Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google The Almighty Buck United States

Next in Google's Quest for Consumer Dominance -- Banking (wsj.com) 91

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
Google will soon offer checking accounts to consumers, becoming the latest Silicon Valley heavyweight to push into finance. The Wall Street Journal: The project, code-named Cache, is expected to launch next year with accounts run by Citigroup and a credit union at Stanford University, a tiny lender in Google's backyard. Big tech companies see financial services as a way to get closer to users and glean valuable data. Apple introduced a credit card this summer. Amazon.com has talked to banks about offering checking accounts. Facebook is working on a digital currency it hopes will upend global payments. Their ambitions could challenge incumbent financial-services firms, which fear losing their primacy and customers. They are also likely to stoke a reaction in Washington, where regulators are already investigating whether large technology companies have too much clout.

The tie-ups between banking and technology have sometimes been fraught. Apple irked its credit-card partner, Goldman Sachs Group, by running ads that said the card was "designed by Apple, not a bank." Major financial companies dropped out of Facebook's crypto project after a regulatory backlash. Google's approach seems designed to make allies, rather than enemies, in both camps. The financial institutions' brands, not Google's, will be front-and-center on the accounts, an executive told The Wall Street Journal. And Google will leave the financial plumbing and compliance to the banks -- activities it couldn't do without a license anyway.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next in Google's Quest for Consumer Dominance -- Banking More

Next in Google's Quest for Consumer Dominance -- Banking

Comments Filter:

  • Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by reanjr ( 588767 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @09:45AM (#59409838) Homepage

    Ok, what's the value add then? Why is a Google checking account useful if it's just a regular checking account?

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @09:59AM (#59409906)
      Presumably some shiny app, the same as Apple.

      • Presumably some shiny app, the same as Apple.

        That, and they can advertise to you more expensive items on payday and cheap items towards the end of a pay period when you have less money...

          oh wait, are we talking about benefit to the consumer, not benefit to google... Benefit to consumer, that's funny.

    • I am not sure but I would suspect some or all of the following:

      • Faster direct deposits
      • No overdraft fees
      • Seamless (eg. from within the Google account) online bill pay
      • Better MFA (eg. TOTP)

      I get the impression that there is a newer generation of checking accounts like Bluebird by American Express that are becoming popular because they fix real accessibility and performance issues compared to traditional checking accounts.

      While I have gone back to a traditional bank for my savings and joint checking account, I st

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by moronikos ( 595352 )

      It is useful for them. To further track your every move--your spending habits and further profile you.

      • Why would they need this then. They are already well aware of this.

    • Ok, what's the value add then?

      One Click Shopping, A GoogleCard® on your phone. Don't worry, the stores will pay the commission.

      For Google, the values are limitless

    • The value from the consumer's perspective is going to be the integration & convenience. I'm sure that they'll integrate account control features into Google Assistant ("Google, what's my account balance?"), create default Android widgets, and have all types of 3rd-party integrations for sending/receiving money.

      This is going to appeal to the same type of idiot that rushed out to buy the new Apple credit card. The day I give Google control over my money is the day Donald Trump starts welcoming in Mexican

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zocalo ( 252965 )
      Seriously? You can't imagine what Google (a company that makes most of its money from selling ads) might do with a near complete record of all the companies you do business with, and potentially many of the specific products and when you bought them as well? They also get to play financial investment gains with the collated pot of money in people's accounts which, if they hire competent people, will yield a lot more return than they'll pass on to account holders.

      Or did you mean for the product (or "con

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jwhyche ( 6192 )

      Your bank account is the last line of information about every thing you spend money on. That information would be a gold mine to a advertising agency. They can map your spending habits, movements, everything about you.

      Just say "No." Of course that worked great for Nance Reagan.

    • Ok, what's the value add then? Why is a Google checking account useful if it's just a regular checking account?

      It'd have to be a shit load of value. Google are almost the last people I would want in my banking.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by NFN_NLN ( 633283 )

        They have zero customer service. There is NO number to call when there is an email issue, or a Youtube strike or a fraudulent transaction.

        Google once wiped my Google Wallet balance... nothing I can do about it.

    • Two things they could do come to mind. #1. Zero transaction fees for transactions with other Google account users in exchange for Google knowing everything about your financial activity; #2. Really good fraud detection - because Google also knows everything else about you, their AI can easily recognize spending behavior that is uncharacteristic. Once enough people have accounts, they can make Google Marketplace, where vendors only accept payments from Google accounts, but pay a significantly smaller percen

      • Zelle already does zero-fee transactions and it's supported by most banking apps already.

