A lot of industry insiders had that exact reaction: "Are you stupid? Did you not know?! You NEVER admit that you're in this industry you moron!" etc. We even had a very sympathetic branch manager suggest that we re-incorporate, re-brand and hide what we do (a front, in other words). I couldn't do that. And I mean, we had no issues for 20 years. 10 of which were banking as a corporation (was personal accounts before that since we ran it as a proprietorship) and I thought that being in Canada we were pretty progressive. No one I told on a personal or professional level had ever cared. So why would the banks? We were lawful so why should they care?
csomar 6 hours ago [-]
> You NEVER admit that you're in this industry you moron!
This can bite you, though unlikely. Look at Fed Lisa Cook. Probably at some point she thought it'd be okay and she's good for the money and it's just a bureaucracy to bypass. It's a very small thing if you compare to ... uhm ... what Trump did. But it's biting hard now.
sneak 21 hours ago [-]
Chargebacks. Tons of people buy porn on a card then later deny it when their SO finds the bill.
The industry is rife with this kind of fraud, and chargebacks represent tangible risk of financial loss, so banks just blanket ban working with certain industries.
People who sell precious metal jewelry for credit card payments are another.
edm0nd 20 hours ago [-]
That's why adult industry merchants are a thing, like CCBill. They have been around for decades and its kind of a non-issue. Can still accept Visa, MC, AMEX, etc.
source: used to run porn websites back in the early 00s.
EarlKing 19 hours ago [-]
How does something like CCBill stay in business when the card networks themselves have strict guidelines on chargeback rates that'll get you booted from the network?
ianhawes 8 hours ago [-]
They charge 10% (or at least they did ~10 years ago, probably higher now) and require you maintain a 30% reserve and then they use that money to continue to lobby Visa/MC to prevent competition.
ceejayoz 18 hours ago [-]
Presumably, such merchants are basically outsourcing their chargeback resolutions to CCBill, who I assume is quite good at fighting them via proof of purchase.
gspencley 6 hours ago [-]
Nothing to do with charge-backs as our bank was not providing payment processing for us. We ran a "free site" that made its income from referring subscription sign-ups to paid sites through their affiliate programs. We sold nothing direct to consumer. Our customer was other adult websites.
The banking services they terminated consisted of a single business checking account, business savings account and company credit card. That was it. That was what they deemed "too risky."
We learned from someone who used to work at Chase's compliance department that most big banks just have a flat-out ban on working with any customers that are involved in the industry in any capacity what-so-ever due to concerns over serious things like human trafficking. It was the fact that we were distributing [lawful and traceable to the producer] content that made them not want us as a client.
aianus 19 hours ago [-]
If this was the main reason they would just charge more to process the payments or add a longer hold period.
fakedang 19 hours ago [-]
Honestly GP just sounds like wrong founder market fit. GP has a moral spine and was operating in a market where you must forgo it.
gwbas1c 24 hours ago [-]
TFA didn't really explain the mistake.
What I think it was:
1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
That being said: In today's world where every other phone call is some telemarketer trying to scam you or otherwise sell you something you don't want or need, I can sympathize with why Mitchell blew off the first call.
stephen_g 21 hours ago [-]
They basically had no problems through $35M+ of money coming in except a few phone calls trying to sell him some banking services... I wouldn't really call it 'not appropriate' for a startup... All it was is probably the guy trying to say "hey maybe you'd be interested in parking some of that capital in a term deposit" or offering some credit products...
It is a bit weird how actively the guy tried to engage but it probably is just because it was one of the largest accounts opened through that branch - if they'd opened an account with the same bank but a branch in down-town SF instead of in the suburbs of LA then they would have had an account manager more accustomed to that kind of business and it presumably wouldn't have been as weird...
crooked-v 20 hours ago [-]
I certainly wouldn't label that 'do you need help' opening as 'engagement'. Something as simple as 'that's a lot of cash just sitting in that checking account, there are a few better options that could get you good returns on that while still being easy to use for expected expenses' would have been actually engaging.
> If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
> A bank account is only insured up to $250k by the FDIC.
Workaccount2 6 hours ago [-]
My guess is that there were millions sitting in a checking account earning 0.015% interest.
Interest rates weren't great back then, but even still you could get 1.5% easily.
All in he probably left a few hundred thousand on the table.
chao- 23 hours ago [-]
Your answers are appreciated, but they beg further questions. Do you mind that I inquire further?
>1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
What properties make it inappropriate for a tech startup, specifically? What would be appropriate instead, and why?
>2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
He did take the call, but I take your answer to mean that Mitchell and Alex didn't have the right kind of conversation on the call. Is that correct? If so, what ought to occur on a call that follows a large transfer?
gwbas1c 22 hours ago [-]
The bank account was appropriate for small businesses. IE, restaurant, laundromat, ect. This became clear when the article explained that there was education for tellers about what a tech startup is.
Mitchell didn't take the call. He ended the call as quickly as he politely could, short of hanging up on Alex.
Edit: I've had a few bank tellers advise me on how to adjust my bank account correctly in the past. I'm going to assume this is what Alex was trying to do.
I might also point out that, around this time, Wells Fargo tellers were very pushy and would make calls like this. (I got one) It later came out that they were under intense pressure to sell banking services that nobody wanted.
chao- 22 hours ago [-]
Thanks for answering!
So there is some set of services that are useful specifically to a tech startup but not a restaurant, but then there are a category of services that "nobody" wants, neither restaurant nor startup. Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I am not asking because I disbelieve you. I am asking because I find this all fascinating, but it seems my imagination is lacking! What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
You said you were "advised to adjust" your account. Again, I apologize if I come across as ignorant, but what kind of adjustments?
jt2190 21 hours ago [-]
(I’m not the person you replied to.)
My understanding is that people with financial training don’t think about money, they think about risk. If you are a banker and ask yourself “What is the probability that this 100 deposit will be here in another 30 days?” you might answer differently depending on what you know about your customer.
- If you think that your customer will withdraw 50 in the next 30 days, you might take the other 50 and invest it in a 30-day CD, and take the other 50 and just hold on to it.
- If you think all 100 will remain in the account the entire time you could invest all 100.
- etc.
If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
astrange 20 hours ago [-]
A bank account is only insured up to $250k by the FDIC. Chase is a very safe bank, but the amount over that is still not insured, so it's not safe.
He also didn't get any extra controls on the account - you can see from the end of the story that they just forgot about it and someone stole $100k of it!
lmm 20 hours ago [-]
> So there is some set of services that are useful specifically to a tech startup but not a restaurant, but then there are a category of services that "nobody" wants, neither restaurant nor startup. Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
It wasn't a specific service, it was that Wells Fargo employees had a "performance metric" (which I understand in certain postapocalyptic hellholes translates to "a threat to your livelihood and your ability to receive medical treatment if you fall ill") on the number of products each customer was using. So they would encourage customers to open extra savings accounts, credit cards etc. (or some of the more enterprising employees would skip the phone hassling stage and just open these accounts).
gwbas1c 19 hours ago [-]
The teller who called me basically gave me awful service.
I visited the bank a few days earlier because they sent me a debit card that I didn't want. (I wanted to switch it to an ATM card because it's harder to commit fraud with them.)
The teller basically didn't listen to me and tried to push services on me for 15-20 minutes. Eventually he realized I was getting extremely frustrated and helped me do what I needed to do.
The call from the teller a few days later was extremely unexpected, and I was justifiably curt. I said something like, "I don't want any new banking services, there's no reason for you to call me."
gwbas1c 19 hours ago [-]
> You said you were "advised to adjust" your account. Again, I apologize if I come across as ignorant, but what kind of adjustments?
A few months ago, a teller offered to move my savings account to a higher interest version. I just had to maintain a minimum balance. A similar thing happened when I had my first summer job before college: A teller offered me a higher-interest money market account, it was just limited to something like 4 withdrawals a month.
> Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I'm not an expert in startup finance, but I'll try my best.
The mistake that Mitchell made was kind of like keeping all your liquid assets in a checking account. Imagine if, instead of investing in a 401k (or similar,) retail investments, CDs, savings accounts, ect; you just put your entire life savings in a single checking account. Not only would you sacrifice a massive amount of interest, you would probably lose FDIC protection as your account grew, you'd be at risk of someone forging checks, and you'd be at risk of debit card fraud.
Startups often talk about their "runway." This is how long the startup can pay their employees, rent, and other bills; if they have no income. Don't quote me, but this is usually something like (roughly) 2-5 years.
Now, keeping the "runway" money in a single account is kind of, to put it bluntly, dumb. (It's like if you kept all your liquid assets in a single checking account.) Most of it should go to low-risk investments, like CDs and other high-interest savings accounts. I'm sure Silicon Valley Bank has a very straightforward way (for startups) to do this, that Chase doesn't have.
> What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
Remember the term "runway." Restaurants are typically profitable from day one, or become profitable quickly. They spend roughly as much as they take in. Startups often run at a loss for many years before they become profitable.
