Madison M&I branch closed because of mass withdrawls

Unconfirmed but, there is apparently a run on the bank that began this morning when the Firefighters union withdrew their retirement funds from M&I. More accounts are being closed forcing the bank to close early.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/TheVoiceOfWisconsin

attempt to take away the rights of the Unions? Or is this something else?

Sorry, not sure what it means, so would appreciate some info.

Teachers, firefighters and police officers said they would begin a boycott of M&I Bank if the bank does not begin publicly opposing Gov. Scott Walker's efforts to curtail collective bargaining for public workers.

Unions representing those groups said they would start other boycotts of businesses that backed Walker in his campaign.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/117756068.html

Make businesses stop and think before they support the fascists!!

:toast: :bounce: :kick: :fistbump: :headbang: :woohoo: :applause:

I hope it's true then ~ this is the way to get to them, where it hurts.

All of them - Workers or Walker - which side are you on

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iAIM02kv0g&feature=related

I'm sure that's a big chunk of change for M&I to lose.

Make them pay

60 days to another bank...

There's a difference between taking a distribution from a retirement account (which, as you correctly noted, can be avoided if you do it properly) and the custodian (presumably the union) moving the funds from one institution to another. That doesn't count as a distribution.

There are, however, conflicting reports on what was actually withdrawn. Some said it was an estimate of the total accounts that were closed, some said it was a single union account representing pensions (seems unlikely given the small amount). Some reports say that the dollar amount wasn't even a withdrawal, it was a mock check displaying the amount that the bank had donated to Walker's campaign and was unrelated to that account closings.

That's what you get when your news source is a Twitter feed.

See:
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/pages/Boycott-Scott-Walker-Contributors/101624709918554

I hope it hurts badly! :-)

:shrug: You reap what you sow..

They deserve to be shut down if they supported that moron.

The Unions have called for everyone to withdraw any money they have in the bank and put in only in banks that support their cause. Firefighters Union withdrew $190,000+ this morning. Hopefully this story is true and EVERYONE has followed suit.

"According to records provided by the Sunlight Foundation, executives at M&I Bank gave $46,308 to Walker’s campaign. And now, a group of local unions in Wisconsin have threatened to pull their money from M&I Bank unless it denounces Scott Walker’s attack on workers’ rights."

I find this story hard to believe. There's nothing that a "run" on an individual branch can do unless the withdrawals are made in case, and the bank almost always has the ability to restrict that type of withdrawal.


BTW - What's the connection between M&I and the struggles in WI?

Go Cheeseheads!!
Solidarity!

This isn't the 1930s. You really can't "run" a branch and force it to close.

If enough people make enough withdrawals a branch can run out of cash. They'll be up and running after the next armored car delivery, but there's a finite amount of cash in any one branch.

That's why the claim was surprising to me. If a branch gets close to running out of cash, they had the option of giving you an official check or requiring you to give (IIRC) seven days notice of the cash withdrawal.

They also have the option of getting cash from another location, but that's risky of course.

Lastly... I just can't imagine the firemen's union walking out with piles of cash (or anyone else with a significant balance).

that's a run on the bank. A run on a bank doesn't necessarily mean they're broke, it means they can't handle the unanticipated transaction load.

That's really all that matters.

"Feeling overwhelmed" isn't a run on the bank. Neither is "too many customers in line".

when a large number of bank customers withdraw their deposits. Nothing more complicated than that. Now usually a run on the bank implies the customers believe the bank is insolvent or close to it, so in that respect this is a little different.

The bank does not have to run out of cash. The bank does not have to even come close. It's not too many customers in line. It's just a large number of bank customers withdrawing their deposits. So yes, this can be legitimately called a "run on the bank."

Edited to add my apology about confusing the issue with the amount of cash on hand. That's irrelevant.

The question is whether or not concerted action forced them to close their doors early.

Yeah I read it. I'm answering a question about whether or not this is a "run on the bank." It sounds like it could be considered one. Whether or not the bank manager decided to close that branch because of it, I don't know. I wasn't there to consult with him or her. Regardless, whether they closed or not is irrelevant to whether a bunch of people withdrawing their deposits/closing their accounts constitutes a run on the bank.

poster is just a picker of nits. he just likes to argue. it doesn't matter if he has a substantive or relevant point, he just likes to be obtuse

necessarily all in the form of physical currency) as a ratio of the loans they make. If enough depositors withdraw funds, whether in the form of cash (currency), cashier's check, or wire transfer, that act of collective withdrawal can so deplete a bank's reserves that it may indeed be forced to close because it no longer has legally mandated reserves to support the outstanding loans it has made.

From my days in Madison (where I worked a summer temp job for M&I while on break from college), I remember M&I being a major state bank, meaning a lot of local participation and deposits. If a significant number of those depositors begin withdrawing funds, M&I might quickly face lack of adequate reserves.

However, I thought the Fed always stood by to lend to banks that faced a run on their deposits. Not sure and I'm not an expert in the field.

