Problems at ING!

[Principessa]

The socialist trade union BBTK is angry with ING as the bank decided to spend €100 million a year in F1 as a sponsor of the Renault F1 Team. While ING gives so much money for advertising, the bank wants to save money by dismissing 4550 staff members.

[mini696]

All banks are evil... Charging $2.50 for a transaction using a machine is ridiculous. Charging $35 for a late payment covers their costs 10x over.

If I wasn't forced to use them I wouldn't.

[Rob W]

Not to mention large companies like banks benchmark their media-spend based on their turnover/profit and on what their competition spends - depending on the growth/consolidation/rationalisation approach of their business at this point in time - not on their staff numbers.

You can't relate lay-offs to ad-spend. Sponsoring in F1 or anything, in theory, should create more than it costs for the sponsor.

Rob W

[f1.redbaron]

All banks are evil... Charging $2.50 for a transaction using a machine is ridiculous. Charging $35 for a late payment covers their costs 10x over.

If I wasn't forced to use them I wouldn't.

Then, don't use them! There are many ways in which one can beat the bank. I, for one, was never charged NSF, transaction, or whatever fees...simply because I rarely use my debit card. All I do is rack up charges on my credit card, collect the airmiles, and once the bill comes in just pay it all off at once (the key is not to charge more than you can afford).

But going back to the topic...I am one of those (a**holes) who believe that unions should be banned (at least in N. America - I'm not sure what they're like in Europe). I had the opportunity to work for both unionized and non-unionized companies, and there are almost no differences - the only difference is that I had to pay my union dues and got nothing in return (by that I mean I showed up for work every time, never called in sick, did my job, etc.). Nowdays, it seems to me that the unions are there only to protect the lazy.

If only Hoffa could them now.

(btw.

[DaveKillens]

My feelings are similar to yours, f1.redbaron. But the problemis that money spent on Formula One is considered advertising, and in a business sense, justified. Of course, putting anyone on the unemployment line is unconsciable. So when I see the pretty advertisments on TV or anything about ING, the logic tells me that they are just another mulitnational, cold-hearted business out purely for the profit, and have little compassion for the ordinary working man (apart from how much they can lever out of his wallet).
But then again, the tobacco companies have little moral ground to stand on either... they want customers so they can make them addicts to a horrible death.

[f1.redbaron]

So when I see the pretty advertisments on TV or anything about ING, the logic tells me that they are just another mulitnational, cold-hearted business out purely for the profit, and have little compassion for the ordinary working man (apart from how much they can lever out of his wallet).

The sooner the people realize that, the better! I've worked with many people who think that the company owed the something other than a financial compensation. For years I've been telling them that, no matter what their argument is, the bottom line is that the companies are responsible to only one group of people - their shareholders. That is the painful truth behind the capitalism (on the other hand, we have socialism, which is, well...we all know how that turns out. I don't think that any country other than Sweden, and possibly France, had much success with socialism...I could be wrong, though).

Again, the sooner we understand that to shareholders, we are a bunch of nobodies, the better off we'll be. So, when they decide to do something stupid (like, say, Toyota dropping $400 million p.a. for, essentially, nothing), those things will not bother us at all...I know that they don't bother me!

It's sad that that is the reality