        • When I read their FAQ, I see the following words:
          "
          I use Zelle for free as a consumer. Is there a fee to use Zelle as a small business?
          It depends. Check with your financial institution to see what fees may apply. Read the updated terms and conditions provided by your financial institution and accept them to use Zelle.
          "
          "
          Is there a limit on the amount of money I can send and receive with Zelle?
          Your financial institution determines this. Please reach out to your bank or credit union directly to find out w

          • If you are a business, you should probably have a merchant account with your own bank.

            It seems unlikely to me that Google is going to somehow enable international bank transfers when the underlying banks don't offer it through Zelle.

    • The value add is to have a seamless experience across all services: you can have your Google banking services suspended for spamming too many emojis on YouTube. It's about time, really.

    • Banks are trash. More specifically, the negative stereotypes of banks tend to be true: they are run by rich men like Epstein, have no respect for women or their clients, are happy to rip you off, and only have their power because they bribe the government.

      To make it more personal, all those expensive hookers and government bribes cost money, so a bank with fewer such expenses (and more data scientists) will be more efficient, offering you more money.

      But for me it's because banks are trash and I'd like
      • This is a textbook example of out of the frying pan and into the fire. Moving your money and transaction history and privacy from regulated banks to Google(!!) is an improvement? You're worried about companies bribing government? That's the only reason an abusive monopolist like Google hasn't faced anti-trust YEARS ago! Wow....
        • You may think Google is evil compared to banks. In that case, you have not ever looked at the history of banks.

          When did Google ever unfairly foreclose on a home?

          • They haven't had the opportunity to yet.

            Now when you type "how do I claim unemployment" in google your account will go into automatic review.

          • Total non sequitur. Google as you perfectly know doesn't YET do home loans. Once they do, they'll be much more efficient at foreclosures than any bank could dream of. Banks have people and paperwork. Google's foreclosure AI will have you on the streets immediately with no human involvement. Sounds better to you?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by lgw ( 121541 )

        Banks are trash. More specifically, the negative stereotypes of banks tend to be true

        It's worth pointing out the difference between retail banks and investment banks. Retail banks are assholes, sure, but savings accounts and mortgages are a very valuable part of modern life. It's a reasonable trade-off.

        Investment banks OTOH are just parasites. The worst corruption of our government is by investment banks. The SEC is mostly composed of former Goldman Sachs employees, so they're effectively self-regulating with all of the lack of actual regulating you might expect. Investment banks cause

        • You mean like Wells Fargo?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by lgw ( 121541 )

            Someone has to be the worst in any category, no? But it's a sign of how bad banking regulation has failed the consumer that Wells Fargo still exists.

            • It's probably hyperbolic to call all banks evil. But in general their inefficiencies could net the consumer an extra 1-2% in interest per year (for savings accounts). Not a lot, but better in my pocket than the bank's.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by lgw ( 121541 )

                That money wouldn't go to depositors anyhow, but to stockholders. Really, you can't reasonably expect government-backed consumer savings to pay more that short-term treasuries or other equally-safe investments that aren't consumer friendly. You should expect to pay a bit for a brick-and-mortar storefront, and the ability to work in amounts that aren't a multiple of $1000.

                The real problem in the early 2010s was that short-term treasuries had been artificially forced below inflation, often down to 0 (and so

                • Well now you are giving me more reasons to not like banks. I already didn't like them.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by lgw ( 121541 )

                    Use them as a convenience for paying. Don't use them as a place to store very much money. Once you're beyond a 6 months disaster find, it's time to learn to invest and leave banks behind.

    • Ok, what's the value add then? Why is a Google checking account useful if it's just a regular checking account?

      Why not? They couldn't be any worse than normal banks.

      Though personally I'd rather have Amazon checking. Amazon customer service is usually stellar, while Google's is usually non-existent.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by lgw ( 121541 )

        Sadly the Amazon credit card is just Chase. Chase is OK, I guess. I mean it's worlds better customer service than Google, but then so is a used car dealership.

    • 1) You will get a cool debit card with the Google logo on it.
      2) Your financial data will be peddled six ways from Sunday, and collated with the data of every other sucker who fell for this will bring untold value... to Google. That’s the value add. And to show their appreciation and to entice more people to sign up, perhaps they will offer “exiting and personalised incentives” like a free cheeseburger at McDs or a buck cash back with your next purchase at Aliblabla or whatever.

      Hey, at

    • Why?

      Isn't it obvious? The opposite of "Do No Evil" is "Get Into Banking."

  • More insights about its users (Score:3)

    by Alain Williams ( 2972 ) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @09:46AM (#59409852) Homepage

    Google will tie up sales with web site visits.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Google will tie up sales with web site visits.

      Quite illegal to do in most countries due to banking and privacy regulations.

      This is why I think it won't work. Most countries will not permit them to operate they way they want to and they'll encounter a lot of issues adapting to the varying regulations in different countries, things you get away with in the US will get your CEO sent to "bugger me up the trumpet" prison in the UK, likewise reporting requirements of the IRS are difficult to comply with under some regulations requiring certain things to b

  • So, the bank runs the account. The bank adheres to the banking and privacy regulations. The bank takes the risk. The consumer gets absolutely fucking -nothing-. And.... drumroll please!!! .......... Google gets your data in a completely unregulated way!!! Yay! As if they didn't have enough private data already. A win for Google, a loss for everyone else. Keep doing, evil, Google. We'd be disappointed by anything else.

  • More To Lose (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @10:21AM (#59409992)
    Now your bank account can be a "Google service" like all the others that you might lose by pissing off the company's censors/kommissars.

    • Re:More To Lose (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BlueStrat ( 756137 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @11:18AM (#59410200)

      Now your bank account can be a "Google service" like all the others that you might lose by pissing off the company's censors/kommissars.

      You go to a licensed gun dealer and attempt to legally buy an AR-15, or you express non-PC opinions within the hearing of a Siri device, or are tagged in a photo at the "wrong" protest march or political rally. Shortly afterward you get a message from Google.

      "Your Google account including banking services has been terminated for violations of Google's Community Guidelines. As per Google's ToS any remaining balances in accounts terminated for Community Guideline violations involving firearms, association with or support for hate groups, or expressions of hate speech, are forfeit. A reminder that Google monitors all user's activity, both offline and on other platforms and services as well as on all Google services."

      Strat

      • Google can term your account for any reason they desire.
        Not only being a SJW/MAGA asshat
        • Google should go into the wedding cake baking business. Then the courts would set them straight real fast.
      • You forgot this part of the Google cancel message, "... for your benefit".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by lgw ( 121541 )

        ou go to a licensed gun dealer and attempt to legally buy an AR-15, or you express non-PC opinions within the hearing of a Siri device, or are tagged in a photo at the "wrong" protest march or political rally. Shortly afterward you get a message from Google.

        You haven't been following the nerd news. Google just banned a wave of people for using too many emojis in YouTube chat. Hundreds lost access to their gmail, YouTube, and Google docs, and had their appeals rejected. This is thing that really happened.

        WTF Google? WTF?

        • You haven't been following the nerd news. Google just banned a wave of people for using too many emojis in YouTube chat.

          Yes, I have been following YouTube's continuing plunge towards irrelevance by attempting to make YT cable TV 2.0. I heard about the incident you mentioned involving users in a superchat during a stream replying to the streamer's request to vote by posting different colored emojis.

          If YouTube was setting out to intentionally drive people to alt-tech platforms like BitChute and MINDS and away from YT, they could hardly come up with a better plan than their current strategy. I imagine in 5 years, barring any ma

    • Now your bank account can be a "Google service"

      So who handles my money when Google abandon this project in 6 months?

  • Scary Times... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by v1s10nary ( 5867496 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @10:34AM (#59410042)

    Is anyone else seriously concerned about the way big tech is evolving? It's like they are intent on permeating every last aspect of our lives. They've already gotten control over our social lives and shopping habits. Now we're slowly letting them move into our personal finance and even our healthcare systems.... Not to mention Google is literally developing a Smart City in Toronto!

    I'm trying my best not to sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist... But the reality of a Mr.Robot-esque "E Corp" conglomerate is getting closer and closer.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Empiric ( 675968 )
      Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?

    • Is anyone else seriously concerned about the way big tech is evolving? It's like they are intent on permeating every last aspect of our lives.

      It's completely equivalent to warning folks about the Church, just before the Inquisition.

      And the dumb fuckers aren't listening.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Empiric ( 675968 )

        More specifically, Roman Catholicism.

        Hence, the Protestant Reformation.

        And the Eastern Orthodox from the beginning.

    • The best way to fight it is to not play. For starters, abandon social media entirely. Get rid of your Google accounts and use something else for email. Stop using your real name online, if you actually do that (noting you use an alias here; good start). Believing it's 'too late to stop it/them' is surrendering before the fight even begins, it's not a foregone conclusion, big tech companies like Google are not the Government of the U.S., or Law Enforcement, or the Military, they're still just some company, h

      • While this would be the ideal solution... it's just not realistic. We've reached a point in society where big tech is a necessary evil (to a certain degree).
        I try to avoid mainstream social media- but as an IT consultant, LinkedIn is a platform that vital to my professional networking.
        I try to avoid using my real name online- but websites are requiring identity verification increasingly often.
        I try to use various browser plug-ins to block their scripts, cookies, and fingerprinting- but that breaks so many m

        • I hear you, and let's just say I'm glad I didn't end up an IT guy (I found the industry to be rather cutthroat and ridiculous to get into so I skipped it and stuck with electronics and other hardware-oriented things). I should say that what I said above isn't really meant to be the be-all end-all solution to the problem, it's just The Resistance, if you follow. The ultimate solution will be getting all our respective governments to rein in these companies so they aren't allowed to act like this anymore. But
    • Oh and also: if you're one of those people who incrementally give up their privacy for 'conveniences', stop doing that. If Google starts a bank, don't use it, obviously, no matter how 'convenient' they make it to use. In fact go back to using cash for everything you can. Not only will that expose you to less risk in the now-inevitable event of data breaches (which literally happen daily, now), but it'll give you back some of your privacy (purchases in cash can't be tracked by anyone unless you give your nam

    • Google: Okay, DeepMind, we are concerned about the path that human civilization is on. How do we course-correct within 50 years?

      DeepMind: Calculating. Stand by...
      DeepMind: First, you'll need to penetrate the health care sector. I predict an 86.7% probability of success by partnering with Ascension Health Care. Further, I predict an 92.2% public acceptance success rate by naming the effort "Project Nightengale".
      DeepMind: Next, you'll need to penetrate the financial sector. I predict an 90.4% probability of s

      • Google: Okay, DeepMind, we are concerned about the path that human civilization is on. How do we course-correct within 50 years?

        We're going to hope the consciousness that evolves out of the Googleplex is better at marketing than stupid puns and old historical references.

        Judging by its success in all other advertising-related endeavors, it will be.

  • Identifying Corruption (Score:3)

    by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @10:41AM (#59410060)

    "Washington, where regulators are already investigating whether large technology companies have too much clout."

    Uh, already investigating?

    Anyone who's even still questioning whether or not large technology companies have too much clout, have basically identified themselves as corrupt.

    The clout at this point is undeniable and blatant, and the only thing "regulators" are doing is figuring out how they can keep their scams going.

    • Anyone who's even still questioning whether or not large technology companies have too much clout, have basically identified themselves as corrupt.

      That the large tech companies have a lot of clout is indisputable. Whether it's "too much" is much less clear. How much is "too much"? Is mere access to information enough, or does it depend on how that access is used? Does it matter what sorts of internal mitigations are deployed? Does it matter what sort of external (i.e. regulatory) mitigations are deployed? Does the mere potential for abuse warrant increased regulation, or does actual abuse have to happen? What sorts of actions constitute abuse?

    • Anyone who's even still questioning whether or not large technology companies have too much clout, have basically identified themselves as corrupt.

      Your detailed and careful legal analysis on this situation is lacking. I think we better leave it to those in Washington that actually have legal basis for analysis rather than your emotional anti-corporate agenda.

      • Anyone who's even still questioning whether or not large technology companies have too much clout, have basically identified themselves as corrupt.

        Your detailed and careful legal analysis on this situation is lacking. I think we better leave it to those in Washington that actually have legal basis for analysis rather than your emotional anti-corporate agenda.

        The legal folks can debate the nature and extent of the clout, and yes, you're probably right about there being more useful information available to them than one would find in a Slashdot quote.

        That being said, Exxon-Mobil didn't have its CEO take the witness stand regarding their impact on the election. Donald Trump's Twitter feed is a dumpster fire, but public opinion is influenced by it, more so than traditional news outlets to a good extent.

        Instagram may not have the same bullseye on it for political re

  • Can't wait to see people lose access to their bank account because they used too many emoji's in a youtube gaming stream, or voted for a non-google approved candidate. Also can't wait for slashdotters to carry water for them when this happens. "It's their bank they can do what they want" FARRRRRRT

  • It's gonna be pretty funny when Alphabet abandons this for another money laundering project after a bunch of people have already put themselves thousands of dollars in debt because of whatever's wrong with it.

  • Open a savings account, and you got REAL usable interest back for allowing the bank the use if it for other purposes (loans, mortgages, etc.). Now you are lucky to get free checking if you have enough moolah.

    CDs used to be good too, not so much anymore.

    Paper Savings Bonds are effectively no more, it's all digital and the earnings suck.

    They want everyone to gamble their money and invest in stocks, no thanks.

    Ok, Google are you trying to change banking for the better, or just game us like all the r
    • Individual banks' savings rates can be a little higher or lower, but it's mostly determined by central bank's monetary policy. And I agree that goading everybody into the stock market is their goal. I guess we are just going to keep probing the limits of national debt until we crash into it.

    • "Open a savings account, and you got REAL usable interest back for allowing the bank the use if it for other purposes (loans, mortgages, etc.)"

      Banks are not permitted to use your money for their own purposes -- they do not loan out your money as that would be unlawful. That they do so is a commonly held errant belief by those who do not understand how the banking system works.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lgw ( 121541 )

      Open a savings account, and you got REAL usable interest back for allowing the bank the use if it for other purposes (loans, mortgages, etc.). Now you are lucky to get free checking if you have enough moolah.

      I also remember when inflation was 12% but savings accounts were legally capped at 5.25%. That was brutal to the average person, just destroying their savings. Of course, if you were rich you just opened a dollar-denominated savings account with a European bank (that us what "eurodollars" means, if you ever wondered).

      These days you can get a savings account online that at least matches inflation, or comes close, before taxes. Most banks with brick and mortar storefronts are horrible rip-offs, of course,

      • No, the rate for personal savings used to be well above inflation, but since the .com crash has been usually below it:

        https://seekingalpha.com/artic... [seekingalpha.com]

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by lgw ( 121541 )

          Do you actually think I was making that up? That graph you linked to doesn't go back to the bad old days.

          It's rather important when considering investments, BTW, to be especially suspicious of the date that graphs begin. I don't hink Seeking Alpha was deliberately being deceptive here but lots of people lie with graphs of return over time. Always look for a wider context.

          • But you said "you'll never get an interest rate above inflation for any guaranteed investment account of any kind" whereas that data shows that sometimes, it has been the case.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by lgw ( 121541 )

              "You will never" is future tense, my friend. I stand by my claim. The days when "safe money" could make money are far behind us.

              If you're a person today with some money wondering how to invest it, the first step is to realize the difference between savings and investment, and decide what your goals are and what's right for you. If you want positive returns, you'll need some combination of risk and volatility. The right mix changes as you age, and also is a function of your utility curve. It's a rewardi

    • Open a savings account, and you got REAL usable interest back for allowing the bank the use if it for other purposes (loans, mortgages, etc.). Now you are lucky to get free checking if you have enough moolah. CDs used to be good too, not so much anymore. Paper Savings Bonds are effectively no more, it's all digital and the earnings suck.

      Savings interest rates are almost always going to be a bit below inflation, unless you assume long term or higher risk.

      It's just more obvious now, since inflation has (officially, anyway) been so low for so long. When inflation was 14% and you were getting 9% (or whatever) on your savings account, it was easier to feel like you were actually getting something, even though you really weren't.

  • Keep money local (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @11:09AM (#59410170) Homepage

    You always here "buy local!", but this is double/triply true when it comes to things like finance. Your local small credit union is your best friend. Keep that money working locally.

    • This. Those "big banks" (CITI/etc) are pretty much a rip-off for small folks. But I've always had good luck with Co-ops. Much better service as well. Small banks as well--I had an account at one bank that had ONE office, about the size of a branch bank now. They have to fight for your business; the big ones would rather you just go away at times. Don't really care about the money working locally, but DO care about the service I get.

  • Goldman-Sachs was meaningfully upset about a marketing slogan? That's a lie. Even if you have a citation and a quote, the person you're quoting is lying.

  • Seriously, even for paid services, it is utterly impossible to reach an actual human being at Google when something goes wrong - and things go wrong all the time. And how much fun will it be when someone trying to break into your email account results in Google not just denying you access to your email and other Google services, but also your money? And then there's the 3-7 day process for getting back into your account after such a lockout, if you're lucky. At least when I call my bank, I do eventually g

    • Or imagine the inverse - a fraud alert on your credit card causes Google to lock down all of your Google services and account access. My bank decides my card is being used fraudulently about once per month...

  • Does anyone have an actual useful link.
  • Is this what humanity is headed for? Would seem so. I for one find the prospect chilling.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lgw ( 121541 )

      Not "humanity", just "the latest crop of fools". Cults always seem to find members. Regrettable, but not important in the larger scheme of things.

  • about the purpose and consequences of this, and sound quite confused. Think Bigger. No, even bigger than that. This isn't about banking or expanding into new industries or even 'too much clout' like some of the medium sized thinkers say.

    This is about Everything. This is about Total control over information, and by extension, people. 85% of users can be identified by joining 2 anonymized data sets (I like to use credit card purchase history and cell phone GPS location as examples).

    The government is alre

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close