4 ms·
Hold on -- sometimes when they're all charging the same price, it's because that's actually "the market price" in the sense that it wouldn't be profitable to do
by SilasX 3y ago
Hold on -- sometimes when they're all charging the same price, it's because that's actually "the market price" in the sense that it wouldn't be profitable to do it for an less, and they actually have their own high costs they have to take care of. If there's free entry into this sector, and all banks find they have to do things that way, then that might just be what's going on.
From what I understand, Europe typically has postal banking that's minimal fee and should be a release valve against other banks' excess, which would for the "legit price" hypothesis.
But if it's very very difficult to start new banks, or for existing businesses to start serving this demand, that would favor the cartel hypothesis.
- moffkalast 3y agoI would expect it to be a mix of both, it has to be more of an expense to run physical branches while catering to a smaller market. But I would be amazed if they don't also blow those figures up beyond what's required to cover those extra expenses just because people have no real alternative to switch to. The largest bank had record profits for the last 3 years straight, and I'm not convinced it's just an inflation artefact. Haven't heard of any postal banks, but digging a little it seems like we did have at least one... which merged with a commercial bank a decade ago. Sounds about right.