Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Banks would usually line up for those kinds of deposits. But Ken Thomas, a Miami-based independent bank consultant and economist, said the bank that receives Graham’s bank accounts will have to answer some tough questions.
“The bank that takes this account will be in a higher visibility position because you’re going to ask them, ‘What do you think of that ad?’ … And they will face some potential reputation risk.”
Banks, Thomas said, “don’t like controversy, and they don’t like reputation risk.”
Whichever bank receives these accounts will have to combat the perception that they stand counter to the ideals of Wells Fargo.
“To take your money out of one of the best-run banks in America, and for another bank to accept an account that came out of Wells Fargo, some people might ask questions like, ‘Does your bank not agree with Wells Fargo?’” Thomas said.
Read more here: Franklin Graham is pulling bank accounts from Wells Fargo for featuring same-sex couple in ad The Charlotte Observer The Charlotte Observer
He is going to have a hard time finding a major national bank willing to assume the reputational risk that he brings with that account.
None of them will want to be associated with anti-LBGT bigotry.
He is probably going to have to put the funds in some mom&pop bank somewhere and they won't have the resources to handle that kind of deposit.
What a fool!
Wrong -
My company no longer does business with Wells Fargo (we did for over 16 years) for the same reason.
Total loss to Wells Fargo? $13.5 million/year in cash flow-thru.
Had offers from 4 different banks - moved the same day.
Oh .... picked Chase Bank ... hardly a nothing banking institution.
Irrelevant since you are not publicly advertising your bigotry to the nation at large.
Also, irrelevant because it negates your previous posts about banks not being willing to take their accounts .. oh, and the other one, about nobody else doing this.
Banks would usually line up for those kinds of deposits. But Ken Thomas, a Miami-based independent bank consultant and economist, said the bank that receives Graham’s bank accounts will have to answer some tough questions.
“The bank that takes this account will be in a higher visibility position because you’re going to ask them, ‘What do you think of that ad?’ … And they will face some potential reputation risk.”
Banks, Thomas said, “don’t like controversy, and they don’t like reputation risk.”
Whichever bank receives these accounts will have to combat the perception that they stand counter to the ideals of Wells Fargo.
“To take your money out of one of the best-run banks in America, and for another bank to accept an account that came out of Wells Fargo, some people might ask questions like, ‘Does your bank not agree with Wells Fargo?’” Thomas said.
Read more here: Franklin Graham is pulling bank accounts from Wells Fargo for featuring same-sex couple in ad The Charlotte Observer The Charlotte Observer
He is going to have a hard time finding a major national bank willing to assume the reputational risk that he brings with that account.
None of them will want to be associated with anti-LBGT bigotry.
He is probably going to have to put the funds in some mom&pop bank somewhere and they won't have the resources to handle that kind of deposit.
What a fool!
Wrong -
My company no longer does business with Wells Fargo (we did for over 16 years) for the same reason.
Total loss to Wells Fargo? $13.5 million/year in cash flow-thru.
Had offers from 4 different banks - moved the same day.
Oh .... picked Chase Bank ... hardly a nothing banking institution.
Irrelevant since you are not publicly advertising your bigotry to the nation at large.
Also, irrelevant because it negates your previous posts about banks not being willing to take their accounts .. oh, and the other one, about nobody else doing this.
BZZZT Wrong!
Graham has publicly announced that he intends to move his accounts which is what makes them risk toxic to whichever bank accepts them.
You have just closed your paltry checking account without any publicity whatsoever therefore there is zero risk to the banks concerned because no one knows about your LBGT bigotry.
Graham removing his business from WF is perfectly empirical. Are you oblivious?Empirical is not fallacy.Franklin Graham.So far it's not working.
You have zero credible evidence to prove your fallacy.
Thank you for tacitly admitting that you have zero credible evidence to prove your fallacy.
There is nothing empirical in your fallacy.
But I don't come at this from a religious POV. My take is entirely empirical and uber progressive. It just happens to be in line with some religious fundamentalism. Coincidence.Homofascists are among the most intolerant people on earth. Their agenda contributes to social demise on several levels and they want to force everyone to acquiesce to their otherwise irrelevant personal behavior choices.
Pure evil.
Ironic given that is an exact description of the aniumus that fundamentalist Christians are displaying towards the LBGT community.
There are more Christians than queers, and i'm sure after all the outrage the queers have been doing against businesses and people. There a lot more atheist that would support Graham. Just to shut the queers up.Like I just said, the wisest banks will remain silent on the issue. If pressed, they will weigh the liabilities and more often than not go the way of maintaining reticence or Hobby Lobby.On the contrary. He may expose a bank with the values of a Chick-Fil-a and that would enhance their business.
That mom&pop bank will probably only have assets equal to a Chik-Fil-A too. It is highly unlikely that any well known national bank will take the reputational risk.
There is one one chik-fil-a, they are not franchises. I doubt a bank with a net worth of $5.5 billion can be considered "mom and pop"
Deposits are liabilities to banks. Loans are assets. Only 28 banks, out of 5,570, in the nation have assets in excess of $5 billion.
