Stop the press: It's starting. Bank makes CFCU offer.
Posted by Trey Reeme on March 22nd, 2007
Ben Rogers at CEO Report has got the scoop. From an email he just forwarded:
CEO REPORT EXCLUSIVE!
Bankers set to bid for Continental FCU
A banking group wants to make a competing offer for Continental FCU ($178 million), El Segundo, Calif. An attorney representing the group contacted Continental CEO Tom Glatt on March 15 to let the credit union know of its interest, Glatt says. If the offer comes through, it would be the second bid for the credit union.
The attorney did not identify his clients, nor did he offer many details about the offer, Glatt says. Glatt told the caller his board could only consider a written offer. The board has already rejected four bids from Wings Financial FCU, which has now taken its proposal directly to the members.
After the merger of Nationwide FCU into Nationwide Bank last year, it became clear that credit union to bank mergers were complicated but possible. And 86% of CEOs who responded to a CEO Report survey felt that if the Wings proposal is allowed to continue it will herald a wave of unsolicited merger bids aimed directly at members.
Ron Bensley absolutely called this on Bruen’s Blog. On Monday he wrote,
A troubling follow-up question comes up as well: how will members-at-large respond if a “bidding war” were to break out, with a bank jumping into the fray with its own “buyout” offer competing with the Wings proposal?
Dang.
CUs are the new baseball card, apparently. Collect ‘em all! The members’ ownership is only worth the stick of gum and, if folded and placed in the spokes just right, their sense of community sounds just like a motorcycle.
Man, I love me a metaphor with mileage. But I hate to alliterate. However, rhyming pleases me, so this works out.
Okay,
Now where DID I put my handbasket??
Charlie,
You’re killing me! I love it! Great metaphor!
So, ok, I have a question. Call me naive (cuz I usually am), but is there anything we can do as credit unions to show support for CFCU and Tom Glatt? I mean, can’t we stand together and let Wings know that this will NOT be tolerated! They’re being a bully and that should not be allowed in the credit union world. I expect it from banks. But come on! It’s obvious that a conversion to a bank is in the cards for them. And the jump to assume that they are trying to take as many members and as much wealth with them as possible is not a big one.
I say if they’re going to act like a bank, then become one. We don’t want you tearing down the basics of what a credit union stands for. Become a big bad ugly bank and leave us alone! We will stand united! Either you’re with us or against us.
As for Tom and CFCU – Keep fighting! We’re behind you! Stand your ground! You have history. Do NOT let anyone or anything tear you down! You know and care about what is in the best interest of your members. You have their best interest at heart, which is the true spirit of a credit union. You’ve got it!
What do you say guys! What can we do? Let’s come up with a way to show them our support!
Well…I guess this was what we were afraid of in the first place when Wings made the hostile offer. Bankers have a long history of paying a premium for other banks and I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that they’ll offer more than a lousy 200 bucks. Woudn’t it be great to wake up tomorrow to find an ad in our local paper…taken out by one of our local/regional bank competitors offering our members $500 or $1,000 if they can convice the Board to sell out.
Now’s the time to write the Chair of Wings and thank him for what he’s started. www.continentalwings.com
Jessica,
I’m with you—Seems like merger-mania put the smell of blood in the water. This hostile takeover attempt is the spotting of the fin of the great white (read bankers). The sharks are hungry. I mean, they’ve got to be pretty merged out.
I feel like Richard Dreyfuss in Jaws clinging to a rope on the bow of the boat waiting for the inevitable attack. My glasses are fogging up…...
D.
I’m dying, just dying, for someone to set-up the, “I think we’re gonna need a bigger boat.” punch-line. And I’m going ahead and calling it for myself: Dibs.
::hovers over keyboard::
I’m dying to know who this “banking group” is. My first reaction was “what in the world does a bank want with this CU?” The Nationwide FCU deal I can understand. But I’m having trouble understanding what makes a bank think it’ll be successful in retaining these customers.
Ron… Is the bank interested in retaining members or the cash? With a 16% capital ratio – Continental has quite a bit in reserve. A bank only needs a 5% ratio so there is plenty left over, even after paying members as Randy suggested. Whole new world for credit unions – hoping this brings us together and wakes us up for a better world.
I am totally with Ron …. what in the world would make a Bank think:
a) members would agree to the merger/ takeover b) that the customer loyalty would somehow transfer itself magically on to the Bank?
I am fascinated to watch this play out.
While noodling Colin’s question, something dawned on me. Thank you, Colin!