Likewise, a restaurant might have to pay back a loan that it used to buy equipment, renovate, or purchase the business. Startups hold onto their investment as "runway" instead of paying back a loan.
I'm going to assume that Silicon Valley Bank has products built around the fact that a startup has a large sum of money that it spends very slowly, versus a restaurant that needs loans and spends money as quickly as it comes in.
Animats 16 hours ago [-]
> I'm going to assume that Silicon Valley Bank has products built around the fact that a startup has a large sum of money that it spends very slowly, versus a restaurant that needs loans and spends money as quickly as it comes in.
That's what SVB assumed, and they were very wrong.[1]
> Some banking experts said that the bank would have managed its risks better had it not been for the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA), enacted in 2018 and supported by SVB CEO Greg Becker, which reduced the frequency and number of scenarios of required stress testing implemented under the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act for banks with under $250 billion in assets.
chao- 19 hours ago [-]
Very informative. Much appreciated.
asimovfan 9 hours ago [-]
If the best Alex could do (or that Chase tells their clerks to do) was "are you sure you don't need anything?" I think it's the bank's fault.
Considering how we receive so much junk communication from banks one would imagine they'd be more vocal about what the issue was.
21 hours ago [-]
bigstrat2003 23 hours ago [-]
> He did take the call, but I take your answer to mean that Mitchell and Alex didn't have the right kind of conversation on the call. Is that correct? If so, what ought to occur on a call that follows a large transfer?
I would echo this question. If my bank called me and asked if I needed help, why would I say yes? I got money, the bank is holding it, everything is going great! This really feels like Alex was trying to ingratiate himself with a big client but communicated that really poorly, such that the message of "you are a big deal so I want to give you top tier service" never came across.
gwbas1c 19 hours ago [-]
> I got money, the bank is holding it, everything is going great!
Until your account is many orders of magnitude larger than the other accounts. I suspect the typical "business" account was well under a million. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058480 to understand why this was a big deal for the bank.
fakedang 18 hours ago [-]
Honestly this was partly on Alex, but again, largely on Chase's banking practices. When a transaction of that size comes on the radar, you don't just ring up compliance to verify records internally. You also bring in the big guns from Main Office (aka the regional business banking HQ) and, along with Alex (as the point of contact), educate the business customer as to what can be done. This was what happened to me at Credit Suisse (RIP) after I had a similar, albeit smaller, transaction happen for my personal account. They were also extremely helpful when I wanted to get started with setting up my current trading business. Oh, and I'm still in touch with most of the people who helped me through that journey, even though they've left for other shores.
But again, Alex would not have been able to do this because Chase might not have had any policy about how to redirect customers to the appropriate type of banker. Which is kind of stupid for a megabank of its size.
conductr 23 hours ago [-]
It's not even an indication of fault. It's actually their internal sales/marketing system that flagging these messages. When they notice something like a large deposit, it triggers a message because they want to sell you a new account. Maybe it's savings, a CD, or you're getting ready to buy a house and they can help you with a mortgage. The average teller or even customer service person can't turn off these notifications, although, you may have some ability to opt out of them. Unfortunately, I find opting into useful notifications also opts me into useless ones, so I just ignore the texts...
Your whole arrangement of having an operating account separate from your wealth accounts is highly regular.
Edit - sorry realized I replied to a reply! Put air quotes on You/Your
pzshaikh 14 hours ago [-]
Most banks have dedicated startup bank account tier where you get many perks (AWS/GCloud/azure credits, transactions fees waived for the first few years, accounting software discounts, virtual credit cards) so it's a good idea to open that account instead of a standard business account plus he had $35m just sitting there in a checking account if he has opened an account with a bank that is more experienced in dealing with this type of businesses their RM would have suggested to keep certain amount in the business account and create another saving account where most of the money would have earned interest or invested in some fund. So I think maybe he is implying that due to these mistakes he missed out on personalized guidance.
dilyevsky 21 hours ago [-]
The biggest thing to me imo is that everything was in one account while fdic insurance is only 250k although if chase goes out of business you probably wont need the money anyway. Also specialized startup banks come with a lot of perks for companies and founders and chase evidently didnt (or just had account rep who sucked at his job)
jaggederest 21 hours ago [-]
It's quite a lot more important to diversify funds for procedural risk than bank failures, although SVB certainly illustrates that they do happen.
More likely, the bank will put a ~$1b hold on your account while they investigate suspicious transactions, and your options are to whistle, sing, scream, or twiddle your thumbs until they are done.
So having 4-5 total accounts, ideally unrelated to each other in terms of legal owners (differently-named subsidiaries are usually the way to go, I understand, though I am far from an expert in such matters), will enable you to continue to operate your business while bank A does compliance on your accounts.
If you run into a situation where banks A through F all put holds on your account, you need a good RICO lawyer or equivalent. Different class of problem, and different likelihood of happening, and the kind of thing a great CFO plans around.
GJim 12 hours ago [-]
> private banks is they make it hard to do retail-like banking behaviors
> depositing a quick check.....Zelle.
Good lord
American banking really is in the stone age. I don't think I've seen a cheque in 20 years. As for private banks, in Blighty they all (?) offer 'retail' services that out perform high street offerings.
Incidentally, all high street banking is free in the UK. Only private banks tend to charge for their services.
asib 9 hours ago [-]
Yes, it's honestly a joke.
Zelle limits the amount you can send per day, starting at $500, so you can't even necessarily pay your rent in one go the first month.
With Chase, I don't have the ability to do ACH transfers to accounts I don't own (I hear other banks allow free ACH transfers), so if Zelle limit is too low, my only option would be a paid wire...
randomsofr 2 hours ago [-]
Congrats on the success! I’ve had a similar experience since I started moving more money around. My local branch started calling me too. I live in a busy area where lines at the bank can take hours, but now they told me I can just message someone whenever I go and they’ll move me to the front.
The other day I was just poking around the investment section of the app to see what kind of rates they offered, and almost immediately I got a call from my personal banker, haha. I actually ended up trying the investment since the returns looked good.
hankthecat 24 hours ago [-]
This is somewhat funny to read because if you were a JPM(chase) Private Bank client you wouldn't have any of these issues (zelle works, you can deposit checks, pull from any/all ATMs).
CamperBob2 23 hours ago [-]
Or just plain Schwab One. Don't know about Zelle but ATMs and checks work just fine.
(Better than fine, in fact, in that they refund your ATM fees.)
ycombobreaker 16 hours ago [-]
Chase Private Client refunds ATM fees too. It's especially nice if you live in a location where a substantial fraction of Chase ATMs and branches are shuttered!
astrange 20 hours ago [-]
If you're a private bank client how much do you care about ATM fees?
hankthecat 19 hours ago [-]
Much more than you would think
17 hours ago [-]
gnerd00 24 hours ago [-]
yeah agree -- it seems like a mistake to use retail banking for real business amounts of money and transactions. I suspect that young adults focused on a fast-moving tech world really did not live the hard lessons of the past with business restrictions. On the one hand, it is a new world now (no one would have come up with the kind of money referenced here, with Mom and Pop business pace); on the other hand, maybe you really are trying to load a trucking worth of transactions onto the top of your used Honda Accord, so to speak.
dpkirchner 23 hours ago [-]
At what point does it make sense to sign up for private banking? I've been happy with our credit union for day to day stuff but we don't keep a ton of cash around (most of our money is in a brokerage account (ETFs)). Is private banking just for folks that want to have a lot of cash around but not have it in an easy to use account?
zie 18 hours ago [-]
If you have to ask, the answer is you don't have enough! :)
Seriously though, just wander into any big ass bank(Chase, BOA, etc) and ask them. They have multiple tiers of private banking, depending on your wealth level. Generally the bottom tiers start around $100k and go from there. To get into the fancy tiers you generally need $1M or more of bank assets. To get into family offices, you generally need $100M or so. Though shared family offices are sometimes available at the low 30-50M range.
Just be very careful of fees. Generally the larger the private client services, the higher the fees.
hankthecat 19 hours ago [-]
Private banking basically means high net worth wealth management. Includes banking, investments, lending, etc.
0x3f 23 hours ago [-]
When you need the specialized services they offer, e.g. Lombard loans, unique mortgage products.
sneak 21 hours ago [-]
When you are managing a $500k-1M+ liquid net worth.
I think Chase starts “Private Client” at $250 or $300k. (Don’t use Chase, however.)
It might in some cases be more trouble than it is worth, if you are right around the threshold. A “normal” retail checking account and a brokerage account at another institution with the ability to transfer between them is probably sufficient for most. If you need loans or mortgages or other stuff, it might be worth the hassle (and phone calls).
mitchellh 21 hours ago [-]
Private client isn’t private bank. They name is like that so you think it is though. :) private banking services start around $10 to $15M with higher tiers as you go.
(Not trying to diminish private client services. But they’re night and day different services.)
sho 17 hours ago [-]
> start around $10 to $15M
That sounds high to me. Maybe American banks? The smaller Swiss banks will start taking your calls at about $2m.
The non retail banks that have a good reputation are even higher.
