banks aren't guaranteeing deposits

[fangless 3,591]

13 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

The banking system is way ahead of anything in UK. OTPs have been in Thailand almost 10 years

OTP's have been in use in Europe for nearly 20 years and  have been subject to hacks in the US and Europe since 2005/6.

I used to work in UK internet/telephone banking security!

 

[gentlemanjackdarby 235]

9 hours ago, Brunolem said:

The only problem is that the FDIC doesn't have the money to cover its promises...by a long shot...

 

Otherwise, deposits in Thai banks are insured up to 5 million baht until August 2021...we'll see after that.

 

Some banks, like the Bangkok Bank for example, also have their own insurance...up to one million baht in this case.

 

It is a simple reflex that leads foreigners to believe that "their" banks are safer, just because "their" country is safer.

 

Non biased economic studies show that the reality is different, and that the banks in the worst financial situation are not in Thailand, but in Europe.

 

As for the governments coming to the rescue, European countries are far more broke than Thailand, with their national debts around 100% of GDP, against less than 60% for Thailand.

 

Anyway it is the central banks, and not the governments, who supervise and come to the rescue of the banks, if necessary.

The FDIC doesn't have to have "the money" sitting in a bank somewhere or under the proverbial mattress for a couple of reasons:

 

The FDIC and various Federal bank regulators exercise such strict oversight of U.S. banks that when a bank gets into trouble, "the machine" is so well-oiled that usually what happens is that "Failing Bank" closes it's doors Friday evening and "Healthy Bank", after working with bank regulators to buy "Failing Bank", puts up it's sign over the weekend and is open for business first thing Monday morning, depositors not really being aware, or caring, about what has happened. No long lines of worried depositors, no frozen accounts, no "wait, you'll get your money in a little while" BS, nothing but business as usual. It's not the 1930s anymore

 

U.S. banks' balance sheets are made up of a lot more than "cash", i.e., banks have assets that are easily transferred and whose value is set by the markets, not by the management skills, or lack thereof, of a particular bank and it's branches; same goes for a banks liabilities, such as deposits. So if a particular bank doesn't meet regulator standards, there's usually another bank that will buy the assets, assume the liabilities, and be more than happy to set up shop. The FDIC doesn't have to do any, or very little, "bailing out"

 

And the biggest reason is that if things got so bad nothing else worked, the U.S. government would step in and provide liquidity and it has demonstrated on several occasions going back to 2008 that it has both the means and will to do so

[fangless 3,591]

20 minutes ago, gentlemanjackdarby said:

And the biggest reason is that if things got so bad nothing else worked, the U.S. government would step in and provide liquidity and it has demonstrated on several occasions going back to 2008 that it has both the means and will to do so

As did the UK with Northern Rock and The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) takeovers and bailouts of other banks in October 2008.

[Peterphuket 607]

When you have cash....buy gold it is still the only thing you can trust.

[ICELANDMAN 930]

9 minutes ago, Peterphuket said:

When you have cash....buy gold it is still the only thing you can trust.

Be careful not to buy fake gold, there are several tons in Asia

[mr mr 5,624]

you're using a bank as a storage place for your value now ? good grief. 

 

get a nano ledger and get usdt. 

[fangless 3,591]

11 minutes ago, mr mr said:

you're using a bank as a storage place for your value now ? good grief. 

 

get a nano ledger and get usdt. 

So go and store all your so called money in a USB stick!  No thanks.

[JimGant 1,287]

23 hours ago, ukrules said:

Why have they been reducing this coverage in stages over the years is the real question here......?

Maybe this article from the Harvard Business Review can shed some light:

 

Quote

What’s more, as a result of the increase in insurable limits to $250,000, regulators have lost the help of a savvy group of private monitors. When insured deposits were limited to $100,000 per account, corporations and wealthy individuals would look closely at the financial condition of a bank before making deposits over that limit. In turn, the executives of the bank would bolster its financial condition to attract monies from such sophisticated depositors.

https://hbr.org/2009/10/fixing-the-fdic

 

[fangless 3,591]

43 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Maybe this article from the Harvard Business Review can shed some light:

Not to me it don't! I don't speak double Dutch

[Leaver 5,473]

1 hour ago, Peterphuket said:

When you have cash....buy gold it is still the only thing you can trust.

Keep listening to your Thai missus and the next thing you will be posting is, "Buy land in Issan." Followed by, and grow rubber trees on said land.   

[VBF 2,371]

4 hours ago, baansgr said:

The banking system is way ahead of anything in UK. OTPs have been in Thailand almost 10 years...internet banking is far superior and easier. Instant transfers as long as I can remember but UK was 3 working days until only a few years ago....Thai Banks win hands down for me....

As the saying goes.....Up to you 

[Chris.B 118]

3 hours ago, fangless said:

Wrong!!    CHAPS/FPS,  was introduced in 1984,

Faster Payments Service (FPS) is a United Kingdom banking initiative to reduce payment times between different banks' customer accounts to typically a few seconds, from the three working days that transfers usually take using the long-established BACS system. 

27 May 2008

 

FPS was officially launched on 27 May 2008 (though testing during the previous week allowed users to process very small-value (1p) transactions as "faster payments") for non-scheduled, "immediate" payments (about 5% of traffic) only, with access for future-dated payments and standing orders from 6 June.

 

Faster Payments Service - Wikipedia

[fangless 3,591]

20 minutes ago, Chris.B said:

27 May 2008

 

FPS was officially launched on 27 May 2008 (though testing during the previous week allowed users to process very small-value (1p) transactions as "faster payments") for non-scheduled, "immediate" payments (about 5% of traffic) only, with access for future-dated payments and standing orders from 6 June.

 

Faster Payments Service - Wikipedia

That is the UK wide major high street bank inter FPS system.  Don't take Wiki as a Bible as it is not an authority on many things and does not know the details.!  

 

FYI FPS  started inside the then new CHAPS system as a branch to branch system between branches of the same banks with the introduction of CHAPS .  It certainly involved HSBC and I believe RBS were also doing inter branch use then.  It then expanded gradually bank wide until eventually the big four went interconnected in 2008.  Most of the rest of the UK & NI banks have now joined up.  

The point is that the post I commented on said  "only a few years ago". Which I take to be somewhat later than even 2008,

 

PS;  FYI In the UK you can now scan a cheque with your phone and be credited immediately.  But your funds can still be clawed back up to 8 working days as in the old system if the cheque eventually bounces!

 

PPS;  Standing orders as referenced in the WIKI article are rarely covered in the FPS as they normally come under BACS and also note that CHAPS/BACS/FPS/SDTs etc all have various payment levels and type of bank account restrictions/limitations.

 

PPPS;  Lets get back on to the actual subject please.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by fangless

[CANSIAM 205]

23 hours ago, VBF said:

Presumably, it's 1 mil per institution ie 1 mil with SCB + 1 mil with Kasikorn etc.? If so possible to mitigate some risk that way.

 

Sorry for Thai people who have no choice, but really any foreigner who keeps lots of dosh in what is still, essentially a 3rd world banking system isn't very smart. Having seen the pitiful security, both personal and electronic practised in Thailand I don't think I'd keep any more than essential even if i did live there.

 

Especially seeing how easy it is today to transfer from a better-protected account Eg UK is  £85K per institution - approx 3,655,000 Baht. I presume the interest rates in Thailand are as pathetically low as other countries - I haven't bothered to look as it doesn't affect me.

Is Citibank considered 3rd world ??

[Leaver 5,473]

45 minutes ago, CANSIAM said:

Is Citibank considered 3rd world ??

Citibank Thailand, or Citibank USA?