Funny to see this pop up again (I'm the author). The year is now 2025 and I still use Chase as a personal bank and I'm now discovering new funny banking behaviors. I'll use this as a chance to share. :)
My company had an exit, I did well financially. This is not a secret. I'm extremely privileged and thankful for it. But as a result of this, I've used a private bank (or mix) for a number of years to store the vast majority of my financial assets (over 99.99% of all assets, I just did the math). An unfortunate property of private banks is they make it hard to do retail-like banking behaviors: depositing a quick check, pulling cash from an ATM, but ironically most importantly Zelle.
As such, I've kept my Chase personal accounts and use them as my retail bank: there are Chase branches everywhere, its easy to get to an ATM, and they give me easy access to Zelle! I didn't choose Chase specifically, I've just always used Chase for personal banking since I was in high school so I just kept using them for this.
Anyways, I tend to use my Chase account to pay a bunch of bills, just because it's more convenient (Zelle!). I have 3 active home construction projects, plus pay my CC, plus pretty much all other typical expenses (utilities, car payments, insurance, etc.). But I float the money in/out of the account as necessary to cover these. We do accounting of all these expenses at the private bank side, so its all tracked, but it settles within the last 24-48 hours via Chase.
Otherwise, I keep my Chase balance no more than a few thousand dollars.
This really wigs out automated systems at Chase. I get phone calls all the time (like, literally multiple times per week) saying "we noticed a large transfer into your account, we can help!" And I cheekily respond "refresh, it's back to zero!" And they're just confused. To be fair, I've explained the situation in detail to multiple people multiple times but it isn't clicking, so they keep calling me.
I now ignore the phone calls. Hope I don't regret that later lol.
The fraud story is interesting, but something I had hoped would be addressed by the end of the post, wasn't. You wrote:
>Someone out there is probably mentally screaming at me "you fool!" at this point. With hindsight, I agree...
I was hoping the piece would end with what you would do now (or what should you have done) when Alex called you. Did I fail to understand something in the piece, and simply staying on the phone with Alex would have somehow avoided the fraud situation down the line? It doesn't seem so?
If I were to get such a call, today, my instincts would be to engage in the same "I'm fine" get-off-the-phone-fast actions. What is the alternative?
I would imagine this phone call's primary goal is trying to sell you higher margin financial products/services.
The way you phrase that, it sounds like these services are more advantageous to the bank, but possibly not to the account holder? If so, that goes against the tone of the article, where Mitchell implies (I think?) that he would have benefited more from speaking to Alex than the other way around.
Not really, these are probably mutually beneficial. Having $35 million sitting in a cash account is, as Mitchell recalls in the article, pretty bad -- you're forgoing a lot of benefit for yourself.
What the bank is probably mainly trying to do is not "extract a higher margin" from you, but rather to "maintain your business." While Alex might not have recognized that a startup that took in a bunch of financing and plopped it into a cash account and then didn't do much with it is a customer who might disappear at any time, on some institutional level the bank is aware of it. They want you to regard them not as an interchangeable place that money sits, but as a valued partner who helps you do things with your money, and as a result you feel like it would both be a risk and a bother to extract all your money and go to some other bank.
> but rather to "maintain your business."
If banks want to keep a customer, you might think the most important thing is to just not annoy or screw over their customers.
Why do they continually treat good customers like shit? I'm in New Zealand and my bank just continuously pisses me off. I don't want any upsell (the arseholes tried to upsell insurance when I got a credit card the other day). I've got a six figure facility at risk (US:HELOC?) and my bank's security practices are shockingly bad (we're way too trusting in New Zealand). Little things like access blocked from oversees for a month (phone banking was theoretically available but I couldn't call international so it wasn't). Aside: I would like to block phone banking because it feels so insecure. I've been looking for a better bank, but I wouldn't get the same mortgage facility, soooooooo I'm kinda stuck (maybe that's the reason they don't need to be good to customers).
Mitchell kept getting annoyed by the bank's activities. They wanted him as a customer but their internal systems didn't know how to make it easy for him. Systems with negative impacts are too common even when you're the guy making them money...
It can also be to maintain the bank. They don't like it when accounts get several more million dollars in them than expected and sometimes it can be too much to handle.
Perhaps not directly/immediately - banks like others know that “relationships” drive long term repeat sales.
I read the whole story and I'm still struggling to understand what you did wrong here. You indicated many times "I know, that was a mistake" (or similar phrases), but each time I was baffled because I saw no mistakes. It was your business, and you had every right to move around the funds within your account. What gives anyone at Chase the right to say diddly squat about how you manage your business' finances?