They don’t outwardly advertise their minimums because “it depends.” For example if you’re an up and comer in your field where it seems like you’re LIKELY to one day hit the mins, they’ll start the relationship early.
sneak 11 hours ago [-]
What’s the difference?
19 hours ago [-]
meistertigran 23 hours ago [-]
What I took from this is that you have a really engaging writing style. Was interesting to read from start to finish.
Aloha 17 hours ago [-]
Chase has a decent private banking operation, which you might consider (so does BofA, and most large banks) which can give you the best of both worlds.
mprivat 10 hours ago [-]
That was an interesting and entertaining read. Well written. Thanks for sharing. It reminds me I do have a bank with physical branches, the digital world made me forget all about that.
JoshTriplett 1 days ago [-]
> I've used a private bank (or mix) for a number of years to store the vast majority of my financial assets
Which one(s)?
insane_dreamer 3 hours ago [-]
Couldn't find the RSS feed for your writing. Available?
thrown-0825 14 hours ago [-]
why does zelle even exist?
every time i have to interact financially with americans its always focused around these random transfer apps like zelle, cash, venmo etc.
jcattle 13 hours ago [-]
The US tends not to regulate what kind of services a bank has to offer to its customers. A bank doesn't need to offer any kind of transfer services to be a bank. As far as I know you can legally be a bank and only offer cash deposit and withdrawal.
The EU has PSD (Payment Services Directive) and PSD2 which stipulate what kind of transfers have to be possible to customers.
Because of that the US just has a bunch of startups which offer services that unify the payment landscape. The alternatives at a bunch of banks is still that you need to write checks.
welder 23 hours ago [-]
You should start a business for your construction projects, then use a business bank like Mercury instead of Chase and get all the nice business features.
mkl 21 hours ago [-]
What are the nice business features you're referring to?
welder 20 hours ago [-]
Paying vendors
attentive 22 hours ago [-]
What's the point of a private bank or do you mean investement/brokerage?
I'm curious what value you get from the private banking side?
lotsofpulp 24 hours ago [-]
I move $10k+ in and out of BoA/Merrill every week and I’ve never received an alert or phone call. I would have stopped using Chase a long time ago if they were that annoying.
I basically never want to talk to anyone at any bank, like any other utility.
papa-ja 21 hours ago [-]
[dead]
josh2600 20 hours ago [-]
Once upon a time my wife went to close a bank account in Italy.
She went to the post office which is also a bank in Rome. She asked to closed her account. She was told that she needed to go to the branch where she opened her account in Florence.
We rented a car and drove to Florence.
When we arrived at the bank in Florence, the teller informed us that we would have to come back “domani” which is Italian for tomorrow because the only person who could help us was the banker who had originally opened the account for my wife when she was a student many moons ago.
We came back the next day and met the banker who immediately recognized my wife including recanting that she was an artist. He informed her that he could not close her account, she would have to speak to the Director of the bank.
We waited in line for the director of the bank but we were told it was too close to the end of the day and the bank was out of money so we’d have to come back… Domani.
Domani arrived and my wife again waited. The Director willfully ignored her for 2 hours and it wasn’t until my wife began to cry that the Director finally called her over and allowed her to close her account.
This for €2500. That was a balance that meant a lot to us at the time.
I will never forget banking in Italy.
dml2135 20 hours ago [-]
This is everything in Italy, not just banking. I remember studying abroad there, it took us a week and a half of “domani” to get the wifi password for the dorm!
epolanski 15 hours ago [-]
I'm Italian and both the previous story as well as your comment trigger me.
1) You could've asked the password to literally anybody in the dorm.
2) Unless this was geological ages ago, by law, all you need to close a bank account is a certified email (or PEC) or a certified letter (you go to the post office with a document and a simple form that specifies where you want your stuff transferred) you don't need to go in person anywhere at all.
koliber 10 hours ago [-]
Regarding closing the account, it's probably just like you describe. However, the author was told something else. Not everyone knows the "proper" procedure by heart, and many people rely on what they are told from officials in a given institution.
The fact that the bank personel in the first bank did not share what you just shared only adds to the misfortune.
mierz00 18 hours ago [-]
I have a similar story in France. Closing an account with Caisse d’Epargne was nothing short of pure torture.
Luckily, I didn’t actually have to go in, but the process took me nearly 6 months of back and forth, multiple phone calls, multiple hand written letters. Yes, France loves hand written letters, no you cannot type it.
Every now and then I think it would be nice to return and live in France, but the thought of having to deal with French administration has vaccinated me for life.
DownGoat 15 hours ago [-]
It's so easy in Norway. When you start a new relationship with another bank, they just offer to move all your money and automatic bill payments from the other bank to your new bank. So the new bank handles everything
Cthulhu_ 12 hours ago [-]
Similar in the Netherlands (idk about banking, but), nowadays if you move house, you just make an appointment at the local county hall and set your new address; the old county is informed, and a lot of companies that bill you regularly (e.g. utilities, health insurance, etc) will automatically reroute any mail to your new address.
I'm glad for that too; mail is pretty much dead, I wouldn't know what organizations to report an address change to nowadays.
michalpleban 9 hours ago [-]
Yes, it's similar with banking, you just use OverstapService.nl and they will automatically switch all your direct debits to your new account. Worked for me like a charm when I switched banks, of around two dozen direct debits only one failed to transfer properly.
DownGoat 11 hours ago [-]
Yeah same process in Norway when you move. Fill in a form online and all mail is rerouted, and companies will update records.
benhurmarcel 14 hours ago [-]
Sounds like your experience was some time ago. Banking with “traditional” banks is still slow and bureaucratic, but not to that point. And online banks let you do everything online quickly.
bdcravens 24 hours ago [-]
During COVID, I took a major haircut in my day job, and ended up doing a lot of side work to stay solvent. All my banking was with Chase; I setup a new checking account for my side work. One day they just took about $900. No matter who I spoke to, they bounced me around and never gave me an answer why. I can only guess there was a fraud trigger or something, but to this day, I've never gotten the money back or even gotten an answer as to what happened. I'm fortunate enough in life that $900 isn't a big deal, but at the time, it was HUGE. As a result, I will never, never do business with Chase again (and it would be very convenient, given how many branches I have around me)
gwbas1c 24 hours ago [-]
Take them to small claims court.
(Also close the account. No bank should lose money like that.)
mortos 19 hours ago [-]
I'd instead talk to the CFPB.
You might also try some other governmental bodies but I've read a lot of success with the CFPB
pavlov 9 hours ago [-]
DOGE killed CFPB.
Musk wants X to be in payments, and he hates CFPB.
righthand 23 hours ago [-]
I agree small claims would be an easy win.
astrange 20 hours ago [-]
File a CFPB complaint. Or email executive/investor relations.
thrown-0825 14 hours ago [-]
I see you are operating under the idea that the US still has consumer protections and isnt a gutted husk of what it once was.
sneak 21 hours ago [-]
PayPal did this to me in 2004 or so when I tried to use a debit card to withdraw cash and it didn’t give me the cash but still debited the account. Hours on the phone, never got the $400 back.
I closed my account and have never directly used PayPal since.
nshelly 19 hours ago [-]
When I was an American PhD student in Zurich, none of the Swiss banks would accept me—except the official post office bank. This was due to the stringent FATCA laws, which made U.S. citizens too burdensome for the traditionally privacy-centric Swiss banks.
Within the first few months, I accumulated around 40K CHF in salary that the university owed me (technically from the Swiss government, since researchers were federal employees). Eventually, the university emailed me to ask if I’d like to pick up my money in cash (Bargeld). Apparently, this wasn’t uncommon.
One day I went to the office to collect it. They asked which denomination I preferred (I assumed 20s or 100s). I asked for a mix, and they handed me several envelopes filled with 1,000 CHF notes and smaller bills. I distinctly remember carrying multiple envelopes. At one point, as I walked back to my office on top overlooking Zurich, a gust of wind blew behind me. I turned around and saw colorful 200 CHF and 1,000 CHF notes scattered along the road. I calmly walked back and picked them up.
For a few months, I paid my rent and groceries entirely in cash. The Swiss didn’t think anything of it—in fact, it was fairly common. Eventually, I was able to open an account and received a yellow two-factor authentication device that looked like an old calculator. I deposited the rest of the money and, for the remainder of my studies, used the “yellow calculator” to pay bills online by debit.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQhylNX...
I never did receive an official Swiss credit card which was fine. However, I did accumulate funds a Swiss 401K which is another story unto itself.
FinnKuhn 8 hours ago [-]
One thing that has always amused me as a German is that for every banking/investing account I have ever opened they always included one question: Do you have an USA citizenship?
I assume with online banking this has become less of an issue, but apparently having US clients as a non-US bank is a massive hassle that no one wants to touch.
kjellsbells 8 hours ago [-]
Whenever I move significant sums into my bank account, I guarantee that my bank is going to do an "Alex" call. I can also guarantee that there is no freaking way I am going to do a call with some rando not already in my contacts to discuss my financials. I really don't know why banks don't understand this.