The offers aren’t targeting the loyal members. The new bank offer will be going after the folks who don’t see a difference between a CU and a bank. The Wings offer is going after people who want the quick cash and like the promises – I mean who wouldn’t like to hear a promise of higher deposit rates and lower loan rates?!
I’m curious about the details of the bank offer when it arrives on Tom Glatt’s desk. But for demonstration purposes, let’s assume it’s similar to Wings’ offer – let’s say it’s a flat $200 per member.
If I’m a member with $25 in deposits (say I have an auto loan but virtually nothing in my share savings) the payout looks like a pretty sweet deal. The loyal member won’t see it that way.
Trey – Good call! My manager and I were talking about this yesterday. So many people out there do NOT know or understand the difference between a bank and credit union. So, yes, these offers look tempting. They don’t understand the long term, bigger picture. And the only way for them to understand it is looking back. By then, the bank or Wings or whoever, already has what they want, which is the profit!
So, this led us to a whole discussion on how to advertise the advantages of credit unions over banks. Cuna made a weak attempt with their “credit union guy” or whatever it was on that site, but I think NOW is the time more than ever to really push the credit union movement! There has been debate as to whether or not we are really in a credit union movement. Lets remove all doubt! If it’s not a movement, lets make it one. Wings has set a standard that it is okay to be a bully and take over wherever they want with their own agendas. They have given a message that when someone is profitable, someone bigger can come in an make bogus offers and try to take advantage of our members lack of knowledge of the differences between banks and credit unions. Now, more than ever is the time to make our voice heard. Send the message that credit unions will stand together, that there is a movement, and that these hostile take over attempts are UNACCEPTABLE!
I am neither a pacifist, nor a war monger … like (I expect) the vast majority of people in this country, I’m somewhere in the middle. And with our military involvement in the Middle East, I do not throw around the term “war” lightly … but this is rapidly developing into an all out war for the future of credit unions and I am getting really ticked off that the supposed leaders of the movement who don’t set foot inside these blog walls don’t realize it.
Aside: Denise, I hope you don’t have to find that handbasket … great reference though.
Trey, you hit it dead center. Loyal members would never be bought out, which is why credit unions should increase their efforts to purge dormant accounts. It will hurt membership numbers in the short run, but will strengthen CU ownership values for the long haul.
I feel like we should be pulling a Paul Revere, riding down the streets of Anytown, U.S.A shouting “The Bankers are Coming, the Bankers are Coming!”
Wait a minute, that IS what we’re doing. Folks, we gotta ride faster and shout louder!
Jessica, I like where you’re headed, but I don’t think marketing solves the problem. I think it covers it up. The appeal of the cooperative nature (aka the movement) of credit unions only goes so far, and it only speaks to a very small percentage. That percentage, I believe, represents the truly loyal members – the ones who would stand against a buyout from a bank or another credit union on principle.
The appeal of credit unions to the majority boils down to superior rates (http://creditunion.coop/ratedex.php) and superior service. But that’s starting to get trumped by convenience. I believe across the board banks have a perceived edge in convenience now, even with shared branching.
Until credit unions differentiate again on product – and maybe that’s Zopa, maybe that’s payday lending that doesn’t screw the folks who need it most, maybe that’s some product that hasn’t been dreamed up yet – we’ve got little that’s compelling to market. I don’t think movement is going to pull us through in the minds of consumers. I do think movement will unite credit unions to figure this all out, though.
I agree with you that it is in the best interest of credit unions to send a clear message. I do fear that credit unions will be stuck silently waiting on courts and the legislature to decide the fate of the industry.
Do I want the movement back in credit unions? Absolutely. But I’m afraid that too many credit unions don’t want the movement. From Wings’ actions, they’re probably at the top of that list.
Do consumers want the movement? As a whole, they want banking that works. They want the best rates, the best service, the best products, and the most convenience.
Ahh but here’s the thing: I believe CUs have an advantage built in – the not-for-profit cooperative status. But too many aren’t using that.
They’re sitting on too much capital.
Ok, so now that I’ve gone through all that, I believe it’s folks like us – Jessica, Denise, John, Doug, Randy, all of us CU folk – who can help reignite the movement within the industry. I believe there’s enough power in social media, and John’s right – that’s what we’re doing. We’ve got to ride faster and shout louder.
I hear patriotic music building int the background. I see a faded image of a flag waving coming into view.
I think the first thing WE (bloggers) need to do is get more people in here.
