4 ms·

Each branch is supposed to function as a bank, right?

• hobolobo 15y ago
  They're not autonomous though - individual branches don't hold the value of all their customers' accounts as cash. You're subject to a daily limit (though you can take more if you give them notice).
  • white_devil 15y ago
    Now we're just being pedantic. My point was that each branch should have enough cash to act as a "proper bank", whatever amount of money you'd reasonably expect one to have in its vault. But I'd sure expect more than 10k euro.
    • burgerbrain 15y ago
      If they barely had 10k in their vault, then it logically follows that they almost never need that much (otherwise they would obviously make it a point to keep more). If they rarely need that much, then it logically follows that somewhere at or less than 10k is a reasonable amount to have. There is no sense in taking the increased liability of having more if they don't need to. Furthermore, acting as a "proper bank" means they do a lot more than just acting as your personal piggy-bank/mattress. If they have all their money tied up in cash, it means they can't actually be preforming real bank activities (investment).
      • white_devil 15y ago
        Fair enough. But basically me and a couple of other people on this thread wanted to point out that the banking system is not very sound. I just chimed in with my anecdote.
        • burgerbrain 15y ago
          Your anecdote has more to do with the logistics of running a bank than it does with the soundness of banks though.
          • white_devil 15y ago
            That may be, but it doesn't affect how sound the banking system is. You think this is enough nitpicking, or do you want to go on?
• burgerbrain 15y ago
  Why in the world should a single branch be expected to hold that kind of cash for withdrawn without notice? There is a* huge* difference between "having the money" and "having the money in cash form on location".