Chase is not the only offender but they are unhilariously, shockingly bad at this: if you do a large transfer, they will sometimes cancel it unilaterally and without warning because of their fraud detection. And then they'll call you, but the dude speaking won't know anything about your account and ask you about what you just did. "We are clean on opsec" is very much not the vibe.
Lest this be just me moaning, Fidelity gets it right. When you log on you can see who your banker is and how to reach them. A real human with a phone! And that person is the one who calls you, emails you, and you can set up a call/mtg with, so you don't have these random calling you.
holman 24 hours ago [-]
Amusing to read this and think back on GitHub's seed round ($100M). At the time we just had a small business account from Bank of America... going from relatively thin cushion in the account over the previous few years to suddenly dropping in $100M was pretty amusing. I believe we moved to a more sophisticated setup quickly thereafter.
merek 19 hours ago [-]
> I never told them what my business does or what I'd use the money for.
This stuck out to me. I'm in the process of opening a bank account in Singapore for a newly registered company, and boy is it difficult.
Hour-long KYC interview. Details of what the business does. Anything remotely controversial could be a red flag. They want to hear about boring B2B services. They want to see evidence of customer communications or contracts, so they can see you're a legit business and not a shell company. This is very difficult for a company that hasn't started operating yet. Why would I start operating without banking? How can I show business activity before commencing operating?
By comparison, I've opened business accounts in both AU and the US without hassle.
decimalenough 13 hours ago [-]
Are you Singaporean? I found opening my business account (UOB) extremely straightforward.
fakedang 18 hours ago [-]
It's likely because of the nature of the country. Singapore and the UAE (another similar country) are notoriously difficult for getting started with business banking because banks often expect you to be either well-funded (from elsewhere) or matured as a business. For a long time, they haven't ever evolved their thought to expect startups to natively grow, and even of late, they expect startups to be these well-capitalized entities with angel/VC funding. That, I presume, is because of the fact that these countries tend to be conduits for money rather than destinations themselves - they'll roll out the red carpet for you if you went with another, more "matured" objective in mind like laundering money or expanding into the country.
On the other hand, Switzerland has been surprisingly very easy to get started with quickly, even though Switzerland falls in the same category. You can easily obtain a (shitty service) Postfinance account to get started, and UBS is a breeze to work with, despite being bulge-bracket - even for new companies. Or you can also opt for a cheaper Kantonalbank, which are surprisingly very open to new businesses.
TZubiri 17 hours ago [-]
Also international accounts have more stringent KYC of course.
jancsika 22 hours ago [-]
> Ultimately, there was no long term negative impact of the events that transpired (except maybe for Alex, but I truly don't know) and I can now look back on it with amusement.
So a software guy who didn't understand people or banking opens an account at Chase. And a guy from Chase who didn't understand people or software calls him-- repeatedly over years-- and fails to ever connect on any human level whatsoever. Now when first guy withdraws millions from Chase, he unwittingly causes the second guy to lose his job. This means the the second guy isn't around to help the first guy when he needs him the most-- to help him navigate banking fraud on that same account.
This just seems tragic. Second guy's success as a banker and first guy's ease of mind as a customer were inextricably linked. Yet neither of them knew how to form the simple social bond of two 4 year-olds playing in the same sandbox.
Seriously-- how did Chase not hand the account to someone who could connect with this guy? For a multi-million dollar account this just doesn't pass the smell test.
gck1 21 hours ago [-]
Banker was probably asked daily by his managers if the multi-million dollar client was happy and the banker probably always responded with-yes, very.
20 hours ago [-]
TZubiri 17 hours ago [-]
I think daily is an overstatement, but it does sound like the guy took credit for some type of relationship that wasn't there, which is kind of unnecessary because maybe what he did was the right move, he gave the client exactly what he wanted.
sneak 11 hours ago [-]
You should not underestimate the median level of incompetence and unprofessionalism among low level Chase employees.
I had one call the police on me recently for (non-surreptitiously) recording our interaction as we conducted a safe deposit box inventory.
TZubiri 17 hours ago [-]
This is one of the takeaways I wasn't able to formulate.
Author added some disclaimers which already clarified their inexperience with the world. But I think that a.. preference for avoid human interactions, and a worldview of computer systems with no human systems are what explains why Author wasn't able to quickly adapt to this adult experience.
What sealed the deal of this interpretation to me:
"He literally writes down a phone number on a piece of paper. This is all feeling so surreal."
Why would this feel so surreal? Gauging by the dates, Author was born in around 1994, phones where definitely a thing, and phone numbers more so. My interpretation is that this guy was absolutely absorbed in computers, every social interaction occured in dms, or emails or posts, or articles. Both the 'unsophisticated' act of transmitting numbers and the need to deal with a human in real time were foreign. Without going into harsher labels like autism or antisociality, I think it's definitely the type of behaviour (described as being heads down), that is necessary to be competent enough with computers to build a hypertechnical security product over the span of almost a decade.
The point of view of the banker and how he fumbled this as well is a nice touch, illustrates the advantages of throwing a bone to your business partners. I mean even if you think of it from a non social perspective, only business, this is a supplier like any other, loyalty and gifts go a long way in general. But I guess that you don't need business acumen for a startup, you can just hyperfocus on your product and have your investors worry about the rest.
supportengineer 1 days ago [-]
I also don't understand banking. "Do you need help?" when I'm making a deposit, or when my investments are set a certain way?
Here's a better idea, guys. Tell me your value proposition. How can I get access to your luxury box? Will you lend me money at ultra-low rates? How about a free toaster? Anything?
recursive 23 hours ago [-]
The author imagines that all readers obviously know why his actions were so wrong.
My understanding of banks is much like his naive version. So what's the more enlightened understanding?
jackvalentine 18 hours ago [-]
Yeah I'm not sure why I would really care about the motivations of the bank. If I need them to be a store of money that I can move in and out and I'm happy with that then leave me alone.
When you're big enough for that to be a problem, like in the story, then someone who knows more that you've hired will have a stronger opinion of that.
phil21 7 hours ago [-]
Banking works as a store of money and money mover until they decide what you are doing is outside the normal course for their average account holder.
After that you very rapidly get educated on the fact that money within a bank is not your money - it’s the banks money and they are not afraid to more or less tell you that outright.
There is very little recourse once you hit some internal KYC/AML or other “non-desirable” entity flags so it’s best to establish relationship banking prior to ever getting close to those (hidden and secret) thresholds. Even having multiple accounts at different banks isn’t much protection since they seemingly by law or regulation share these databases with each other. You will likely never make it off such a list if you get added to one.
For me at least that’s all private banking or even banking beyond a checking and savings account is. It’s paid insurance for continued access to the financial system.
TZubiri 17 hours ago [-]
I can explain a little bit
1- KYC, the bank is a highly regulated entity, regulated by the state, they are a branch of the executive, they enforce banking laws set by the legislative, and can get involved in cases of fraud, money laundering, or other illegal activities.
If they see a million dollar transaction, they usually want to know where the money came from, if they don't they would essentially be looking the other way.
In general know what your business partner needs, in any walk of business. Let them know that you have a such and such business, that you got a round of funding. Also know what kind of bad actors you want to differentiate yourself from, let them know you are not a drug dealer, you are not laundering money, or running a ponzi scheme, and that the money won't be frozen putting them in trouble.
2) Money is a very complex subject, the fact that you think of money as "something that is stored in a bank" is testament to the fact that banks do a good job, it's an illusion, there's a lot going on behind the scenes that you are unaware of, similar to how there's a lot going on behind the scenes in Google or ChatGPT, which have simple interfaces but complex inner workings.
3) In general, a bank is a vendor, a supplier a business partner, you pay them for services. Maybe in your personal life you don't care and you are used to anonymous transactions because of the low amounts. But in business, these are strategic relationships, you want to get the most out of your money and establish a relationship with your vendor. Loyalty goes a long way, although switching vendors is always possible, it's a tradeoff with consequences that needs to be considered, and not ignored.
delusional 15 hours ago [-]
> similar to how there's a lot going on behind the scenes in Google or ChatGPT
I would caution against maling this sort of comparison to tech companies. Speaking from personal experience, my vantage point is limited to Denmark, but banking isn't complicated like tech is. In tech the complications are all self inflicted, all serve to make the product. Banking interacts directly with the foundation of society. Most of the complication of banking is therefore not in service of the product, but in service of democracy.
That distinction affects the mentality and the "feel" of the complications a lot.
TZubiri 3 hours ago [-]
Borrowing some lexicon from the Zen of python, what you are saying is that tech is complicated but banking is complex.
Regardless, it is still a case of a simple UI and a complex (complicated implies complexity) backend.
I had the same experience at Citibank. We started at a small branch in downtown LA with our Series Seed round check for $3M. Even then we barely got any attention, and dealt with just a local branch manager. Later we closed $7.5M, still no attention; except this time due to consolidation we were kicked to a regional team that handled our account as a team. In fact we never had a dedicated banker, we were just handled like so many SMB by calling a banking center. Over the years we asked for things like corporate credit cards and the like, but it always seemed we were just a little too small (I guess with Fortune 50 clients, we were small to them). Anyway we eventually moved to a smaller independent bank for different reasons.
apt-apt-apt-apt 22 hours ago [-]
Semi-interesting, but it felt like it was leading up to something big or interesting knowledge all the way up to the end.