The majority of credit union influencers still get their news from CUNA. YIKES!!! Waiting for that newsletter to come out and the secretary to put the routing slip on it for senior management. (insert sound of crickets).
Or from CU Journal or CU Times which is not an OPEN FORUM.
Or wait for their state leagues to have a CEO Roundtable and hope enough people show up after the golf game to have a meaningful discussion.
Today I pledge to send this link to 25 credit union leaders. This is where it begins. Today.
Trey: I wholeheartedly agree the CU movement needs to embrace social media – and for CFCU in particular, it could be the key to turning things around.
Uh, Denise. You do know about News Now, right? The daily news site from CUNA that I can assure you does NOT sit on a desk waiting for a routing slip. http://www.cuna.org/newsnow
MtMLC – News Now has been the first other than CEO Report to break the story. BTW, I do get News Now daily, and I would suggest that every CU person get on that email list (along with CUES Tech Port and Callahan’s weekly updates).
Agree that we need to get more CU bloggers active. An active social media dialogue is critical to recapturing and mobilizing loyal CU members against these predatory takeover attempts.
Chuck Bruen’s blog (where I’m a regular contributor) is very widely read but the readers very seldom post comments.
MtMLC,
I was really talking about how credit unions get their information. Not what’s available to them.
So many STILL do not get (and I mean that in a “being enlightened way”) social media.
http://www.cuna.org/newsnow is a great resource for stuff as it happens.
Thanks for reminding me.
Ok, I think I’m getting social media and marketing confused. I’m not one for terminology. The fact is, we have to get the movement up and going! Whether it be internet, tv, billboards, whatever! It amazes me how many people I talk to who “would love to be part of a credit union, but don’t qualify.” People don’t realize that times have changed and they DO qualify. I’m thinking things like “the ad counsel” and “bankerspank” and “save the pig.” I’m not sure if that’s social media or marketing or what you want to call it, but . . . lets get the word out there. Credit unions are not just for employee groups anymore. And the ARE different from banks.
But on that note, Trey you’re right. We do have to be different! Which is where the ongoing stuggle comes in. How do we stay one step above? What can we offer that banks don’t? How do we set ourselves apart? We need something!
Denise – I like your idea. If we all send out a link and start getting people involved, then maybe that’s a start.
Ahh, now social media, that’s a great call.
I really haven’t formed an opinion about a unified marketing approach for credit unions – a national brand, if you will. Like you, I believe the story of credit unions has to be told clearly. I think it requires language we’re not used to using. That’s part of the reason I asked the “can we define CU” question last month.
So it looks like we’re on the same page – sometimes I just have to vent on the whole movement issue – because I believe it’s relevant to this situation. As Brent has said, “I submit this: You are a movement. But the movement has been hijacked by those who are afraid to polarize, who are afraid to be too movementy because movements cause opinions, and not all opinions are good.”
And my opinion is that credit unions stand at a crossroads right now. We’ve looked up and our worst fears about an onslaught of conversions and buyouts could be happening. And I’m afraid that many CU folk have no idea about this yet.
Many thanks for the conversation as always!
For what it’s worth, you’ve managed to get my attention for a while now. I stumbled upon this site a two or three months ago. I’ve been spreading the word about it to others here at my credit union.
Wendy, Many thanks for spreading the word and for leaving a comment -
Love reading your CEO’s stuff, by the way!
Please stop the hysteria. Even CUNA on their site (www.cuna.org) is using words like “reportedly” and “allegedly” when referring to this supposed bank offer. There’s no need to get all worked up over nothing when there’s not any confirmation that anything has occurred in the first place. Don’t you think CU Times or CU Journal would be all over this story if it were true???
Roger, Check www.cutimes.com, as it’s the most recent story confirming what was reported here and elsewhere including CUNA News Now today. It was posted on CU Times website on Friday 03/23/2007, 02:10 PM.
Ben Rogers, the editor of a wonderful CU publication called CEO Report, scooped it. Plain and simple.
Also, if you look at the initial post that started this thread, Ben presented it objectively. I’ve added emphasis below.
“A banking group wants to make a competing offer for Continental FCU ($178 million), El Segundo, Calif. An attorney representing the group contacted Continental CEO Tom Glatt on March 15 to let the credit union know of its interest, Glatt says. If the offer comes through, it would be the second bid for the credit union.”
Roger, many thanks for the conversation. I know that not everyone believes this event to have the importance that I believe it does. I love hearing the other side of the argument, and encourage you to continue in this debate. We’ll keep it friendly, and I always try to express my opinion as such.