I don't think he was trying to imply that he did anything wrong. He was admitting the ignorance regarding how banks and banking work... plus acknowledging that a lot of readers will have had experiences that would make them think "Oh you young fool."
In 2022 I lost my business banking and had to shut down a business that I owned for 20 years because it was related to the adult entertainment industry and, despite being completely legal and aboveboard, a single wire transfer that got a little bit of scrutiny resulted in them asking questions about what we did and, knowing that I was doing absolutely nothing wrong, I answered all of their questions truthfully and completely. A few months later I was told that we "fell outside of their risk appetite", our accounts were being closed... and for two months we searched for any bank or credit union in Canada but none would take us.
A lot of industry insiders had that exact reaction: "Are you stupid? Did you not know?! You NEVER admit that you're in this industry you moron!" etc. We even had a very sympathetic branch manager suggest that we re-incorporate, re-brand and hide what we do (a front, in other words). I couldn't do that. And I mean, we had no issues for 20 years. 10 of which were banking as a corporation (was personal accounts before that since we ran it as a proprietorship) and I thought that being in Canada we were pretty progressive. No one I told on a personal or professional level had ever cared. So why would the banks? We were lawful so why should they care?
Chargebacks. Tons of people buy porn on a card then later deny it when their SO finds the bill.
The industry is rife with this kind of fraud, and chargebacks represent tangible risk of financial loss, so banks just blanket ban working with certain industries.
People who sell precious metal jewelry for credit card payments are another.
That's why adult industry merchants are a thing, like CCBill. They have been around for decades and its kind of a non-issue. Can still accept Visa, MC, AMEX, etc.
source: used to run porn websites back in the early 00s.
How does something like CCBill stay in business when the card networks themselves have strict guidelines on chargeback rates that'll get you booted from the network?
Presumably, such merchants are basically outsourcing their chargeback resolutions to CCBill, who I assume is quite good at fighting them via proof of purchase.
If this was the main reason they would just charge more to process the payments or add a longer hold period.
Honestly GP just sounds like wrong founder market fit. GP has a moral spine and was operating in a market where you must forgo it.
TFA didn't really explain the mistake.
What I think it was:
1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
That being said: In today's world where every other phone call is some telemarketer trying to scam you or otherwise sell you something you don't want or need, I can sympathize with why Mitchell blew off the first call.
Your answers are appreciated, but they beg further questions. Do you mind that I inquire further?
>1: Chase's business account wasn't appropriate for a tech startup; nor was it appropriate for the amount of money Mitchell was handling.
What properties make it inappropriate for a tech startup, specifically? What would be appropriate instead, and why?
>2: When your bank calls you after a very, very large money transfer, you should take the call.
He did take the call, but I take your answer to mean that Mitchell and Alex didn't have the right kind of conversation on the call. Is that correct? If so, what ought to occur on a call that follows a large transfer?
> He did take the call, but I take your answer to mean that Mitchell and Alex didn't have the right kind of conversation on the call. Is that correct? If so, what ought to occur on a call that follows a large transfer?
I would echo this question. If my bank called me and asked if I needed help, why would I say yes? I got money, the bank is holding it, everything is going great! This really feels like Alex was trying to ingratiate himself with a big client but communicated that really poorly, such that the message of "you are a big deal so I want to give you top tier service" never came across.
> I got money, the bank is holding it, everything is going great!
Until your account is many orders of magnitude larger than the other accounts. I suspect the typical "business" account was well under a million. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058480 to understand why this was a big deal for the bank.
Honestly this was partly on Alex, but again, largely on Chase's banking practices. When a transaction of that size comes on the radar, you don't just ring up compliance to verify records internally. You also bring in the big guns from Main Office (aka the regional business banking HQ) and, along with Alex (as the point of contact), educate the business customer as to what can be done. This was what happened to me at Credit Suisse (RIP) after I had a similar, albeit smaller, transaction happen for my personal account. They were also extremely helpful when I wanted to get started with setting up my current trading business. Oh, and I'm still in touch with most of the people who helped me through that journey, even though they've left for other shores.
But again, Alex would not have been able to do this because Chase might not have had any policy about how to redirect customers to the appropriate type of banker. Which is kind of stupid for a megabank of its size.
The bank account was appropriate for small businesses. IE, restaurant, laundromat, ect. This became clear when the article explained that there was education for tellers about what a tech startup is.