Seems like it could have been way shorter, the plot is essentially "Deposited more and more money into a local Chase branch, made some guy named Alex a rising star. They called once in awhile, not sure why. Moving lots of money around isn't super straightforward."
chihuahua 19 hours ago [-]
Yes, I was expecting the outcome to be that the account gets frozen because it triggers some kind of anti money laundering filter.
Asraelite 15 hours ago [-]
Same. If anything, this post taught me that actually, depositing and moving around large sums of money is straightforward.
heyflyguy 1 days ago [-]
Chase sucks so bad, I would spend a lifetime encouraging anyone to bank elsewhere. I know Mitch is nice enough to say Chase wasn't the problem, but their "controls" are so archaic it makes doing business with them a chore and not a pleasure.
toast0 1 days ago [-]
I'm not a fan of Chase, and I don't think I'd bank with them again, but they are a 'large national bank'. If you value having local branches mostly where ever you go, they're part of that group. That comes with all the usual exciting attractions like negligible interest on balances, and miscellaneous fees. But if you want a large national bank, eh, I guess they're fine?
My California based credit union doesn't even offer business accounts. And using the co-op network to do in-branch business at other credit unions is not as easy as the marketing lead me to believe, so I had to get a local credit union account where I moved as well. My Washington credit union does do business accounts, so that's a nice option if I need one. Plus, it's fun being a member of two aerospace/defense employee credit unions when I only worked in tech :P
TZubiri 17 hours ago [-]
Lots of local branches sounds great for personal banking, but for businesses? Unless you have a nation wide franchise business or a logistics business, doesn't seem as important.
On the contrary, a highly concentrated bank might be better, everyone is on the same building, there are no encapsulated branches, you get assigned a banker that is the best fit, rather than the one who was born closest to you.
toast0 15 hours ago [-]
Depends... If you want to be able to go in and do business banking when you're visiting your parents? Might be nice. I dunno.
TZubiri 3 hours ago [-]
The thing is that if there is a single branch (or few branches), then there's processes designed to be able to be completed remotely, with phone calls or faxes, etc...
When the bank has many branches, there will always be some steps that require visiting the main branch, and the opening branch.
With a single branch bank, the main branch and the opening branch are one and the same. And it's the best branch.
fabiensanglard 1 days ago [-]
Would have been interesting to read what the author would have done differently with what he learned.
You create a startup -> Do you need to do anything special with regard to the bank you chose?
krashidov 22 hours ago [-]
Chase Bank Story time -
We sold our company in 2020. Anticipating the wire I decided I needed to upgrade to a big boy bank from my small regional bank that I've been using since I was 16.
What finer institution is there than J.P. Morgan Chase? I opened an account with them. I called them telling them there was going to be a larger than average transfer. I put in $500 to "warm up" the account (stupid in retrospect).
Acquisition goes through. Champagne for everyone. I try to login to look at the funds and my account has been closed. I call Chase and ask them "wtf?"
They say there's been fraud in the account. We've closed it. We will mail the check to your address. So I'm thinking they're going to mail me my acquisition funds over check?? FML. 24 agonizing hours and 10 calls to them later (all leading nowhere), I eventually got the funds to be wired to my original regional bank lmao. No thanks to Chase, this was all because of PNC who was in charge of the acquisition.
This is probably my fault for using a new account like this (I think someone told me to use a large bank or something I don't remember), but I will forever hold a grudge against Chase.
P.S. I never got back my $500 that they stole from me
astrange 20 hours ago [-]
File a CFPB complaint!
dabeeeenster 23 hours ago [-]
Favourite part of this story is how the casually realise there's $1M in funds sent from customers that they didnt notice.
didibus 19 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure I understand why there's anything wrong, strange or embarrassing about what the author did?
Can some finance person tell me why the author feel they did did in not smart ways and maybe made some mistakes?
s_dev 12 hours ago [-]
He didn't do anything wrong, the takeaway is that he made Alex a rising star in his bank who was supposed to be giving him 'white glove' treatment but to the Founder it was a just a bank account. Years later he decides to move money to another bank. Alex can't stop it because he has no personal relationship or rapport to lean on. A few years later he encounters some fraud on the account the kind of exact situation that Alex could uniquely help with but Alex had presumably been let go for not giving the white glove treatment and built a rapport to the Founder.
Personally I found the whole thing frustrating to read as it underscores how traditional banks operate 'look after rich people' and 'be indifferent to not rich people'.
eadmund 10 hours ago [-]
> Personally I found the whole thing frustrating to read as it underscores how traditional banks operate 'look after rich people' and 'be indifferent to not rich people'.
Would you expect the fellow who earns the bank $20,000/year and the fellow who earns the bank $200/year to be treated the same?
I also think it’s less about ‘looking after rich people’ as offering the right services to the right customers. Someone who lives paycheque to paycheque and bridges the gap with credit cards and someone who has a few tens of thousands of dollars in cash have different needs; someone who has a few hundreds of thousands has still different ones; someone who has a few millions has yet different ones. Different products make sense to use — and from the bank’s perspective, to offer — at those different points.
Remember, too, that it costs different amounts for the bank to offer different products. Technology can help reduce those costs, which is a good part of how we all have jobs, and a good part of how so many people are so much better off than fifty years ago (back in the day, one had to place orders for 100-share blocks of stock, and pay a broker a commission on it — now it is possible to purchase fractional shares with no commission, enabling anyone with even a few extra bucks to get started compounding returns). But some costs, particularly regulatory costs, cannot be reduced.
ajd555 24 hours ago [-]
Great read - as a young startup with Chase, this is an interesting story. As Mitch says, this isn't inherently an issue with Chase, but interesting bank behavior. I'll be sure to keep this story in mind, if we ever get to these amounts of cash!
joelesler 1 days ago [-]
So let's say a startup was funded through a Chase bank account and now everyone on this thread is saying "yeah don't do that"...
Let's say that a friend of mine has a startup funded account at Chase, and where should they go?
greyb 24 hours ago [-]
>Let's say that a friend of mine has a startup funded account at Chase, and where should they go?
Silicon Valley Bank... oh wait.
In all seriousness, the approachability and flexibility of SVB bankers was really unparalleled at the time. Not like Alex in this story, that made really half-baked attempts to engage with a client model he was entirely unfamiliar with (but got all the credit for). This being said, Silicon Valley Bank, a division of First Citizens Bank continues to exist.
I see a lot of Fintech players on the scene now. Brex, Mercury and Rho are common ones, through Brex has taken steps to distance itself from true, seed-stage startups as of late. Given what happened with Synapse's failure [1], I have doubts that they have the same protections and regulations of a brick and mortar FDIC bank.
Diversification is key too - so having multiple accounts. Some non-fintech banks I've seen floating around, ironically, JP Morgan Startup Banking, Wells Fargo Technology Banking Group, Citigroup Commercial Bank, PNC Technology Finance. All big banks, just not their retail banking divisions (as the author was experienced using).
One of the more frustrating things in life are cleaning up novice mistakes from people who should know better.
I wonder why the investors didn't at least do some due diligence into where the money was being stored?
21 hours ago [-]
lackbeard 23 hours ago [-]
This was a super-interesting read, but I'm disappointed there isn't a description of what, exactly, was wrong about what he did, and what one should do instead. The only thing that comes to mind is the obvious one: you don't want more than the FDIC limit in a single bank account.
chihuahua 19 hours ago [-]
> you don't want more than the FDIC limit in a single bank account
especially when you're talking about Silicon Valley Bank, ironically.
ungreased0675 22 hours ago [-]
I’m curious why this company raised money, only to park it in a bank account? What was the raise for?
wmf 21 hours ago [-]
Pretty much the best case for a startup is you don't need money -> VCs are begging to invest -> you take the money just in case -> you never need the money. Especially if it's a top tier VC the PR from raising is worth the dilution.
urbandw311er 22 hours ago [-]
My take on that was that they did use a lot of the money but were also generating revenue that came in to replace it.
bobmcnamara 1 days ago [-]
One man run on the bank!
laksmanv 23 hours ago [-]
What banks are recommended for startups if not chase?
jabo 21 hours ago [-]
Mercury
whalesalad 22 hours ago [-]
Quite happy with Mercury. I had really terrible experiences with Chase and will never give them my money again.
Giorgi 24 hours ago [-]
Would never thought there is so much money to be made in cloud services.
sneak 21 hours ago [-]
I too have a “Chase is pathological and untrustworthy” business banking story.
My company had an exit, I did well financially. This is not a secret. I'm extremely privileged and thankful for it. But as a result of this, I've used a private bank (or mix) for a number of years to store the vast majority of my financial assets (over 99.99% of all assets, I just did the math). An unfortunate property of private banks is they make it hard to do retail-like banking behaviors: depositing a quick check, pulling cash from an ATM, but ironically most importantly Zelle.