None of those 28 banks will be willing to take on the reputational risk associated with the LBGT animus that is associated with the Graham deposits. That just leaves the 5,542 mom&pop banks who will struggle with the FDIC insurance involved with a deposit of that magnitude.
Except that banks are openly embracing the LBGT community and will continue to do so because they know that is good for business.
You obviously don't realize if a national bank accepts Graham's accounts. More than likely all Christian businesses and all churches, even christians, and people who are tired of hearing about queers 24/7. Will move their money there. That would make that bank the biggest in the world and would put some banks that are trying to play the pc card, out of business. You really don't understand how it really works.Banks would usually line up for those kinds of deposits. But Ken Thomas, a Miami-based independent bank consultant and economist, said the bank that receives Graham’s bank accounts will have to answer some tough questions.
“The bank that takes this account will be in a higher visibility position because you’re going to ask them, ‘What do you think of that ad?’ … And they will face some potential reputation risk.”
Banks, Thomas said, “don’t like controversy, and they don’t like reputation risk.”
Whichever bank receives these accounts will have to combat the perception that they stand counter to the ideals of Wells Fargo.
“To take your money out of one of the best-run banks in America, and for another bank to accept an account that came out of Wells Fargo, some people might ask questions like, ‘Does your bank not agree with Wells Fargo?’” Thomas said.
Read more here: Franklin Graham is pulling bank accounts from Wells Fargo for featuring same-sex couple in ad The Charlotte Observer The Charlotte Observer
He is going to have a hard time finding a major national bank willing to assume the reputational risk that he brings with that account.
None of them will want to be associated with anti-LBGT bigotry.
He is probably going to have to put the funds in some mom&pop bank somewhere and they won't have the resources to handle that kind of deposit.
What a fool!
Wrong -
My company no longer does business with Wells Fargo (we did for over 16 years) for the same reason.
Total loss to Wells Fargo? $13.5 million/year in cash flow-thru.
Had offers from 4 different banks - moved the same day.
Oh .... picked Chase Bank ... hardly a nothing banking institution.
Irrelevant since you are not publicly advertising your bigotry to the nation at large.
Also, irrelevant because it negates your previous posts about banks not being willing to take their accounts .. oh, and the other one, about nobody else doing this.
BZZZT Wrong!
Graham has publicly announced that he intends to move his accounts which is what makes them risk toxic to whichever bank accepts them.
You have just closed your paltry checking account without any publicity whatsoever therefore there is zero risk to the banks concerned because no one knows about your LBGT bigotry.
He is going to have a hard time finding a major national bank willing to assume the reputational risk that he brings with that account.
None of them will want to be associated with anti-LBGT bigotry.
He is probably going to have to put the funds in some mom&pop bank somewhere and they won't have the resources to handle that kind of deposit.
What a fool!
Wrong -
My company no longer does business with Wells Fargo (we did for over 16 years) for the same reason.
Total loss to Wells Fargo? $13.5 million/year in cash flow-thru.
Had offers from 4 different banks - moved the same day.
Oh .... picked Chase Bank ... hardly a nothing banking institution.
Irrelevant since you are not publicly advertising your bigotry to the nation at large.
Also, irrelevant because it negates your previous posts about banks not being willing to take their accounts .. oh, and the other one, about nobody else doing this.
BZZZT Wrong!
Graham has publicly announced that he intends to move his accounts which is what makes them risk toxic to whichever bank accepts them.
You have just closed your paltry checking account without any publicity whatsoever therefore there is zero risk to the banks concerned because no one knows about your LBGT bigotry.
The liberal mind fascinates me .... kinda like looking in a can of worms, hoping to find gold. Amusing ... but not very fruitful.
Just go away .... your perverted sense of logic offends me.
Fine. Do without our money. There is no reason to celebrate gay marriage in commercials. Wells Fargo doesn't celebrate normal marriages.Franklin Graham is pulling bank accounts from Wells Fargo for featuring same-sex couple in ad The Charlotte Observer The Charlotte Observer
He wants you evangelicals to boycott such corporations who support LGBT. The far right social con Christian reactionaries are going to find out just how irrelevant they are truly.
You cannot be the Morality Police anymore.
Run along.
Graham removing his business from WF is perfectly empirical. Are you oblivious?Empirical is not fallacy.Franklin Graham.You have zero credible evidence to prove your fallacy.
Thank you for tacitly admitting that you have zero credible evidence to prove your fallacy.
There is nothing empirical in your fallacy.
But I don't come at this from a religious POV. My take is entirely empirical and uber progressive. It just happens to be in line with some religious fundamentalism. Coincidence.Homofascists are among the most intolerant people on earth. Their agenda contributes to social demise on several levels and they want to force everyone to acquiesce to their otherwise irrelevant personal behavior choices.
Pure evil.
Ironic given that is an exact description of the aniumus that fundamentalist Christians are displaying towards the LBGT community.
It's backwards, out-of-touch people who promote the homo agenda.