Mitchell didn't take the call. He ended the call as quickly as he politely could, short of hanging up on Alex.
Edit: I've had a few bank tellers advise me on how to adjust my bank account correctly in the past. I'm going to assume this is what Alex was trying to do.
I might also point out that, around this time, Wells Fargo tellers were very pushy and would make calls like this. (I got one) It later came out that they were under intense pressure to sell banking services that nobody wanted.
Thanks for answering!
So there is some set of services that are useful specifically to a tech startup but not a restaurant, but then there are a category of services that "nobody" wants, neither restaurant nor startup. Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I am not asking because I disbelieve you. I am asking because I find this all fascinating, but it seems my imagination is lacking! What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
You said you were "advised to adjust" your account. Again, I apologize if I come across as ignorant, but what kind of adjustments?
(I’m not the person you replied to.)
My understanding is that people with financial training don’t think about money, they think about risk. If you are a banker and ask yourself “What is the probability that this 100 deposit will be here in another 30 days?” you might answer differently depending on what you know about your customer.
- If you think that your customer will withdraw 50 in the next 30 days, you might take the other 50 and invest it in a 30-day CD, and take the other 50 and just hold on to it.
- If you think all 100 will remain in the account the entire time you could invest all 100.
- etc.
If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
> So there is some set of services that are useful specifically to a tech startup but not a restaurant, but then there are a category of services that "nobody" wants, neither restaurant nor startup. Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
It wasn't a specific service, it was that Wells Fargo employees had a "performance metric" (which I understand in certain postapocalyptic hellholes translates to "a threat to your livelihood and your ability to receive medical treatment if you fall ill") on the number of products each customer was using. So they would encourage customers to open extra savings accounts, credit cards etc. (or some of the more enterprising employees would skip the phone hassling stage and just open these accounts).
The teller who called me basically gave me awful service.
I visited the bank a few days earlier because they sent me a debit card that I didn't want. (I wanted to switch it to an ATM card because it's harder to commit fraud with them.)
The teller basically didn't listen to me and tried to push services on me for 15-20 minutes. Eventually he realized I was getting extremely frustrated and helped me do what I needed to do.
The call from the teller a few days later was extremely unexpected, and I was justifiably curt. I said something like, "I don't want any new banking services, there's no reason for you to call me."
A bank account is only insured up to $250k by the FDIC. Chase is a very safe bank, but the amount over that is still not insured, so it's not safe.
He also didn't get any extra controls on the account - you can see from the end of the story that they just forgot about it and someone stole $100k of it!
> You said you were "advised to adjust" your account. Again, I apologize if I come across as ignorant, but what kind of adjustments?
A few months ago, a teller offered to move my savings account to a higher interest version. I just had to maintain a minimum balance. A similar thing happened when I had my first summer job before college: A teller offered me a higher-interest money market account, it was just limited to something like 4 withdrawals a month.
> Do you have an examples of any of those categories?
I'm not an expert in startup finance, but I'll try my best.
The mistake that Mitchell made was kind of like keeping all your liquid assets in a checking account. Imagine if, instead of investing in a 401k (or similar,) retail investments, CDs, savings accounts, ect; you just put your entire life savings in a single checking account. Not only would you sacrifice a massive amount of interest, you would probably lose FDIC protection as your account grew, you'd be at risk of someone forging checks, and you'd be at risk of debit card fraud.
Startups often talk about their "runway." This is how long the startup can pay their employees, rent, and other bills; if they have no income. Don't quote me, but this is usually something like (roughly) 2-5 years.
Now, keeping the "runway" money in a single account is kind of, to put it bluntly, dumb. (It's like if you kept all your liquid assets in a single checking account.) Most of it should go to low-risk investments, like CDs and other high-interest savings accounts. I'm sure Silicon Valley Bank has a very straightforward way (for startups) to do this, that Chase doesn't have.
> What would I want from a bank account as a tech startup, versus a non-tech startup, versus a restaurant, that the bank wouldn't already give me when I sign up for a normal business account?
Remember the term "runway." Restaurants are typically profitable from day one, or become profitable quickly. They spend roughly as much as they take in. Startups often run at a loss for many years before they become profitable.
Likewise, a restaurant might have to pay back a loan that it used to buy equipment, renovate, or purchase the business. Startups hold onto their investment as "runway" instead of paying back a loan.
I'm going to assume that Silicon Valley Bank has products built around the fact that a startup has a large sum of money that it spends very slowly, versus a restaurant that needs loans and spends money as quickly as it comes in.
Very informative. Much appreciated.