As such, I've kept my Chase personal accounts and use them as my retail bank: there are Chase branches everywhere, its easy to get to an ATM, and they give me easy access to Zelle! I didn't choose Chase specifically, I've just always used Chase for personal banking since I was in high school so I just kept using them for this.
Anyways, I tend to use my Chase account to pay a bunch of bills, just because it's more convenient (Zelle!). I have 3 active home construction projects, plus pay my CC, plus pretty much all other typical expenses (utilities, car payments, insurance, etc.). But I float the money in/out of the account as necessary to cover these. We do accounting of all these expenses at the private bank side, so its all tracked, but it settles within the last 24-48 hours via Chase.
Otherwise, I keep my Chase balance no more than a few thousand dollars.
This really wigs out automated systems at Chase. I get phone calls all the time (like, literally multiple times per week) saying "we noticed a large transfer into your account, we can help!" And I cheekily respond "refresh, it's back to zero!" And they're just confused. To be fair, I've explained the situation in detail to multiple people multiple times but it isn't clicking, so they keep calling me.
I now ignore the phone calls. Hope I don't regret that later lol.
>Someone out there is probably mentally screaming at me "you fool!" at this point. With hindsight, I agree...
I was hoping the piece would end with what you would do now (or what should you have done) when Alex called you. Did I fail to understand something in the piece, and simply staying on the phone with Alex would have somehow avoided the fraud situation down the line? It doesn't seem so?
If I were to get such a call, today, my instincts would be to engage in the same "I'm fine" get-off-the-phone-fast actions. What is the alternative?
I'm sure Schwab would rather me have my money in a mutual fund than have a bunch of cash, for the reasons the other commenter pointed out (more complex arrangements and a view of the bank as a partner rather than an interchangeable "money box" is 'stickier') but this was a real double win for me and one of the handful of stories I call upon when I am asked why I do most of my financial business with that company.
What the bank is probably mainly trying to do is not "extract a higher margin" from you, but rather to "maintain your business." While Alex might not have recognized that a startup that took in a bunch of financing and plopped it into a cash account and then didn't do much with it is a customer who might disappear at any time, on some institutional level the bank is aware of it. They want you to regard them not as an interchangeable place that money sits, but as a valued partner who helps you do things with your money, and as a result you feel like it would both be a risk and a bother to extract all your money and go to some other bank.
If banks want to keep a customer, you might think the most important thing is to just not annoy or screw over their customers.
Why do they continually treat good customers like shit? I'm in New Zealand and my bank just continuously pisses me off. I don't want any upsell (the arseholes tried to upsell insurance when I got a credit card the other day). I've got a six figure facility at risk (US:HELOC?) and my bank's security practices are shockingly bad (we're way too trusting in New Zealand). Little things like access blocked from oversees for a month (phone banking was theoretically available but I couldn't call international so it wasn't). Aside: I would like to block phone banking because it feels so insecure. I've been looking for a better bank, but I wouldn't get the same mortgage facility, soooooooo I'm kinda stuck (maybe that's the reason they don't need to be good to customers).
Mitchell kept getting annoyed by the bank's activities. They wanted him as a customer but their internal systems didn't know how to make it easy for him. Systems with negative impacts are too common even when you're the guy making them money...
In 2022 I lost my business banking and had to shut down a business that I owned for 20 years because it was related to the adult entertainment industry and, despite being completely legal and aboveboard, a single wire transfer that got a little bit of scrutiny resulted in them asking questions about what we did and, knowing that I was doing absolutely nothing wrong, I answered all of their questions truthfully and completely. A few months later I was told that we "fell outside of their risk appetite", our accounts were being closed... and for two months we searched for any bank or credit union in Canada but none would take us.
A lot of industry insiders had that exact reaction: "Are you stupid? Did you not know?! You NEVER admit that you're in this industry you moron!" etc. We even had a very sympathetic branch manager suggest that we re-incorporate, re-brand and hide what we do (a front, in other words). I couldn't do that. And I mean, we had no issues for 20 years. 10 of which were banking as a corporation (was personal accounts before that since we ran it as a proprietorship) and I thought that being in Canada we were pretty progressive. No one I told on a personal or professional level had ever cared. So why would the banks? We were lawful so why should they care?
This can bite you, though unlikely. Look at Fed Lisa Cook. Probably at some point she thought it'd be okay and she's good for the money and it's just a bureaucracy to bypass. It's a very small thing if you compare to ... uhm ... what Trump did. But it's biting hard now.
The industry is rife with this kind of fraud, and chargebacks represent tangible risk of financial loss, so banks just blanket ban working with certain industries.
People who sell precious metal jewelry for credit card payments are another.
source: used to run porn websites back in the early 00s.
The banking services they terminated consisted of a single business checking account, business savings account and company credit card. That was it. That was what they deemed "too risky."
We learned from someone who used to work at Chase's compliance department that most big banks just have a flat-out ban on working with any customers that are involved in the industry in any capacity what-so-ever due to concerns over serious things like human trafficking. It was the fact that we were distributing [lawful and traceable to the producer] content that made them not want us as a client.
What I think it was:
1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
That being said: In today's world where every other phone call is some telemarketer trying to scam you or otherwise sell you something you don't want or need, I can sympathize with why Mitchell blew off the first call.
It is a bit weird how actively the guy tried to engage but it probably is just because it was one of the largest accounts opened through that branch - if they'd opened an account with the same bank but a branch in down-town SF instead of in the suburbs of LA then they would have had an account manager more accustomed to that kind of business and it presumably wouldn't have been as weird...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058480
> If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058894
> A bank account is only insured up to $250k by the FDIC.
Interest rates weren't great back then, but even still you could get 1.5% easily.
All in he probably left a few hundred thousand on the table.
>1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
What properties make it inappropriate for a tech startup, specifically? What would be appropriate instead, and why?
>2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
He did take the call, but I take your answer to mean that Mitchell and Alex didn't have the right kind of conversation on the call. Is that correct? If so, what ought to occur on a call that follows a large transfer?
Mitchell didn't take the call. He ended the call as quickly as he politely could, short of hanging up on Alex.
Edit: I've had a few bank tellers advise me on how to adjust my bank account correctly in the past. I'm going to assume this is what Alex was trying to do.
I might also point out that, around this time, Wells Fargo tellers were very pushy and would make calls like this. (I got one) It later came out that they were under intense pressure to sell banking services that nobody wanted.
So there is some set of services that are useful specifically to a tech startup but not a restaurant, but then there are a category of services that "nobody" wants, neither restaurant nor startup. Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I am not asking because I disbelieve you. I am asking because I find this all fascinating, but it seems my imagination is lacking! What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
You said you were "advised to adjust" your account. Again, I apologize if I come across as ignorant, but what kind of adjustments?
My understanding is that people with financial training don’t think about money, they think about risk. If you are a banker and ask yourself “What is the probability that this 100 deposit will be here in another 30 days?” you might answer differently depending on what you know about your customer.
- If you think that your customer will withdraw 50 in the next 30 days, you might take the other 50 and invest it in a 30-day CD, and take the other 50 and just hold on to it.
- If you think all 100 will remain in the account the entire time you could invest all 100.
- etc.
If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
He also didn't get any extra controls on the account - you can see from the end of the story that they just forgot about it and someone stole $100k of it!
It wasn't a specific service, it was that Wells Fargo employees had a "performance metric" (which I understand in certain postapocalyptic hellholes translates to "a threat to your livelihood and your ability to receive medical treatment if you fall ill") on the number of products each customer was using. So they would encourage customers to open extra savings accounts, credit cards etc. (or some of the more enterprising employees would skip the phone hassling stage and just open these accounts).
I visited the bank a few days earlier because they sent me a debit card that I didn't want. (I wanted to switch it to an ATM card because it's harder to commit fraud with them.)
The teller basically didn't listen to me and tried to push services on me for 15-20 minutes. Eventually he realized I was getting extremely frustrated and helped me do what I needed to do.
The call from the teller a few days later was extremely unexpected, and I was justifiably curt. I said something like, "I don't want any new banking services, there's no reason for you to call me."
A few months ago, a teller offered to move my savings account to a higher interest version. I just had to maintain a minimum balance. A similar thing happened when I had my first summer job before college: A teller offered me a higher-interest money market account, it was just limited to something like 4 withdrawals a month.
> Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I'm not an expert in startup finance, but I'll try my best.
The mistake that Mitchell made was kind of like keeping all your liquid assets in a checking account. Imagine if, instead of investing in a 401k (or similar,) retail investments, CDs, savings accounts, ect; you just put your entire life savings in a single checking account. Not only would you sacrifice a massive amount of interest, you would probably lose FDIC protection as your account grew, you'd be at risk of someone forging checks, and you'd be at risk of debit card fraud.
Startups often talk about their "runway." This is how long the startup can pay their employees, rent, and other bills; if they have no income. Don't quote me, but this is usually something like (roughly) 2-5 years.
