Jump to content

Please consider disabling your adblocker for CreditBoards if you have not already done so.  This site depends on advertising revenue to stay online.


Economy Watch Thread

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Rogue said:

In a more innovative approach, some lenders are hoping to reverse the flow of information that’s flooded from banks to financial technology ventures in recent years. Aggregators such as Plaid and Envestnet Inc.’s Yodlee have been collecting account data and providing it to apps that offer help with personal finances or investments. Now, banks are hoping to tap into that information to glean a more complete view of their own customers’ finances, such as their balances at other banks.

 

 

I assume that any such data would be provided in aggregate only (not identifiable by specific customer).  I have to imagine that any release of individual customer data by an aggregator such as Yodlee, etc. would be in violation of the customer agreement through which such data is collected on  behalf of a customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Krish said:

Instead of doing PPP to save the employees, gubernment should have paid off to employee directly, like more stimulus checks from printing fake money.

 

PPP is just adding another layer of bureaucracy, thus asking employers to keep the employers and pay them. Companies which did not PPP or not planning to layoff people are taking PPP, as its free money.

 

Direct stimulus to lower working class would help the economy rev up then giving to people who dont need. 

Except when this is finally over we want people on payrolls, working, not sitting at home unemployed waiting for the next check to appear in the mailbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rogue said:

Nationwide, lenders are preparing to take a closer look at consumers who have arranged to delay payments, potentially pushing some out of the programs, as the industry tries to get a clearer picture of how many customers are truly unable to keep up during the coronavirus pandemic.

 

Banks are now examining millions of account holders to determine who is taking advantage of the programs. The efforts include trying to figure out which customers still have jobs by checking databases operated by major credit reporting firms.

 

In a more innovative approach, some lenders are hoping to reverse the flow of information that’s flooded from banks to financial technology ventures in recent years. Aggregators such as Plaid and Envestnet Inc.’s Yodlee have been collecting account data and providing it to apps that offer help with personal finances or investments. Now, banks are hoping to tap into that information to glean a more complete view of their own customers’ finances, such as their balances at other banks.

 

yup... asking for a payment or other accommodation is a signal for the lender about the future intentions of the consumer.

 

and I've always assumed aggregators have been selling my data.

 

welcome to the new normal :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hegemony said:

yup... asking for a payment or other accommodation is a signal for the lender about the future intentions of the consumer.

 

and I've always assumed aggregators have been selling my data.

 

welcome to the new normal :(

 

Just to expand, I'd be very disinclined to take advantage of a deferment offer, unless it truly eased my current financial picture.  I don't want to suggest that the related credit account notation is a "scarlet letter", but I would expect my other credit account relationships to sit up and take notice.  (Can you imagine asking for a CLI on an unrelated credit card while such a notation was active on your report?)

 

As far as the selling of aggregator data, while it's reasonable to anticipate that publicly available data on you might be collected and resold, I hope you're not saying that detailed account level data (such as monthly payment performance history or asset balances, which are generally privacy protected to varying degrees) is the data you're referring to.

 

Yodlee acquires account level data only with the consent of the account holder.  While I haven't recently reviewed the agreement under which someone permits Yodlee to aggregate and summarize their accounts, I have every reason to presume that it protects key privacy rights.  I'd be hard-pressed to believe that, even when you access such aggregation/reporting through your financial institution, that your financial institution is permitted to access that information.

 

Bottom line, I believe the article cast far too wide a net in suggesting that lenders might use an account aggregator such as Yodlee to gather specific asset account information on their customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

 

 

 

As far as the selling of aggregator data, while it's reasonable to anticipate that publicly available data on you might be collected and resold, I hope you're not saying that detailed account level data (such as monthly payment performance history or asset balances, which are generally privacy protected to varying degrees) is the data you're referring to.

 

 

This is exactly the type of data being monetized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hegemony said:

This is exactly the type of data being monetized.

 

I read you to assert that the data that Yodlee is aggregating on my behalf, at my request, and via account details and/or login credentials that I provide is being profitably resold by Yodlee ... not just in aggregation with other Yodlee's customers, but in specific, account level detail that by one means or another can be related back to me personally.

