Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#61

Post by mstibbard »

wmil wrote: post #31
hirundo wrote: post #6

> Thus BancList (spelling absolutely intentional, because even the K is regulated and I am absolutely not joking about that fact). No, he's not joking. Even the font size is regulated. I ran into that as an employee of a commodities trader. I'm not sure if the choice of font is regulated but it wouldn't be surprising.

A bit of a tangent, but in Canada "financial advisers" are regulated and required to act in the customers interests. So naturally banks will connect you to "financial advisors" (unregulated) to buy products. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-watchdog-advise...

FYI financial advisers having a fiduciary duty to their clients is standard in most of the western world EXCEPT America.

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#62

Post by [deleted] »

mstibbard wrote: post #61
wmil wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit of a tangent, but in Canada "financial advisers" are regulated and required to act in the customers interests. So naturally banks will connect you to "financial advisors" (unregulated) to buy products. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-watchdog-advise...

FYI financial advisers having a fiduciary duty to their clients is standard in most of the western world EXCEPT America.

[deleted]

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#63

Post by sjy »

wmil wrote: post #31
hirundo wrote: post #6

> Thus BancList (spelling absolutely intentional, because even the K is regulated and I am absolutely not joking about that fact). No, he's not joking. Even the font size is regulated. I ran into that as an employee of a commodities trader. I'm not sure if the choice of font is regulated but it wouldn't be surprising.

A bit of a tangent, but in Canada "financial advisers" are regulated and required to act in the customers interests. So naturally banks will connect you to "financial advisors" (unregulated) to buy products. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-watchdog-advise...

Putting aside the real issue of advisors not acting in their clients' best interest, the distinction between 'advisers' and 'advisors' seems to be a myth based on an assumption by the Small Investors Protection Association that the spelling of the word in a certain law is somehow decisive, which would make no sense in the context of consumer protection.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/financial-advisor-vs-advis...

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#64

Post by JackFr »

asark wrote: post #55
scott_s wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is worth stressing: such regulations often exist to prevent fraud from outright scammers. If such a regulation did not exist, I am confident there would be institutions that called themselves a "bank" but met none of the basic consumer protections we expect from a bank.

Generally, it's a good idea to force labeling of businesses and products to match their potential customers' expectations of what they mean. It's one of those places where fostering a well-functioning free market (by decreasing information asymmetry, to put it succinctly, even if we're not talking outright scammers) is at odds with some strict notions of liberty (to call your business or product whatever you please).

There are similar requirements in some jurisdictions for lawyers. For instance if you work for a law firm, but are NOT a lawyer, you’re business card must indicate that.

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#65

Post by mpmpmpmp »

djsumdog wrote: post #40
scarejunba wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their sole innovation over that is that they realized neutrality and being a third party is valuable because of regulation. Haha, this is pretty clever.

For this to work, don't they have to be the exclusive means of getting stock information for a bank? So everyone who owns bank stock in a bank that uses banclist must agree to use it to get all shareholder disclosure information?

Probably the opposite. Bank signs deal with banclist, notifies shareholders official information disclosures will only be done through banclist.

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#66

Post by mdpopescu »

scott_s wrote: post #43
Quenty wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at least unregistered banks can’t name their company “Trust Bank” or something.

This is worth stressing: such regulations often exist to prevent fraud from outright scammers. If such a regulation did not exist, I am confident there would be institutions that called themselves a "bank" but met none of the basic consumer protections we expect from a bank.

Given the crisis of 2008, I would say that this failed utterly, wouldn't you? It's just another few millions lost in regulation compliance to add to the billions lost to the "outright scammers" that are the regulated banks.

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#67

Post by mdpopescu »

benj111 wrote: post #10
hirundo wrote: post #6

> Thus BancList (spelling absolutely intentional, because even the K is regulated and I am absolutely not joking about that fact). No, he's not joking. Even the font size is regulated. I ran into that as an employee of a commodities trader. I'm not sure if the choice of font is regulated but it wouldn't be surprising.

I'm guessing font size regs are to prevent "RISK FREE INVESTMENT, (investment not risk free)" type things? That seems sensible. I can see there being rules for italics etc for similar reasons.

Wouldn't it be much less game-able to forbid LYING in a document, as understood by the elusive man-in-the-street?

Seriously: to judge a contract in case of a conflict, pick 12 people from the street and ask them to summarize it. Go with what they wrote. Going to "experts" when deciding language is what created the current mess, sticking to them is not going to solve it.

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#68

Post by mdpopescu »

eridius wrote: post #33
saagarjha wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it's called "BancList"?

That just indicates that it's regulated. Where's the "over" part? Personally, it sounds like a rather good idea to have regulation over who's allowed to use the word "bank", given the assumptions that the general public will make about anything with "bank" in the name.

What stops the general public from making the same assumptions about anything with "banc" in the name?

Re: “Banclist.com is probably the most lucrative direct messaging platform”

#70

Post by eridius »

mdpopescu wrote: post #68
eridius wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That just indicates that it's regulated. Where's the "over" part? Personally, it sounds like a rather good idea to have regulation over who's allowed to use the word "bank", given the assumptions that the general public will make about anything with "bank" in the name.

What stops the general public from making the same assumptions about anything with "banc" in the name?

Probably the same thing that stops them from assuming that anything with "spank" in the name is a reputable financial institution.
Post reply on HN