Best, Trey
Trey, thanks. The next time I talk to Bucky, I will let him know.
I went over to his office to see if I could chat briefly with him about this very issue (Wings/Continental/banks), but he is out this afternoon. Bucky is extremely approachable, not only to those of us in marketing, but to everyone here. And he’s not shy about sharing his opinions on issues like this.
Trey, Agreed. I do like reading both sides of the issue.
In some ways I think that it is good what is happening to Continental. Far too many credit unions do not understand that they need to be competitive to not only grow, but also to just exist. How does Continental compare to their peers and would their members ultimately be better off under different management? Credit unions that offer a competitive value proposition have nothing to fear, but fear in the hearts of those that are underperformers is a good thing for their members.
It’s kind of interesting the comment that many people don’t know the difference between a credit union and a bank. I thought that John Cote addressed that very well in a previous blog on this site. Unfortunately it is true that most people don’t know the difference and I have found myself explaining it to a lot of people these days.
I like what Trey said in a comment here, “The new bank offer will be going after the folks who don’t see a difference between a CU and a bank.”
That is a very revealing observation.
Keep creating…please!
Mike
To clarify, I was referring to the Wings offer. However, just like banks, some credit unions are more about their management than their members. It’s up to each credit union to demonstrate how they are different….just having a credit union charter is not enough and all credit unions are far from being equal. The Continental offer will appeal to anyone where Continental has been unable to demonstrate how they are different from the alternatives. Unconditional support of all credit unions without regard to the particulars is crazy.
freemarket – I have to say, when I first read your take on things, my initial reaction was “ahhhh.” But let me say this. After thinking about it, I can’t agree more. Competition is always a good thing. It makes people stretch a little. It makes you take that extra push and ask “can we offer better rates?” and “are we providing the best services we can for our members?”
Along with that, it has definitely opened some eyes. It has made all of us think, and Tom Glatt I’m sure is thinking about what COULD happen.
We can no longer sit by and coast on what we have. We MUST stay competitive. We MUST provide something that sets us apart. We MUST be better! It is a movement. And we can let it move stagnantly with few changes, or we can make it move!
As for the unconditional support without regards to particulars . . . I have to disagree there. Yes, we do need to pay attention to particulars, but shouldn’t we support credit unions as a whole? Encourage the ones that need encouraged, lift up ones that need lifted, praise ones that deserve praise, etc.
Jessica,
I agree with you. I am actually a big supporter of credit unions and also believe the community should provide broad support. I just do not believe it should be unconditional. Continental may very well deserve support, but the discussions in this blog and elsewhere in the CU community should include specifics on why they deserve their members support. My credit union rocks and I would fight to stop it from being acquired or transitioned to a bank. However, they have earned that support based on what they deliver, not because they are a credit union.
Freemarket,
What DOES your credit union deliver that keeps you so loyal? I think it’s different for everyone.
My credit union keeps me loyal because they know me by name, I trust them, and I like what they stand for. I too would fight a takeover of my credit union.
I honestly don’t know if they have the best rates in the market. But they’re good enough for me.
I worry that credit unions are going to view this as another reason to merge and create economies of scale so they can beat everyone’s rate. period.
Freemarket, I love what you’re adding to the conversation. And, like Jessica, I agree with most of your points.
The good that could come out of this: it’s a wake-up call.
But I’m afraid that part of the domino effect is going to be millions of CU members looking up and being bank customers. Bye-bye ownership.
Am I saying this will happen if Wings acquires Continental FCU? Nope. I’m talking bigger picture. I’m talking about the bankers sitting around tables saying, “What an easy way to make money! Let’s buy a credit union!”
I had a long conversation with my wife about this over the weekend. She’s not in credit unions, and to my disappointment, she’s not a reader of Open Source CU unless I tell her “Honey, someone ripped me apart in a comment today.” But I digress.
In this conversation with my wife, she asked, “Why is this all a big deal?” And my response was akin to:
I have no problem with people getting rich. One day, I hope we can take dips in the money bin, Scrooge McDuck style. What I do have a problem with is people cheating to get rich – taking something from someone else right out from under them.
I have a problem with the fact that a conversion from a credit union to a bank can occur. What that means (assuming that the management and board of the former CU cash in with stock) is that the hard work of generations of volunteers and members (yes, members who pooled their money to lend to each other) goes to making folks (individuals or corporations or other credit unions) who I see as greedy+lazy to get rich/richer.