[deleted]
They basically had no problems through $35M+ of money coming in except a few phone calls trying to sell him some banking services... I wouldn't really call it 'not appropriate' for a startup... All it was is probably the guy trying to say "hey maybe you'd be interested in parking some of that capital in a term deposit" or offering some credit products...
It is a bit weird how actively the guy tried to engage but it probably is just because it was one of the largest accounts opened through that branch - if they'd opened an account with the same bank but a branch in down-town SF instead of in the suburbs of LA then they would have had an account manager more accustomed to that kind of business and it presumably wouldn't have been as weird...
I certainly wouldn't label that 'do you need help' opening as 'engagement'. Something as simple as 'that's a lot of cash just sitting in that checking account, there are a few better options that could get you good returns on that while still being easy to use for expected expenses' would have been actually engaging.
See in this thread:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058480
> If you are the customer you want a bank that understands what kind of inflows/outflows you’ll typically have. The bank wants to manage the risk, and you want a bank that doesn’t freak out at what seem to you to be very mundane transactions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45058894
> A bank account is only insured up to $250k by the FDIC.
It's not even an indication of fault. It's actually their internal sales/marketing system that flagging these messages. When they notice something like a large deposit, it triggers a message because they want to sell you a new account. Maybe it's savings, a CD, or you're getting ready to buy a house and they can help you with a mortgage. The average teller or even customer service person can't turn off these notifications, although, you may have some ability to opt out of them. Unfortunately, I find opting into useful notifications also opts me into useless ones, so I just ignore the texts...
Your whole arrangement of having an operating account separate from your wealth accounts is highly regular.
Edit - sorry realized I replied to a reply! Put air quotes on You/Your
The biggest thing to me imo is that everything was in one account while fdic insurance is only 250k although if chase goes out of business you probably wont need the money anyway. Also specialized startup banks come with a lot of perks for companies and founders and chase evidently didnt (or just had account rep who sucked at his job)
It's quite a lot more important to diversify funds for procedural risk than bank failures, although SVB certainly illustrates that they do happen.
More likely, the bank will put a ~$1b hold on your account while they investigate suspicious transactions, and your options are to whistle, sing, scream, or twiddle your thumbs until they are done.
So having 4-5 total accounts, ideally unrelated to each other in terms of legal owners (differently-named subsidiaries are usually the way to go, I understand, though I am far from an expert in such matters), will enable you to continue to operate your business while bank A does compliance on your accounts.
If you run into a situation where banks A through F all put holds on your account, you need a good RICO lawyer or equivalent. Different class of problem, and different likelihood of happening, and the kind of thing a great CFO plans around.
Chase has a decent private banking operation, which you might consider (so does BofA, and most large banks) which can give you the best of both worlds.
This is somewhat funny to read because if you were a JPM(chase) Private Bank client you wouldn't have any of these issues (zelle works, you can deposit checks, pull from any/all ATMs).
yeah agree -- it seems like a mistake to use retail banking for real business amounts of money and transactions. I suspect that young adults focused on a fast-moving tech world really did not live the hard lessons of the past with business restrictions. On the one hand, it is a new world now (no one would have come up with the kind of money referenced here, with Mom and Pop business pace); on the other hand, maybe you really are trying to load a trucking worth of transactions onto the top of your used Honda Accord, so to speak.
Or just plain Schwab One. Don't know about Zelle but ATMs and checks work just fine.
(Better than fine, in fact, in that they refund your ATM fees.)
If you're a private bank client how much do you care about ATM fees?
[deleted]
Much more than you would think
At what point does it make sense to sign up for private banking? I've been happy with our credit union for day to day stuff but we don't keep a ton of cash around (most of our money is in a brokerage account (ETFs)). Is private banking just for folks that want to have a lot of cash around but not have it in an easy to use account?
If you have to ask, the answer is you don't have enough! :)
Seriously though, just wander into any big ass bank(Chase, BOA, etc) and ask them. They have multiple tiers of private banking, depending on your wealth level. Generally the bottom tiers start around $100k and go from there. To get into the fancy tiers you generally need $1M or more of bank assets. To get into family offices, you generally need $100M or so. Though shared family offices are sometimes available at the low 30-50M range.
Just be very careful of fees. Generally the larger the private client services, the higher the fees.
Private banking basically means high net worth wealth management. Includes banking, investments, lending, etc.
When you need the specialized services they offer, e.g. Lombard loans, unique mortgage products.
When you are managing a $500k-1M+ liquid net worth.