 

I'll disagree with that assertion and suggest that such detailed sharing/selling of information would leave them vulnerable to being bitch slapped by CFPB, even in it's present watered-down weakened state.

 

I'm not prepared to parse the entire user agreement and privacy notice with you.  However, the following passage is sufficient for me to take comfort that no one is getting info on my credit/investment balances or my monthly funds movements via Yodlee/Envestnet. 

 

Quote

Yodlee reserves the right to share aggregated information with third parties in which case personal information about you will never be disclosed.

 

There are, of course, two primary avenues by which a consumer can avail themselves of Yodlee's data aggregation services/reporting.  You can set up an account directly with Yodlee, or you can set up an account through an account provider (such as your bank or investment company).  I access my aggregate data through Yodlee directly.  If you instead opt to access through an account provider, an intermediary is involved and there may be a separate agreement/policy  that governs sharing of that information issued by the account provider.

 

However, anyone who aggregates your data with your consent and sharing of security information, who then goes on to sell that information without explicit consent on your part, is most certainly in fouled fiduciary turf.  I'll believe it happens when I see convincing evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, hdporter said:

 

I read you to assert that the data that Yodlee is aggregating on my behalf, at my request, and via account details and/or login credentials that I provide is being profitably resold by Yodlee ... not just in aggregation with other Yodlee's customers, but in specific, account level detail that by one means or another can be related back to me personally.

 

I'll disagree with that assertion and suggest that such detailed sharing/selling of information would leave them vulnerable to being bitch slapped by CFPB, even in it's present watered-down weakened state.

 

I'm not prepared to parse the entire user agreement and privacy notice with you.  However, the following passage is sufficient for me to take comfort that no one is getting info on my credit/investment balances or my monthly funds movements via Yodlee/Envestnet. 

 

 

There are, of course, two primary avenues by which a consumer can avail themselves of Yodlee's data aggregation services/reporting.  You can set up an account directly with Yodlee, or you can set up an account through an account provider (such as your bank or investment company).  I access my aggregate data through Yodlee directly.  If you instead opt to access through an account provider, an intermediary is involved and there may be a separate agreement/policy  that governs sharing of that information issued by the account provider.

 

However, anyone who aggregates your data with your consent and sharing of security information, who then goes on to sell that information without explicit consent on your part, is most certainly in fouled fiduciary turf.  I'll believe it happens when I see convincing evidence.

it depends how they define aggregate... They claim to not sell identifying data but these days it only takes a little more data to cross-list with something from yodlee to ID a person. If Yodlee sold data for people in my zip +4 with 3 or more deferred comp accounts AND a chase savings account I doubt the file sold would have an n-size of 1 (i.e., me).

 

have you ever seen the ACH data some clearinghouses (IIRC including CHEX) track on you? That data is monetized too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hegemony said:

If there is not more assistance to come from the federal government on this front, “many malls will be headed into default because they won’t be able to make mortgage payments going forward,” he said at the time. 

Mall of America is not alone in this scenario, either. A number of malls are missing mortgage payments, and particularly those in the CMBS market. 

 

This is going to be a big problem. Since many malls cannot reopen yet, or are just curbside pickup only, I am not so sure tenants in these malls will be able to make their financial commitments to avoid the need for a bailout. It is highly contingent on just how confident the consumer is. At least those that are still employed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't help the side note that facebook allowing employees to work remotely in U.S. but that be warned if you leave Bay Area, you'll take a significant pay cut.

 

The company will begin allowing certain employees to work remotely full time, he said. Those employees will have to notify the company if they move to a different location by Jan. 1, 2021. As a result, those employees may have their compensations adjusted based on their new locations, Zuckerberg said. 

 

 

“We’ll adjust salary to your location at that point,” said Zuckerberg, citing that this is necessary for taxes and accounting. “There’ll be severe ramifications for people who are not honest about this.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2020 at 5:04 PM, NorCalR1 said:

Couldn't help the side note that facebook allowing employees to work remotely in U.S. but that be warned if you leave Bay Area, you'll take a significant pay cut.