It should be illegal, IMHO, but it isn’t yet. And that gets my goat. And my problem with this whole situation with Wings and Nationwide before it is that we don’t just have to worry about conversions anymore; now a bank can buy a credit union. Or a credit union who has once expressed interest in becoming a bank can orchestrate a hostile takeover. Of a fellow credit union. A not-for-profit cooperative where every member owns part of the institution.
So that’s the reason for my disgust. It’s not aimed at Wings. It’s aimed at conversions, and now at hostile takeovers. It’s aimed at what I feel is a forced hijacking of what a cooperative group of people built together.
Ok, onto the “good.” I’ve been screaming that we need a wake-up call. I just hoped that credit unions would wake up on their own. What will the credit union movement look like in ten years?
I just hope there are enough loyal members to block a takeover from another CU or an acquisition by a bank it if it comes down to it. BTW, here’s a great post from Arleen Payne summing up the loyalty issue that’s emerged in this comment thread.
There has to be palpable, tangible reasons to choose a credit union over a bank. Better products, better service, better this and that … there has to be some reason why there are 87 million of us!
We can’t “spank” them on product … they’re bigger and have infiintely more market share and resources.
We can’t outgun them on marketing for the same reason. I loved Trey’s point that CUs are sitting on too much capital … why are CUs like Digital FCU (my favorite whipping post) in MA spending millions of dollars of their members’ money on the naming rights to sports arenas?
I don’t have as much of a problem with large CUs spending members’ money on their own buildings, however. I’m not against large CUs looking good and putting cash into improving themselves, as long as it’s for the members. I think every penny spent by a CU, regardless of size, should be for the benefit of the members. They are why we’re here, after all! And paying good people a good salary to do these things for members IS a good use of funds. We’re all willing to accept a little less of a reward for working in a “white hat” industry, but we’re not stupid.
So if marketing and product are out, what’s left … rates and service. The old saw “Not for profit, not for charity, but for service” may be outdated and confusing in the light of modern day, but that doesn’t make it wrong. If we could find a good way to say that in words that someone under the age of 50 can relate to and understand, we’d be helping a lot.
As for rates, that’s a no brainer … stop wasting capital on useless things and give it back to the members. After all the political rhetoric is gone, isn’t that the real reason why we’re income tax-exempt?
Roger, I have to respectfully disagree with you that we’re reacting hysterically. Even if the bank buyout angle isn’t accurate (although I don’t doubt it for a sec), much of our reaction to the Wings / Continental story centers around the original hostile takeover attempt by Wings and the end-run they’re doing around the Continental board. That’s the nastiest part of the whole deal … the potential bank buyout is just the rotten sour cherry on top.
BTW, did anyone see Tom Glatt’s comment (not sure if it’s CU Times or Journal) ... “If you want to steal from members, at least have the decency to wear a mask and carry a gun. It’s theft. I am adamantly against any credit union starting a bank.”
I wish I’d thought of that.
John,
YOU SAID: “Not for profit, not for charity, but for service.”......If we could find a good way to say that in words that someone under the age of 50 can relate to and understand, we’d be helping a lot.
This is so well said and so important today. That was OUR language. We got it. What will the next generation get and be compelled to grow and protect?
I understand that bank conversions are a big issue and are the antithesis of the credit union philosophy, but I am more concerned by credit unions and their actions towards their fellow credit unions. I just don’t understand why it is so difficult for credit unions to act like credit unions any more. The larger they are, the larger they appear to want to be at whatever the cost to their members or the community- even to the point of this hostile takeover. I’ve seen too many CU CEOs sell out their own credit unions because they will end up with a higher salary or better benefits -maybe the promise of a better job. I’ve also seen way too many CEO’s merge their own credit unions because they are retiring and “can’t find anyone qualified to take over when they leave”. We are all replaceable -maybe by someone who is even better then we were. Where are the wonderful credit unions that truly care about their members? Yes, I am fortunate enough to know some of them – but not very many – and I know a lot of credit unions. The credit unions that really care about their members have a lot of members who care about them. It’s pretty simple really.
So, what does make a loyal member? Maybe we need to explore this a little deeper. And how do we communicate all of this to our members? I mean, how do we re-phrase the whole concept of the credit union difference and package it to be appealing enough to create loyal members. I think it is becoming very clear that it is possible for banks (and even power hungry, bank wanta be credit unions) to greedily come in and make offers to our members. We can’t run from it. And if we sit on our hands and hope that it “doesn’t happen to us” then we’re gonna be in trouble! We must embrace it and prepare to hit it head on.