I think Chase starts “Private Client” at $250 or $300k. (Don’t use Chase, however.)
It might in some cases be more trouble than it is worth, if you are right around the threshold. A “normal” retail checking account and a brokerage account at another institution with the ability to transfer between them is probably sufficient for most. If you need loans or mortgages or other stuff, it might be worth the hassle (and phone calls).
Private client isn’t private bank. They name is like that so you think it is though. :) private banking services start around $10 to $15M with higher tiers as you go.
(Not trying to diminish private client services. But they’re night and day different services.)
> start around $10 to $15M
That sounds high to me. Maybe American banks? The smaller Swiss banks will start taking your calls at about $2m.
Maybe. All the retail banks I know don’t start true private banking until there. For example, here is an article about JPM requiring 10 back in 2016 (it’s higher now): https://www.wsj.com/articles/at-j-p-morgan-9-million-in-asse...
The non retail banks that have a good reputation are even higher.
They don’t outwardly advertise their minimums because “it depends.” For example if you’re an up and comer in your field where it seems like you’re LIKELY to one day hit the mins, they’ll start the relationship early.
[deleted]
What I took from this is that you have a really engaging writing style. Was interesting to read from start to finish.
> I've used a private bank (or mix) for a number of years to store the vast majority of my financial assets
Which one(s)?
You should start a business for your construction projects, then use a business bank like Mercury instead of Chase and get all the nice business features.
What are the nice business features you're referring to?
Paying vendors
What's the point of a private bank or do you mean investement/brokerage?
I'm curious what value you get from the private banking side?
I move $10k+ in and out of BoA/Merrill every week and I’ve never received an alert or phone call. I would have stopped using Chase a long time ago if they were that annoying.
I basically never want to talk to anyone at any bank, like any other utility.
[dead]
Once upon a time my wife went to close a bank account in Italy.
She went to the post office which is also a bank in Rome. She asked to closed her account. She was told that she needed to go to the branch where she opened her account in Florence.
We rented a car and drove to Florence.
When we arrived at the bank in Florence, the teller informed us that we would have to come back “domani” which is Italian for tomorrow because the only person who could help us was the banker who had originally opened the account for my wife when she was a student many moons ago.
We came back the next day and met the banker who immediately recognized my wife including recanting that she was an artist. He informed her that he could not close her account, she would have to speak to the Director of the bank.
We waited in line for the director of the bank but we were told it was too close to the end of the day and the bank was out of money so we’d have to come back… Domani.
Domani arrived and my wife again waited. The Director willfully ignored her for 2 hours and it wasn’t until my wife began to cry that the Director finally called her over and allowed her to close her account.
This for €2500. That was a balance that meant a lot to us at the time.
I will never forget banking in Italy.
This is everything in Italy, not just banking. I remember studying abroad there, it took us a week and a half of “domani” to get the wifi password for the dorm!
I have a similar story in France. Closing an account with Caisse d’Epargne was nothing short of pure torture.
Luckily, I didn’t actually have to go in, but the process took me nearly 6 months of back and forth, multiple phone calls, multiple hand written letters. Yes, France loves hand written letters, no you cannot type it.
Every now and then I think it would be nice to return and live in France, but the thought of having to deal with French administration has vaccinated me for life.
During COVID, I took a major haircut in my day job, and ended up doing a lot of side work to stay solvent. All my banking was with Chase; I setup a new checking account for my side work. One day they just took about $900. No matter who I spoke to, they bounced me around and never gave me an answer why. I can only guess there was a fraud trigger or something, but to this day, I've never gotten the money back or even gotten an answer as to what happened. I'm fortunate enough in life that $900 isn't a big deal, but at the time, it was HUGE. As a result, I will never, never do business with Chase again (and it would be very convenient, given how many branches I have around me)
Take them to small claims court.
(Also close the account. No bank should lose money like that.)
I'd instead talk to the CFPB.
You might also try some other governmental bodies but I've read a lot of success with the CFPB
I agree small claims would be an easy win.
File a CFPB complaint. Or email executive/investor relations.
PayPal did this to me in 2004 or so when I tried to use a debit card to withdraw cash and it didn’t give me the cash but still debited the account. Hours on the phone, never got the $400 back.
I closed my account and have never directly used PayPal since.
> Ultimately, there was no long term negative impact of the events that transpired (except maybe for Alex, but I truly don't know) and I can now look back on it with amusement.
