Lloyds just get worse with the hard sell

Inactive

Well if that is the case, why are we the tax payer, bailing most of them out, while we allow Woollies, MFI etc. etc. to go to the wall?:rolleyes:

Aegis

Inactive wrote: »

Well if that is the case, why are we the tax payer, bailing most of them out, while we allow Woollies, MFI etc. etc. to go to the wall?:rolleyes:

Because banking systems are vital to the stability of a country's economy, while we can do without Woolies and MFI without too much problem.

Plus we're actually investing in the banks, not just bailing them out. The country part-owns these countries now, and as such if they recover the country will actually profit from the bail out.

Inactive

Aegis wrote: »

Because banking systems are vital to the stability of a country's economy, while we can do without Woolies and MFI without too much problem.

Exactly, so they are not the same as shops.

Aegis

JamieD wrote: »

I'm intruiged by the different attitudes toward the ethics or morality of "selling". Obviously a bank or building society is a profit making organisation, and within branch level sales are an important factor, but is this relevant. Is it the motive or the outcome which is important when determining whether it's bad or good. For example:

1. Ann is a selfless, well intentioned Adviser who really wants to help the customers out and improve their lives. Through misjudgement or inexperience, she sells a loan which the customer can't afford and will eventually cripple them financially.

2. Bob is only interested in maximising his sales points and couldn't care less about the customer. However, the loan he sells is perfect for the customer and puts them on a solid financial footing.

Clearly, neither is the ideal Customer Adviser and outside the thought experiment there is scope for mis-selling. However with the central issue, which is more important - the intent or result with which your bank deals with you?

What matters most to the customer will be the result in most cases, I would think. From the bank's side of things, the result is obviously important, but the method is equally so. After all, just because it was right this time doesn't mean it will be next time, and if someone sells a product that's not needed using hard-sell tactics, that's easily grounds for a mis-sale. Likewise, if the salesperson is too inexperienced to sell the product, that must be identified and they must be retrained before being allowed to do so again.

The ideal is that the staff member should give the right product to the right person with the right technique. Remove any of these three legs and there's a problem with that person being allowed to sell.

Aegis

Inactive wrote: »

Exactly, so they are not the same as shops.

That's something of a non-sequitur. Just because these are a particularly important type of shop doesn't mean that they're not still shops.

Inactive

Aegis wrote: »

That's something of a non-sequitur. Just because these are a particularly important type of shop doesn't mean that they're not still shops.

Get real, they are either banks or they are shops, make up your mind.

They are banks, they carry out a significantly different type of business to shops.

ShelfStacker_3

High-street banks and shops are both retail institutions, and so share similar marketing strategies and, to a certain extent, economic realities.

There. Try and deliberately misinterpret that.

Inactive

ShelfStacker wrote: »

High-street banks and shops are both retail institutions, and so share similar marketing strategies and, to a certain extent, economic realities.

There. Try and deliberately misinterpret that.

Doesn't change anything SS they are still banks, not shops, they have a totally different business model, if they were " shops " most of them would by now be history.;)

Geoffo_M

ShelfStacker wrote: »

High-street banks and shops are both retail institutions, and so share similar marketing strategies and, to a certain extent, economic realities.

There. Try and deliberately misinterpret that.

The difference is that I would trust a shopkeeper to sell me the correct type of product more than I would a bank. The complex nature of most banking products makes it easier to pull the wool over the eyes of a non-financial person. Today, I would put the reputation of the banking sales staff on a par with the doorstep cold caller trying to get you to switch your energy provider. A few years ago, it would have been estate agents. Sorry, just the way it is at the moment. I want to go into my bank without being constantly badgered - as you could do in most shops!

Inactive

ld, I know that banks flog stuff, but they are not shops, they are primarily a bank to service the financial day to day requirements of their customers.

The " retail " part of what the banks do is a secondary role, albeit I would guess highly profitable for them, I wouldn't really know because I don't buy anything from my bank/s.