I suspect that Bank of America simply wanted to make a political statement, which was unnecessary. If anything, it only sent paying clients to a competitor, which is lunacy. [More]Yesterday I submitted my latest GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" piece, "Banking on Disarmament," dealing with B of A and other financial ideological cleansers. I expect to see it posted to the site soon.
Also still unresolved: Bass Pro Shops is staying mum about what it's relationship with B of A on credit cards and Citi on credit processing means for its business practices. Probably because no one else is asking.
[Via Mack H]
3 comments:
I never even head of the term 'virtue signalling' until a few months ago.
That's what this was. Lunacy.
I've had a BoA/AAA co-branded card for many years. I intend to keep it, ESPECIALLY given their recent idiocy. Why? Because it hurts them to have me as a customer. I've reached that point in my life where I am able to pay off my credit card IN FULL each month, so they collect no interest from me at all (or an annual fee for that matter). On top of that, I get a 3% rebate on all my gasoline purchases. They basically pay ME to carry their card, and have done so for at least the last 10 years. Especially given the latest shenanigans from BoA, I'll keep the card and bleed them a little bit at a time. If more folks did this, they'd have less free cash flow to spend needlessly annoying the customer base with SJW crap like this.
I overpaid my BOA bill by $3 and stuck the card in the sock drawer.
Now they mail me a bill every month to tell me they still owe me money.
They also send me various promotional material begging me to borrow money from them. Not gonna happen anytime soon.
Post a Comment