And they would always have the option of teh fed funds window if their liquidity dropped too low (which, keep in mind, would require draining the reserves on close to $50 Billion in deposits, not just what was held at that one branch.

However, I thought the Fed always stood by to lend to banks that faced a run on their deposits. Not sure and I'm not an expert in the field.

You're correct. It's one of their primary functions.

just takes me to my FB page.

So it's only the Madison branch of M&I that allegedly closed? If that is the case, is it the one right on the capital square?

If the Madison branch closed, I suspect it would be b/c its cash on hand (paper currency and coin) was insufficient to meet depositors' demands. However, I'm a bit dubious, as surely the branch could arrange for currency transfer from other of its branches.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

and personally I wouldn't bank with an organization that donates to scum like Walker. Even if it did take a week to get my money out, I'd leave them in the dust.

The OP was that the withdrawals forced the bank to close their doors. What many posters here failed to realize was that it's a very serious thing for a bank to close their doors during the normal banking day because they run out of cash. Times (and regulations) have changed since the days of the old Bailey Savings and Loan, but it's still a big deal.

The "two issues" are the impact of the lost business and the potential impact of running out of cash. "Closed because of mass withdrawals" implies that latter. Which is why I responded the way I did. Finding out whether or not that actually happened is a big deal.

Your post (like many here) is really focusing on the former. Yes, losing customers hurts the company. And yes, this is a company that could be on the brink of failure. They've lost money for eight straight quarters and are still relying on government bailout funds to stay afloat. The reported $190k really isn't that big a deal compared to the size of the bank, but they'll certainly "get the message".

I spent most of the thread (and some of last night) trying to find out whether or not the title of the OP was correct (for the reasons I stated above - it's a much bigger deal than losing some customers). It turns out that it wasn't true. The police asked them to close due to safety issues related to crowd control. Not that that isn't a good result of protesting a company (assuming the protesters have remained as nonviolent as they have admirably done for three weeks), but it isn't as big a deal as I thought might have occurred if the OP was correct.

They called for everyone to withdraw their money from that bank. If this story is true, it sounds like people heeded the advice of the Union head. I so hope they shut the bank down!

This could really snowball.

the Chairman of the bank might be on a Kaopectate IV right about now.


I love it. :rofl:

I have no money in that bank but if I did I would withdraw it today, too.

I rather doubt it.

If it wasn't cash... it doesn't hurt the branch's ability to stay open.

Of course... it does hurt their profitability. But that's their own look out.

... because of the current situation, it might still be prudent to close up shop for a bit. Today, they might have everyone fired up. Give it a day or two, and they will be on to the next boycott having forgotten the bank.

So, no, they won't run out of money. But they might run out of customers which is worse.

That really isn't an option.

But they might run out of customers

That would certainly be a welcome sight (taking as true that the bank is in fact a big supporter - I don't know)... but we're talking about something like a $50 Billion dollar bank. It's going to take a little more juice than a couple unions withdrawing their funds to get that far.

But it could certainly hurt!

but I doubt you get it, that a boycott does work, and that it has started.

And I'm all for it.

I only questioned whether they could succeed in forcing a branch to close it's doors for running out of cash.

I don't think that they can.

Whether they did it due to withdrawals or not matters little... have a good day.

It's begun...

The question is whetherthey were forced to close EARLY.

If you've seen a news report saying that they did; I'd love to see it.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

They see a big drop and will know why.

It appears that they have eight straight quarters of losses and don't expect to begin repaying TARP until late this year.

This is a bank that's still in trouble.


But if we're talking about their cash position (which, again, I don't believe to be the case), that gets reconciled nightly.

do business with your competitor.


I'm a Postal Credit Union member.

all their funds. It equaled $190,000+. They called for ALL union members to follow suit.

if those withdrawals are in the form of a cashier's check.

It has to be cash and the branch has the option of refusing in those types of situations.

All I know is what I heard the Firefighter Union boss say...the Firefighter's Union had all their funds in M & I and they all went down to the bank and withdrew their money...which equaled $190,000+. He didn't specify cash or cashier's check. And it DOES make a HUGE difference when they have NO CUSTOMERS LEFT. That makes it a tad bit difficult to conduct business, when there is none.

Imagine you were a union member. Would you feel comfortable with your treasurer walking out of a bank with a couple hundred grand in cash?

Would that be good stewardship of your money?

And it DOES make a HUGE difference when they have NO CUSTOMERS LEFT. That makes it a tad bit difficult to conduct business, when there is none.

That's a bit of a stretch. I have no doubt that this will hurt that branch (their "net new" number will be awful)... but an average downtown branch has more than $100 million dollars in deposits (sometimes quite a bit more). Unless there were a few thousand OTHER unions doing the same thing... it's not really "NO CUSTOMERS LEFT".

"retirement funds" = union pension fund.

If a bank runs out of cash due to withdrawals, it may be forced to close it's doors (a really bad thing).

But withdrawing all of your money doesn't impact the cash position if the withdrawal is in the form of a cashier's check.

I agree that taking out close to 200k in union money is going to make that branch feel a little pain... but I simply can't imagine anyone who is a trustee for those union dollars walking into a branch and saying "give it to us in cash".