So a software guy who didn't understand people or banking opens an account at Chase. And a guy from Chase who didn't understand people or software calls him-- repeatedly over years-- and fails to ever connect on any human level whatsoever. Now when first guy withdraws millions from Chase, he unwittingly causes the second guy to lose his job. This means the the second guy isn't around to help the first guy when he needs him the most-- to help him navigate banking fraud on that same account.
This just seems tragic. Second guy's success as a banker and first guy's ease of mind as a customer were inextricably linked. Yet neither of them knew how to form the simple social bond of two 4 year-olds playing in the same sandbox.
Seriously-- how did Chase not hand the account to someone who could connect with this guy? For a multi-million dollar account this just doesn't pass the smell test.
Banker was probably asked daily by his managers if the multi-million dollar client was happy and the banker probably always responded with-yes, very.
[deleted]
I think daily is an overstatement, but it does sound like the guy took credit for some type of relationship that wasn't there, which is kind of unnecessary because maybe what he did was the right move, he gave the client exactly what he wanted.
This is one of the takeaways I wasn't able to formulate. Author added some disclaimers which already clarified their inexperience with the world. But I think that a.. preference for avoid human interactions, and a worldview of computer systems with no human systems are what explains why Author wasn't able to quickly adapt to this adult experience.
What sealed the deal of this interpretation to me:
"He literally writes down a phone number on a piece of paper. This is all feeling so surreal."
Why would this feel so surreal? Gauging by the dates, Author was born in around 1994, phones where definitely a thing, and phone numbers more so. My interpretation is that this guy was absolutely absorbed in computers, every social interaction occured in dms, or emails or posts, or articles. Both the 'unsophisticated' act of transmitting numbers and the need to deal with a human in real time were foreign. Without going into harsher labels like autism or antisociality, I think it's definitely the type of behaviour (described as being heads down), that is necessary to be competent enough with computers to build a hypertechnical security product over the span of almost a decade.
The point of view of the banker and how he fumbled this as well is a nice touch, illustrates the advantages of throwing a bone to your business partners. I mean even if you think of it from a non social perspective, only business, this is a supplier like any other, loyalty and gifts go a long way in general. But I guess that you don't need business acumen for a startup, you can just hyperfocus on your product and have your investors worry about the rest.
Amusing to read this and think back on GitHub's seed round ($100M). At the time we just had a small business account from Bank of America... going from relatively thin cushion in the account over the previous few years to suddenly dropping in $100M was pretty amusing. I believe we moved to a more sophisticated setup quickly thereafter.
> I never told them what my business does or what I'd use the money for.
This stuck out to me. I'm in the process of opening a bank account in Singapore for a newly registered company, and boy is it difficult.
Hour-long KYC interview. Details of what the business does. Anything remotely controversial could be a red flag. They want to hear about boring B2B services. They want to see evidence of customer communications or contracts, so they can see you're a legit business and not a shell company. This is very difficult for a company that hasn't started operating yet. Why would I start operating without banking? How can I show business activity before commencing operating?
By comparison, I've opened business accounts in both AU and the US without hassle.
It's likely because of the nature of the country. Singapore and the UAE (another similar country) are notoriously difficult for getting started with business banking because banks often expect you to be either well-funded (from elsewhere) or matured as a business. For a long time, they haven't ever evolved their thought to expect startups to natively grow, and even of late, they expect startups to be these well-capitalized entities with angel/VC funding. That, I presume, is because of the fact that these countries tend to be conduits for money rather than destinations themselves - they'll roll out the red carpet for you if you went with another, more "matured" objective in mind like laundering money or expanding into the country.
On the other hand, Switzerland has been surprisingly very easy to get started with quickly, even though Switzerland falls in the same category. You can easily obtain a (shitty service) Postfinance account to get started, and UBS is a breeze to work with, despite being bulge-bracket - even for new companies. Or you can also opt for a cheaper Kantonalbank, which are surprisingly very open to new businesses.
Also international accounts have more stringent KYC of course.
I also don't understand banking. "Do you need help?" when I'm making a deposit, or when my investments are set a certain way?
Here's a better idea, guys. Tell me your value proposition. How can I get access to your luxury box? Will you lend me money at ultra-low rates? How about a free toaster? Anything?
Chase sucks so bad, I would spend a lifetime encouraging anyone to bank elsewhere. I know Mitch is nice enough to say Chase wasn't the problem, but their "controls" are so archaic it makes doing business with them a chore and not a pleasure.