BIG IDEA: Here’s how I see the evolution of the credit union brand from the consumer’s perspective.
1930’s “The Little Guy” Depression Era
1950’s “People Helping People” Good times, Flower Children
1980’s “Credit Union Campaign for Consumer Choice” got us checking accounts….S & Ls failed..that didn’t hurt
1990’s The National Credit Union Brand (hands) hoping to capitalize on the Prince concept—don’t have to say it – just see it.
TODAY—“Damn the Man!”
I think to appeal to Gen Y and X we need to say it like it is. The “MAN” is the banker. No way around it. They are IN IT for profit. Free checking is a lie. They are the ones that came up with surcharging. Not us.
Damn the man!!!
Here’s an article from today’s CU Journal. Looks like Continental FCU has bigger problems that Wings Financial.
Continental Hub is Nexus of CU Competition 3/28/2007 NEWARK, N.J. – Newark International Airport, one of the main hubs for Continental Airlines, has become a microcosm of credit union competition, as increasing numbers of credit unions have entered the market to serve the hundreds of thousands of airline employees over the last few three years. Since then, three credit unions, including the giants American Airlines FCU and Chartway FCU, as well as FAA Service FCU, have established a presence on the ground here; even before the hostile offer earlier this month from $1.6 billion Wings Financial FCU to take over Continental FCU. The growing competition has put Continental, which is in a five-year steady decline in membership, at a disadvantage, according to some of the credit union’s own members and ex-members. “I used to have all my accounts there, but now I went over to Chartway,” Jose Coste, an airport worker, told The Credit Union Journal yesterday, one of a series of interview yesterday with Continental members. Gladstone Hall, another ex-Continental member, said he moved his accounts to Chartway because he was disappointed in the fees he paid at Continental FCU. Christian Cepeda, another Continental FCU member, said he opened a Chartway account to get a new iPod, even though he likes the service at Continental, but now he can shop th better rate between the two credit unions. Several Continental workers cited the open access to American Airlines FCU’s new branch, as opposed to the secure entry at the Continental branch, limiting access to members. Many other credit unions without a physical presence, except for ATM networking, also vie for the allegiance of Continental employees, they said.
Jessica, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head when you ask what makes loyal members. I think it is important to reward your members for the behaviors that you want repeated and treat your members like you would want to be treated. Service, service, service and with a smile. Treat members like they are the most important part of your business (they own it, after all) and make sure they know you want their business. We’ve spent the last decade pushing members out of the credit union offices onto phones and websites, so we have to figure out how to make them still feel like they are valued members even without all of the personal contact. Re-thinking member fees and options for rewards may be part of the answer. Everyone scrambles to save a buck, and CU scramble to make a buck, so there has to be a way to make necessary fees palatable to ensure the services are available.
Denise and John:
Love your points about finding the right language for the under 50 set. It seems to me that the message to members at some point during the year needs to be … “here’s how much you are saving by being with us.” CUs already have to generate 1098s (or whatever the # is) for member tax purposes – it seems to me that it wouldn’t be too hard to estimate cost savings per member in ways that members could easily understand (and start talking about!!!).
My best friend is in the hospitality industry and he told me a while back about a study they did on consumers and travel habits. One of the big findings he said was, “travelers want to be able to sit in the hotel restaurant and think they got a better deal than the schlep sitting at the next table.”
Perhaps reports to each member could be used to state the value of credit union membership in terms that younger people “get.”
Our CU member model is built on the premise that we ask people to consider membership once in their lives.
Meanwhile, I happily pay Costco $50 every year to stay a member (as do millions of other people)! I know I’ll more than recoup that $50, so it makes the choice a no-brainer.
Perhaps we need to think about the Costco model a little more and how it might apply to CUs.
Jeff
This is a bit off subject…but…banks have been whining about so-called credit union advantages for a long time. If they really think we have it so good, and they really want to take one over, shouldn’t they keep the not-for-profit status and let the members keep control? You know, since we are all just raking in the cash.
Gee, whatever happened to the supposed “bank offer”? Looks like CEO Report should check their sources a little more carefully. Nothing ever came of this if there was any kind of actual offer to begin with.
Roger, Take a listen at http://www.ciicu.com where the offer was cited by Joe Melchione, Esq., who represented Continental Federal Credit Union.
Joe said the verbal offer from the bank (whose identity was not revealed) was for $1,700 per member.
I’d say that verification comes from a reliable source.