Now, keeping the "runway" money in a single account is kind of, to put it bluntly, dumb. (It's like if you kept all your liquid assets in a single checking account.) Most of it should go to low-risk investments, like CDs and other high-interest savings accounts. I'm sure Silicon Valley Bank has a very straightforward way (for startups) to do this, that Chase doesn't have.
> What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
Remember the term "runway." Restaurants are typically profitable from day one, or become profitable quickly. They spend roughly as much as they take in. Startups often run at a loss for many years before they become profitable.
Likewise, a restaurant might have to pay back a loan that it used to buy equipment, renovate, or purchase the business. Startups hold onto their investment as "runway" instead of paying back a loan.
I'm going to assume that Silicon Valley Bank has products built around the fact that a startup has a large sum of money that it spends very slowly, versus a restaurant that needs loans and spends money as quickly as it comes in.
That's what SVB assumed, and they were very wrong.[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_Silicon_Valley_Ban...
> Some banking experts said that the bank would have managed its risks better had it not been for the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA), enacted in 2018 and supported by SVB CEO Greg Becker, which reduced the frequency and number of scenarios of required stress testing implemented under the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act for banks with under $250 billion in assets.
Considering how we receive so much junk communication from banks one would imagine they'd be more vocal about what the issue was.
I would echo this question. If my bank called me and asked if I needed help, why would I say yes? I got money, the bank is holding it, everything is going great! This really feels like Alex was trying to ingratiate himself with a big client but communicated that really poorly, such that the message of "you are a big deal so I want to give you top tier service" never came across.
Until your account is many orders of magnitude larger than the other accounts. I suspect the typical "business" account was well under a million. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058480 to understand why this was a big deal for the bank.
But again, Alex would not have been able to do this because Chase might not have had any policy about how to redirect customers to the appropriate type of banker. Which is kind of stupid for a megabank of its size.
Your whole arrangement of having an operating account separate from your wealth accounts is highly regular.
Edit - sorry realized I replied to a reply! Put air quotes on You/Your
More likely, the bank will put a ~$1b hold on your account while they investigate suspicious transactions, and your options are to whistle, sing, scream, or twiddle your thumbs until they are done.
So having 4-5 total accounts, ideally unrelated to each other in terms of legal owners (differently-named subsidiaries are usually the way to go, I understand, though I am far from an expert in such matters), will enable you to continue to operate your business while bank A does compliance on your accounts.
If you run into a situation where banks A through F all put holds on your account, you need a good RICO lawyer or equivalent. Different class of problem, and different likelihood of happening, and the kind of thing a great CFO plans around.
> depositing a quick check.....Zelle.
Good lord
American banking really is in the stone age. I don't think I've seen a cheque in 20 years. As for private banks, in Blighty they all (?) offer 'retail' services that out perform high street offerings.
Incidentally, all high street banking is free in the UK. Only private banks tend to charge for their services.
Zelle limits the amount you can send per day, starting at $500, so you can't even necessarily pay your rent in one go the first month.
With Chase, I don't have the ability to do ACH transfers to accounts I don't own (I hear other banks allow free ACH transfers), so if Zelle limit is too low, my only option would be a paid wire...
The other day I was just poking around the investment section of the app to see what kind of rates they offered, and almost immediately I got a call from my personal banker, haha. I actually ended up trying the investment since the returns looked good.
(Better than fine, in fact, in that they refund your ATM fees.)
Seriously though, just wander into any big ass bank(Chase, BOA, etc) and ask them. They have multiple tiers of private banking, depending on your wealth level. Generally the bottom tiers start around $100k and go from there. To get into the fancy tiers you generally need $1M or more of bank assets. To get into family offices, you generally need $100M or so. Though shared family offices are sometimes available at the low 30-50M range.
Just be very careful of fees. Generally the larger the private client services, the higher the fees.
I think Chase starts “Private Client” at $250 or $300k. (Don’t use Chase, however.)
It might in some cases be more trouble than it is worth, if you are right around the threshold. A “normal” retail checking account and a brokerage account at another institution with the ability to transfer between them is probably sufficient for most. If you need loans or mortgages or other stuff, it might be worth the hassle (and phone calls).
(Not trying to diminish private client services. But they’re night and day different services.)
That sounds high to me. Maybe American banks? The smaller Swiss banks will start taking your calls at about $2m.
The non retail banks that have a good reputation are even higher.
They don’t outwardly advertise their minimums because “it depends.” For example if you’re an up and comer in your field where it seems like you’re LIKELY to one day hit the mins, they’ll start the relationship early.
Which one(s)?
every time i have to interact financially with americans its always focused around these random transfer apps like zelle, cash, venmo etc.
The EU has PSD (Payment Services Directive) and PSD2 which stipulate what kind of transfers have to be possible to customers.
Because of that the US just has a bunch of startups which offer services that unify the payment landscape. The alternatives at a bunch of banks is still that you need to write checks.
I basically never want to talk to anyone at any bank, like any other utility.
She went to the post office which is also a bank in Rome. She asked to closed her account. She was told that she needed to go to the branch where she opened her account in Florence.
We rented a car and drove to Florence.
When we arrived at the bank in Florence, the teller informed us that we would have to come back “domani” which is Italian for tomorrow because the only person who could help us was the banker who had originally opened the account for my wife when she was a student many moons ago.
We came back the next day and met the banker who immediately recognized my wife including recanting that she was an artist. He informed her that he could not close her account, she would have to speak to the Director of the bank.
We waited in line for the director of the bank but we were told it was too close to the end of the day and the bank was out of money so we’d have to come back… Domani.
Domani arrived and my wife again waited. The Director willfully ignored her for 2 hours and it wasn’t until my wife began to cry that the Director finally called her over and allowed her to close her account.
This for €2500. That was a balance that meant a lot to us at the time.
I will never forget banking in Italy.
1) You could've asked the password to literally anybody in the dorm.
2) Unless this was geological ages ago, by law, all you need to close a bank account is a certified email (or PEC) or a certified letter (you go to the post office with a document and a simple form that specifies where you want your stuff transferred) you don't need to go in person anywhere at all.
The fact that the bank personel in the first bank did not share what you just shared only adds to the misfortune.
Luckily, I didn’t actually have to go in, but the process took me nearly 6 months of back and forth, multiple phone calls, multiple hand written letters. Yes, France loves hand written letters, no you cannot type it.
Every now and then I think it would be nice to return and live in France, but the thought of having to deal with French administration has vaccinated me for life.
I'm glad for that too; mail is pretty much dead, I wouldn't know what organizations to report an address change to nowadays.
(Also close the account. No bank should lose money like that.)
You might also try some other governmental bodies but I've read a lot of success with the CFPB
Musk wants X to be in payments, and he hates CFPB.
I closed my account and have never directly used PayPal since.
Within the first few months, I accumulated around 40K CHF in salary that the university owed me (technically from the Swiss government, since researchers were federal employees). Eventually, the university emailed me to ask if I’d like to pick up my money in cash (Bargeld). Apparently, this wasn’t uncommon.
One day I went to the office to collect it. They asked which denomination I preferred (I assumed 20s or 100s). I asked for a mix, and they handed me several envelopes filled with 1,000 CHF notes and smaller bills. I distinctly remember carrying multiple envelopes. At one point, as I walked back to my office on top overlooking Zurich, a gust of wind blew behind me. I turned around and saw colorful 200 CHF and 1,000 CHF notes scattered along the road. I calmly walked back and picked them up.
For a few months, I paid my rent and groceries entirely in cash. The Swiss didn’t think anything of it—in fact, it was fairly common. Eventually, I was able to open an account and received a yellow two-factor authentication device that looked like an old calculator. I deposited the rest of the money and, for the remainder of my studies, used the “yellow calculator” to pay bills online by debit. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQhylNX...
I never did receive an official Swiss credit card which was fine. However, I did accumulate funds a Swiss 401K which is another story unto itself.
I assume with online banking this has become less of an issue, but apparently having US clients as a non-US bank is a massive hassle that no one wants to touch.
Chase is not the only offender but they are unhilariously, shockingly bad at this: if you do a large transfer, they will sometimes cancel it unilaterally and without warning because of their fraud detection. And then they'll call you, but the dude speaking won't know anything about your account and ask you about what you just did. "We are clean on opsec" is very much not the vibe.
Lest this be just me moaning, Fidelity gets it right. When you log on you can see who your banker is and how to reach them. A real human with a phone! And that person is the one who calls you, emails you, and you can set up a call/mtg with, so you don't have these random calling you.
This stuck out to me. I'm in the process of opening a bank account in Singapore for a newly registered company, and boy is it difficult.
Hour-long KYC interview. Details of what the business does. Anything remotely controversial could be a red flag. They want to hear about boring B2B services. They want to see evidence of customer communications or contracts, so they can see you're a legit business and not a shell company. This is very difficult for a company that hasn't started operating yet. Why would I start operating without banking? How can I show business activity before commencing operating?
By comparison, I've opened business accounts in both AU and the US without hassle.