I'm not a fan of Chase, and I don't think I'd bank with them again, but they are a 'large national bank'. If you value having local branches mostly where ever you go, they're part of that group. That comes with all the usual exciting attractions like negligible interest on balances, and miscellaneous fees. But if you want a large national bank, eh, I guess they're fine?
My California based credit union doesn't even offer business accounts. And using the co-op network to do in-branch business at other credit unions is not as easy as the marketing lead me to believe, so I had to get a local credit union account where I moved as well. My Washington credit union does do business accounts, so that's a nice option if I need one. Plus, it's fun being a member of two aerospace/defense employee credit unions when I only worked in tech :P
Lots of local branches sounds great for personal banking, but for businesses? Unless you have a nation wide franchise business or a logistics business, doesn't seem as important.
On the contrary, a highly concentrated bank might be better, everyone is on the same building, there are no encapsulated branches, you get assigned a banker that is the best fit, rather than the one who was born closest to you.
When I was an American PhD student in Zurich, none of the Swiss banks would accept me—except the official post office bank. This was due to the stringent FATCA laws, which made U.S. citizens too burdensome for the traditionally privacy-centric Swiss banks.
Within the first few months, I accumulated around 40K CHF in salary that the university owed me (technically from the Swiss government, since researchers were federal employees). Eventually, the university emailed me to ask if I’d like to pick up my money in cash (Bargeld). Apparently, this wasn’t uncommon.
One day I went to the office to collect it. They asked which denomination I preferred (I assumed 20s or 100s). I asked for a mix, and they handed me several envelopes filled with 1,000 CHF notes and smaller bills. I distinctly remember carrying multiple envelopes. At one point, as I walked back to my office on top overlooking Zurich, a gust of wind blew behind me. I turned around and saw colorful 200 CHF and 1,000 CHF notes scattered along the road. I calmly walked back and picked them up.
For a few months, I paid my rent and groceries entirely in cash. The Swiss didn’t think anything of it—in fact, it was fairly common. Eventually, I was able to open an account and received a yellow two-factor authentication device that looked like an old calculator. I deposited the rest of the money and, for the remainder of my studies, used the “yellow calculator” to pay bills online by debit. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQhylNX...
I never did receive an official Swiss credit card which was fine. However, I did accumulate funds a Swiss 401K which is another story unto itself.
The author imagines that all readers obviously know why his actions were so wrong.
My understanding of banks is much like his naive version. So what's the more enlightened understanding?
Yeah I'm not sure why I would really care about the motivations of the bank. If I need them to be a store of money that I can move in and out and I'm happy with that then leave me alone.
When you're big enough for that to be a problem, like in the story, then someone who knows more that you've hired will have a stronger opinion of that.
I can explain a little bit
1- KYC, the bank is a highly regulated entity, regulated by the state, they are a branch of the executive, they enforce banking laws set by the legislative, and can get involved in cases of fraud, money laundering, or other illegal activities. If they see a million dollar transaction, they usually want to know where the money came from, if they don't they would essentially be looking the other way. In general know what your business partner needs, in any walk of business. Let them know that you have a such and such business, that you got a round of funding. Also know what kind of bad actors you want to differentiate yourself from, let them know you are not a drug dealer, you are not laundering money, or running a ponzi scheme, and that the money won't be frozen putting them in trouble.
2) Money is a very complex subject, the fact that you think of money as "something that is stored in a bank" is testament to the fact that banks do a good job, it's an illusion, there's a lot going on behind the scenes that you are unaware of, similar to how there's a lot going on behind the scenes in Google or ChatGPT, which have simple interfaces but complex inner workings.
3) In general, a bank is a vendor, a supplier a business partner, you pay them for services. Maybe in your personal life you don't care and you are used to anonymous transactions because of the low amounts. But in business, these are strategic relationships, you want to get the most out of your money and establish a relationship with your vendor. Loyalty goes a long way, although switching vendors is always possible, it's a tradeoff with consequences that needs to be considered, and not ignored.
Discussed at the time:
My startup banking story - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35157959 - March 2023 (257 comments)
Semi-interesting, but it felt like it was leading up to something big or interesting knowledge all the way up to the end.
Seems like it could have been way shorter, the plot is essentially "Deposited more and more money into a local Chase branch, made some guy named Alex a rising star. They called once in awhile, not sure why. Moving lots of money around isn't super straightforward."
Yes, I was expecting the outcome to be that the account gets frozen because it triggers some kind of anti money laundering filter.
Would have been interesting to read what the author would have done differently with what he learned.
You create a startup -> Do you need to do anything special with regard to the bank you chose?