And as I said. If they DID, the branch has the option of saying "no".

Every gangster in North America is studying Madison's traffic patterns in Google Maps right now. Trying to find where the best place is to hit the armored car.

read the rest of the thread for the connection.

I can't imagine them taking it out in cash (it sounds incredibly irresponsible to do so)... but a check of that size (or many times that size) doesn't impact a branch's ability to stay open.

It's alot of money to you and me... but it's just not an issue for the bank.

I'd bet that the real impact was probably the crowd of protestors outside the branch.

This is definitely putting your money where your mouth is.


:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I already have my bank accounts in a local credit union, but everyone, who still banks with the national and international banksters needs to move their funds to a community bank or credit union and do it before the weekend. This will send a very big salvo and there needn't be a bullet fired.

Stand together or fall separately.

Smart move. And very effective, and logical. The bank has (had) lots of the firefighters' money, and it should be expected not to harm their interests.

nt

Update 3 p.m.: A call to M&I's Capitol Square branch confirms the bank is closed for the rest of the day.

When the firefighters arrived at the Capitol this morning they started the chant "MOVE YOUR MONEY!" Firefighters Local 311 President Joe Conway told the audience they should move their money out of M&I Bank. The bank was one of the leading contributors to the Walker campaign due to contributions by current and former executives and board members. Detailed contributions are available via the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. In a statement to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel last month the bank said "Individual employees may choose, at their own discretion and based on their political beliefs, to make contributions to political campaigns."

Following speeches by Conway and Wisconsin Professional Firefighters Association Mahlon Mitchell, the firefighters marched to the M&I Bank across the street and picketed the bank. Some reports suggest the firefighters withdrew more than $100,000 from the bank. The number has fluctuated from $182,000 to $192,000. Other reports suggest a firefighter was simply carrying a mock "receipt" issued by M&I Bank to Gov. Walker to the tune of $182,000. We're working on getting verification that a withdrawal by the firefighters did actually occur. Video of the firefighters arriving this morning and part of Conway's speech is posted below.

http://www.dane101.com/current/2011/03/10/firefighters_target_mi_bank_for_executive_support_of_walker

If the bank itself made contributions, he would have bigger legal problems than is currently anticipated.

Not to pick nits :)

Donated to Walker, 68 donated to Barrett. The bank itself donated nothing.

So I guess those 68 employees need to be punished for not making sure every other employee donated to Barrett. They need to possibly lose their jobs because they didn't interrogate every other employee of the bank to make sure their ideology was correct before taking a job.

Boy, that'll show them.

How much did the two groups donate in terms of dollars?

And how many donated to both sides?

That helps.

They also got quite a bit of TARP money. I haven't found out yet whether they've repaid it... but it shouldn't take long.

Still checking.

Found it.

"M&I executives reiterated in a conference call with analysts Wednesday that they are sticking with plans they announced at the annual shareholders meeting in April that the company will start repaying the TARP debt in late 2011. Repayment will be possible only when the bank returns to profitability, which it has failed to attain the past eight quarters."

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2010/10/21/mi-pays-tarp-dividend.html

This is a bank that can't afford to lose many customers if their capital position is this strained. It's still silly to think of 192k as meaning much (and there's some reason to doubt that part of the story is even true since the union gave them until the 17th to change their position), but a significant boycott CAN have a real impact on them.

because, why not?

I completely understand those who are concerned that the fat cats will remain fat and boycotts will just hurt the little guy...


...but if the bank continues to struggle (it's really done quite poorly even compared to other banks), they'll be closed by the FDIC and handed over to a more solvent bank. If that bank has lots of overlap in the same markets, some branches would probably be closed, but most customer-facing employees would be pretty safe (and would now be working for a more solvent organization).

Go Firefighters!

This bank was a big topic this morning for the money they gave to Wanker and the Fitzgerald cabal. The call had gone out through various unions to boycott M & I...looks like people were listening.

Yep...hit 'em in the pocketbook. Also look for a boycott of Menards...another Wanker puppetmaster...

and, btw, can I just say :wtf: really? a flame war?

dg

remaining option.

thats what will really hurt the bank the most because their loyal customers will be so inconvenienced without access to the ATM's.

Let's see if the bank can come up with the reserves to cover it.

If so, I'd love to hear it.

Ever seen "It's a Wonderful Life"?

All "fractional reserves" really means is that when you deposit $100 with the bank, they don't have to keep $100 in cash in the vault in order to cover your potential witdrawal. But if they DID have to, they wouldn't have anything to lend out. Which kinda defeats the purpose of having banks in the first place.

Lol... not that some would consider that BAD thing. :)

Which talks about how fractional reserve is the worst system of banking... except for every other system that's ever been devised and implemented.

Though he also wrote it in 2007 and talked about how hedging with CDOs and CDSs was bringing an unprecedented level of stability and security to the market. So YMMV.

M and I has been my bank for over 20 years, but now that I know who they support, they can go Fuck Themselves!

Take a stand and make a point.