On the other hand, Switzerland has been surprisingly very easy to get started with quickly, even though Switzerland falls in the same category. You can easily obtain a (shitty service) Postfinance account to get started, and UBS is a breeze to work with, despite being bulge-bracket - even for new companies. Or you can also opt for a cheaper Kantonalbank, which are surprisingly very open to new businesses.
So a software guy who didn't understand people or banking opens an account at Chase. And a guy from Chase who didn't understand people or software calls him-- repeatedly over years-- and fails to ever connect on any human level whatsoever. Now when first guy withdraws millions from Chase, he unwittingly causes the second guy to lose his job. This means the the second guy isn't around to help the first guy when he needs him the most-- to help him navigate banking fraud on that same account.
This just seems tragic. Second guy's success as a banker and first guy's ease of mind as a customer were inextricably linked. Yet neither of them knew how to form the simple social bond of two 4 year-olds playing in the same sandbox.
Seriously-- how did Chase not hand the account to someone who could connect with this guy? For a multi-million dollar account this just doesn't pass the smell test.
I had one call the police on me recently for (non-surreptitiously) recording our interaction as we conducted a safe deposit box inventory.
What sealed the deal of this interpretation to me:
"He literally writes down a phone number on a piece of paper. This is all feeling so surreal."
Why would this feel so surreal? Gauging by the dates, Author was born in around 1994, phones where definitely a thing, and phone numbers more so. My interpretation is that this guy was absolutely absorbed in computers, every social interaction occured in dms, or emails or posts, or articles. Both the 'unsophisticated' act of transmitting numbers and the need to deal with a human in real time were foreign. Without going into harsher labels like autism or antisociality, I think it's definitely the type of behaviour (described as being heads down), that is necessary to be competent enough with computers to build a hypertechnical security product over the span of almost a decade.
The point of view of the banker and how he fumbled this as well is a nice touch, illustrates the advantages of throwing a bone to your business partners. I mean even if you think of it from a non social perspective, only business, this is a supplier like any other, loyalty and gifts go a long way in general. But I guess that you don't need business acumen for a startup, you can just hyperfocus on your product and have your investors worry about the rest.
Here's a better idea, guys. Tell me your value proposition. How can I get access to your luxury box? Will you lend me money at ultra-low rates? How about a free toaster? Anything?
My understanding of banks is much like his naive version. So what's the more enlightened understanding?
When you're big enough for that to be a problem, like in the story, then someone who knows more that you've hired will have a stronger opinion of that.
After that you very rapidly get educated on the fact that money within a bank is not your money - it’s the banks money and they are not afraid to more or less tell you that outright.
There is very little recourse once you hit some internal KYC/AML or other “non-desirable” entity flags so it’s best to establish relationship banking prior to ever getting close to those (hidden and secret) thresholds. Even having multiple accounts at different banks isn’t much protection since they seemingly by law or regulation share these databases with each other. You will likely never make it off such a list if you get added to one.
For me at least that’s all private banking or even banking beyond a checking and savings account is. It’s paid insurance for continued access to the financial system.
1- KYC, the bank is a highly regulated entity, regulated by the state, they are a branch of the executive, they enforce banking laws set by the legislative, and can get involved in cases of fraud, money laundering, or other illegal activities. If they see a million dollar transaction, they usually want to know where the money came from, if they don't they would essentially be looking the other way. In general know what your business partner needs, in any walk of business. Let them know that you have a such and such business, that you got a round of funding. Also know what kind of bad actors you want to differentiate yourself from, let them know you are not a drug dealer, you are not laundering money, or running a ponzi scheme, and that the money won't be frozen putting them in trouble.
2) Money is a very complex subject, the fact that you think of money as "something that is stored in a bank" is testament to the fact that banks do a good job, it's an illusion, there's a lot going on behind the scenes that you are unaware of, similar to how there's a lot going on behind the scenes in Google or ChatGPT, which have simple interfaces but complex inner workings.
3) In general, a bank is a vendor, a supplier a business partner, you pay them for services. Maybe in your personal life you don't care and you are used to anonymous transactions because of the low amounts. But in business, these are strategic relationships, you want to get the most out of your money and establish a relationship with your vendor. Loyalty goes a long way, although switching vendors is always possible, it's a tradeoff with consequences that needs to be considered, and not ignored.
I would caution against maling this sort of comparison to tech companies. Speaking from personal experience, my vantage point is limited to Denmark, but banking isn't complicated like tech is. In tech the complications are all self inflicted, all serve to make the product. Banking interacts directly with the foundation of society. Most of the complication of banking is therefore not in service of the product, but in service of democracy.
That distinction affects the mentality and the "feel" of the complications a lot.
Regardless, it is still a case of a simple UI and a complex (complicated implies complexity) backend.
My startup banking story - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35157959 - March 2023 (257 comments)
Seems like it could have been way shorter, the plot is essentially "Deposited more and more money into a local Chase branch, made some guy named Alex a rising star. They called once in awhile, not sure why. Moving lots of money around isn't super straightforward."
My California based credit union doesn't even offer business accounts. And using the co-op network to do in-branch business at other credit unions is not as easy as the marketing lead me to believe, so I had to get a local credit union account where I moved as well. My Washington credit union does do business accounts, so that's a nice option if I need one. Plus, it's fun being a member of two aerospace/defense employee credit unions when I only worked in tech :P
On the contrary, a highly concentrated bank might be better, everyone is on the same building, there are no encapsulated branches, you get assigned a banker that is the best fit, rather than the one who was born closest to you.
When the bank has many branches, there will always be some steps that require visiting the main branch, and the opening branch.
With a single branch bank, the main branch and the opening branch are one and the same. And it's the best branch.
You create a startup -> Do you need to do anything special with regard to the bank you chose?
We sold our company in 2020. Anticipating the wire I decided I needed to upgrade to a big boy bank from my small regional bank that I've been using since I was 16.
What finer institution is there than J.P. Morgan Chase? I opened an account with them. I called them telling them there was going to be a larger than average transfer. I put in $500 to "warm up" the account (stupid in retrospect).
Acquisition goes through. Champagne for everyone. I try to login to look at the funds and my account has been closed. I call Chase and ask them "wtf?"
They say there's been fraud in the account. We've closed it. We will mail the check to your address. So I'm thinking they're going to mail me my acquisition funds over check?? FML. 24 agonizing hours and 10 calls to them later (all leading nowhere), I eventually got the funds to be wired to my original regional bank lmao. No thanks to Chase, this was all because of PNC who was in charge of the acquisition.
This is probably my fault for using a new account like this (I think someone told me to use a large bank or something I don't remember), but I will forever hold a grudge against Chase.
P.S. I never got back my $500 that they stole from me
Can some finance person tell me why the author feel they did did in not smart ways and maybe made some mistakes?
Personally I found the whole thing frustrating to read as it underscores how traditional banks operate 'look after rich people' and 'be indifferent to not rich people'.
Would you expect the fellow who earns the bank $20,000/year and the fellow who earns the bank $200/year to be treated the same?
I also think it’s less about ‘looking after rich people’ as offering the right services to the right customers. Someone who lives paycheque to paycheque and bridges the gap with credit cards and someone who has a few tens of thousands of dollars in cash have different needs; someone who has a few hundreds of thousands has still different ones; someone who has a few millions has yet different ones. Different products make sense to use — and from the bank’s perspective, to offer — at those different points.
Remember, too, that it costs different amounts for the bank to offer different products. Technology can help reduce those costs, which is a good part of how we all have jobs, and a good part of how so many people are so much better off than fifty years ago (back in the day, one had to place orders for 100-share blocks of stock, and pay a broker a commission on it — now it is possible to purchase fractional shares with no commission, enabling anyone with even a few extra bucks to get started compounding returns). But some costs, particularly regulatory costs, cannot be reduced.
Let's say that a friend of mine has a startup funded account at Chase, and where should they go?
Silicon Valley Bank... oh wait. In all seriousness, the approachability and flexibility of SVB bankers was really unparalleled at the time. Not like Alex in this story, that made really half-baked attempts to engage with a client model he was entirely unfamiliar with (but got all the credit for). This being said, Silicon Valley Bank, a division of First Citizens Bank continues to exist.
I see a lot of Fintech players on the scene now. Brex, Mercury and Rho are common ones, through Brex has taken steps to distance itself from true, seed-stage startups as of late. Given what happened with Synapse's failure [1], I have doubts that they have the same protections and regulations of a brick and mortar FDIC bank.
Diversification is key too - so having multiple accounts. Some non-fintech banks I've seen floating around, ironically, JP Morgan Startup Banking, Wells Fargo Technology Banking Group, Citigroup Commercial Bank, PNC Technology Finance. All big banks, just not their retail banking divisions (as the author was experienced using).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapse_Financial_Technologies
I wonder why the investors didn't at least do some due diligence into where the money was being stored?
especially when you're talking about Silicon Valley Bank, ironically.
https://sneak.berlin/20191119/your-money-isnt-yours/
I finally just closed all my accounts there. It feels great. Fuck Chase.