 

The company will begin allowing certain employees to work remotely full time, he said. Those employees will have to notify the company if they move to a different location by Jan. 1, 2021. As a result, those employees may have their compensations adjusted based on their new locations, Zuckerberg said. 

 

 

“We’ll adjust salary to your location at that point,” said Zuckerberg, citing that this is necessary for taxes and accounting. “There’ll be severe ramifications for people who are not honest about this.”

 

Which ties in with the recent news in the Bay Area that many tech employees who are currently working from home are eyeing real estate in the Tahoe area. Not that it's cheap, but probably a bit less expensive than SF and the Peninsula.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, hegemony said:

a good way to slow any recovery is if the gov't allows airlines to stop the movement of commerce and people...

 

U.S. grants tentative OK for 15 air carriers to suspend service to 75 airports

It IS peculiar that half of the listed airports are potential destination hotspots, but I always thought places like Aspen were seasonal anyhow...

 

Stopping flights to Michigan makes sense in a way, but the carriers that remain will be jacking rates...though maybe most leaving that State are doing so with a Penske or Uhaul LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, hegemony said:

a good way to slow any recovery is if the gov't allows airlines to stop the movement of commerce and people...

 

U.S. grants tentative OK for 15 air carriers to suspend service to 75 airports

I have my doubts that this is a likely impact.

 

When I scanned the airport list, it impressed me as predominantly involving airports where the carrier serviced another airport within approx 100 mi.  At a time when smaller destinations are seeing almost all flights at 50% capacity or less, it seems imminently rational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hdporter said:

I have my doubts that this is a likely impact.

 

When I scanned the airport list, it impressed me as predominantly involving airports where the carrier serviced another airport within approx 100 mi.  At a time when smaller destinations are seeing almost all flights at 50% capacity or less, it seems imminently rational.

IDK, they get a bailout but then are allowed to starve smaller cities of transportation and cargo services. Seems like an impediment to restarting local economies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, hegemony said:

IDK, they get a bailout but then are allowed to starve smaller cities of transportation and cargo services. Seems like an impediment to restarting local economies.

 

I don't think it's the case, where any single airport is concerned, that the airline suspending service is their only carrier.  When markets shrink, the number of providers typically shrinks as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

I have my doubts that this is a likely impact.

 

When I scanned the airport list, it impressed me as predominantly involving airports where the carrier serviced another airport within approx 100 mi.  At a time when smaller destinations are seeing almost all flights at 50% capacity or less, it seems imminently rational.

 

I agree. It will inconvenience some for sure, but there are sufficient nearby airports the carriers will operate from that will help mitigate costs while not being a blocker for local economies to open up and grow. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, hegemony said:

IDK, they get a bailout but then are allowed to starve smaller cities of transportation and cargo services. Seems like an impediment to restarting local economies.

 

There has to be some compromise during times of crisis. I don't see this move as a large impediment to these localized economies. There are workarounds that are inconvenient, but bailouts can only do so much.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, wingwalker said:

Which ties in with the recent news in the Bay Area that many tech employees who are currently working from home are eyeing real estate in the Tahoe area. Not that it's cheap, but probably a bit less expensive than SF and the Peninsula.

Interesting you mention that. We were in Tahoe many times this past Winter and I could easily see myself living out a nice retirement there, but it is not for everyone, and you need to have a true passion for Winter Sports. It was out of reach for a vacation home there, but I agree with you, I definitely think there will be alot of interest in Tahoe Real Estate this year, but I just don't have the resources at this time to make something happen.

 

 

Edited by NorCalR1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, NorCalR1 said:

 

There has to be some compromise during times of crisis. I don't see this move as a large impediment to these localized economies. There are workarounds that are inconvenient, but bailouts can only do so much.

 

The original agreement for the bailout was airlines would not cut cities serviced. Compromise isn't a moving target of convenience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

 

I don't think it's the case, where any single airport is concerned, that the airline suspending service is their only carrier.  When markets shrink, the number of providers typically shrinks as well.

I'm sure fares will go down when only one airline services a town... :sarcasm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.





  • Today's Birthdays

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      178,620
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    DymonStudded
    Joined

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines