Sunday, 16 June 2013

Do banks need branches any more?

Every town has at the branch office of least one bank in it, yet I can't remember the last time I visited a bank for any other reason than to pay in a cheque. Everything else I do via the internet, or use a cashpoint. Some banks even have separate branches in towns less than a mile apart.

That's a hell of a lot of money going out in wages, rent and business rates and for what? Would not the banks be better off outsourcing their branches' money-receiving functions to the Post Office, employing a few travelling "account managers" to conduct face-to face interviews when they thought it necessary and conducting all their other business via the internet?

7 comments:

Kj said...

Most town branches are sales-offices for mortgages largely aren't they?

Mark Wadsworth said...

Agreed. And you can pay in cheques using the hole-in-the-wall machines anyway.

@ Kj, I would assume so. But even most of mortgage stuff is done online.

As TS says, the reason there are so many branches is simply because the banks have not got round to shutting them all down. They used to need them in olden times before we had the internet, but now they are largely useless.

Tim Almond said...

MW

Did I? I think I might have said that about libraries, but willing to accept amnesia.

Banks are generally more mercenary. They shut down a lot of branches years ago.

Mark Wadsworth said...

TS, my bad, I thought that you posted this, when actually it was Bayard.

But it's the sort of thing which you post, that's my defence!

Lola said...

Yep.
Plus software is now available that lets anyone deal with their bank without dealing with their bank - if you see what I mean.

Pablo said...

I spoze it gives a certain sort of reassurance that one's money is somewhere.

Bayard said...

Yeah, what do banks keep in their vaults these days apart from spiders?