There are more Christians than queers, and i'm sure after all the outrage the queers have been doing against businesses and people. There a lot more atheist that would support Graham. Just to shut the queers up.Like I just said, the wisest banks will remain silent on the issue. If pressed, they will weigh the liabilities and more often than not go the way of maintaining reticence or Hobby Lobby.That mom&pop bank will probably only have assets equal to a Chik-Fil-A too. It is highly unlikely that any well known national bank will take the reputational risk.
There is one one chik-fil-a, they are not franchises. I doubt a bank with a net worth of $5.5 billion can be considered "mom and pop"
Deposits are liabilities to banks. Loans are assets. Only 28 banks, out of 5,570, in the nation have assets in excess of $5 billion.
None of those 28 banks will be willing to take on the reputational risk associated with the LBGT animus that is associated with the Graham deposits. That just leaves the 5,542 mom&pop banks who will struggle with the FDIC insurance involved with a deposit of that magnitude.
Except that banks are openly embracing the LBGT community and will continue to do so because they know that is good for business.
You obviously don't realize if a national bank accepts Graham's accounts. More than likely all Christian businesses and all churches, even christians, and people who are tired of hearing about queers 24/7. Will move their money there. That would make that bank the biggest in the world and would put some banks that are trying to play the pc card, out of business. You really don't understand how it really works.He is going to have a hard time finding a major national bank willing to assume the reputational risk that he brings with that account.
None of them will want to be associated with anti-LBGT bigotry.
He is probably going to have to put the funds in some mom&pop bank somewhere and they won't have the resources to handle that kind of deposit.
What a fool!
Wrong -
My company no longer does business with Wells Fargo (we did for over 16 years) for the same reason.
Total loss to Wells Fargo? $13.5 million/year in cash flow-thru.
Had offers from 4 different banks - moved the same day.
Oh .... picked Chase Bank ... hardly a nothing banking institution.
Irrelevant since you are not publicly advertising your bigotry to the nation at large.
Also, irrelevant because it negates your previous posts about banks not being willing to take their accounts .. oh, and the other one, about nobody else doing this.
BZZZT Wrong!
Graham has publicly announced that he intends to move his accounts which is what makes them risk toxic to whichever bank accepts them.
You have just closed your paltry checking account without any publicity whatsoever therefore there is zero risk to the banks concerned because no one knows about your LBGT bigotry.
Are you forgetting about Chick Fil A and Hobby Lobby? Empirical is as empirical is.Graham removing his business from WF is perfectly empirical. Are you oblivious?Empirical is not fallacy.Franklin Graham.
Thank you for tacitly admitting that you have zero credible evidence to prove your fallacy.
There is nothing empirical in your fallacy.
That is not empirical, it is anecdotal.
WF openly advertising to attract the LBGT community is not refuted by a single instance of someone closing their account.
What bigotry? Show me the bigotry.But I don't come at this from a religious POV. My take is entirely empirical and uber progressive. It just happens to be in line with some religious fundamentalism. Coincidence.Homofascists are among the most intolerant people on earth. Their agenda contributes to social demise on several levels and they want to force everyone to acquiesce to their otherwise irrelevant personal behavior choices.
Pure evil.
Ironic given that is an exact description of the aniumus that fundamentalist Christians are displaying towards the LBGT community.
It's backwards, out-of-touch people who promote the homo agenda.
Your vile bigotry just happens to align with fundamentalist Christianity and yet you claim that is coincidence.
My take on the social counter-productivity of the homo agenda is, again, purely empirical and based in social science. It just so happens that fundamentalists including muslims are in agreement with me.But I don't come at this from a religious POV. My take is entirely empirical and uber progressive. It just happens to be in line with some religious fundamentalism. Coincidence.Homofascists are among the most intolerant people on earth. Their agenda contributes to social demise on several levels and they want to force everyone to acquiesce to their otherwise irrelevant personal behavior choices.
Pure evil.
Ironic given that is an exact description of the aniumus that fundamentalist Christians are displaying towards the LBGT community.
It's backwards, out-of-touch people who promote the homo agenda.
Your vile bigotry just happens to align with fundamentalist Christianity and yet you claim that is coincidence.
I've been saying all along that all fundamentalists, including Muslims, are alike.My take on the social counter-productivity of the homo agenda is, again, purely empirical and based in social science. It just so happens that fundamentalists including muslims are in agreement with me.But I don't come at this from a religious POV. My take is entirely empirical and uber progressive. It just happens to be in line with some religious fundamentalism. Coincidence.Homofascists are among the most intolerant people on earth. Their agenda contributes to social demise on several levels and they want to force everyone to acquiesce to their otherwise irrelevant personal behavior choices.
Pure evil.
Ironic given that is an exact description of the aniumus that fundamentalist Christians are displaying towards the LBGT community.
It's backwards, out-of-touch people who promote the homo agenda.
Your vile bigotry just happens to align with fundamentalist Christianity and yet you claim that is coincidence.
Glaad is bad Graham is good.Where are all the nuts who railed against GLAAD et al for wanting a boycott of A&E over the Duck Dynasty business.
I guess boycotts are back on the RWnut menu...