I had the same experience at Citibank. We started at a small branch in downtown LA with our Series Seed round check for $3M. Even then we barely got any attention, and dealt with just a local branch manager. Later we closed $7.5M, still no attention; except this time due to consolidation we were kicked to a regional team that handled our account as a team. In fact we never had a dedicated banker, we were just handled like so many SMB by calling a banking center. Over the years we asked for things like corporate credit cards and the like, but it always seemed we were just a little too small (I guess with Fortune 50 clients, we were small to them). Anyway we eventually moved to a smaller independent bank for different reasons.
I'm not sure I understand why there's anything wrong, strange or embarrassing about what the author did?
Can some finance person tell me why the author feel they did did in not smart ways and maybe made some mistakes?
Chase Bank Story time -
We sold our company in 2020. Anticipating the wire I decided I needed to upgrade to a big boy bank from my small regional bank that I've been using since I was 16.
What finer institution is there than J.P. Morgan Chase? I opened an account with them. I called them telling them there was going to be a larger than average transfer. I put in $500 to "warm up" the account (stupid in retrospect).
Acquisition goes through. Champagne for everyone. I try to login to look at the funds and my account has been closed. I call Chase and ask them "wtf?"
They say there's been fraud in the account. We've closed it. We will mail the check to your address. So I'm thinking they're going to mail me my acquisition funds over check?? FML. 24 agonizing hours and 10 calls to them later (all leading nowhere), I eventually got the funds to be wired to my original regional bank lmao. No thanks to Chase, this was all because of PNC who was in charge of the acquisition.
This is probably my fault for using a new account like this (I think someone told me to use a large bank or something I don't remember), but I will forever hold a grudge against Chase.
P.S. I never got back my $500 that they stole from me
File a CFPB complaint!
Great read - as a young startup with Chase, this is an interesting story. As Mitch says, this isn't inherently an issue with Chase, but interesting bank behavior. I'll be sure to keep this story in mind, if we ever get to these amounts of cash!
So let's say a startup was funded through a Chase bank account and now everyone on this thread is saying "yeah don't do that"...
Let's say that a friend of mine has a startup funded account at Chase, and where should they go?
[deleted]
>Let's say that a friend of mine has a startup funded account at Chase, and where should they go?
Silicon Valley Bank... oh wait. In all seriousness, the approachability and flexibility of SVB bankers was really unparalleled at the time. Not like Alex in this story, that made really half-baked attempts to engage with a client model he was entirely unfamiliar with (but got all the credit for). This being said, Silicon Valley Bank, a division of First Citizens Bank continues to exist.
I see a lot of Fintech players on the scene now. Brex, Mercury and Rho are common ones, through Brex has taken steps to distance itself from true, seed-stage startups as of late. Given what happened with Synapse's failure [1], I have doubts that they have the same protections and regulations of a brick and mortar FDIC bank.
Diversification is key too - so having multiple accounts. Some non-fintech banks I've seen floating around, ironically, JP Morgan Startup Banking, Wells Fargo Technology Banking Group, Citigroup Commercial Bank, PNC Technology Finance. All big banks, just not their retail banking divisions (as the author was experienced using).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapse_Financial_Technologies
One of the more frustrating things in life are cleaning up novice mistakes from people who should know better.
I wonder why the investors didn't at least do some due diligence into where the money was being stored?
[deleted]
This was a super-interesting read, but I'm disappointed there isn't a description of what, exactly, was wrong about what he did, and what one should do instead. The only thing that comes to mind is the obvious one: you don't want more than the FDIC limit in a single bank account.
> you don't want more than the FDIC limit in a single bank account
especially when you're talking about Silicon Valley Bank, ironically.
I’m curious why this company raised money, only to park it in a bank account? What was the raise for?
Pretty much the best case for a startup is you don't need money -> VCs are begging to invest -> you take the money just in case -> you never need the money. Especially if it's a top tier VC the PR from raising is worth the dilution.
My take on that was that they did use a lot of the money but were also generating revenue that came in to replace it.
Favourite part of this story is how the casually realise there's $1M in funds sent from customers that they didnt notice.
What banks are recommended for startups if not chase?
Mercury
One man run on the bank!
Quite happy with Mercury. I had really terrible experiences with Chase and will never give them my money again.
Would never thought there is so much money to be made in cloud services.
[dead]
I too have a “Chase is pathological and untrustworthy” business banking story.
https://sneak.berlin/20191119/your-money-isnt-yours/
I finally just closed all my accounts there. It feels great. Fuck Chase.