Slashdot Mirror
Deposit Checks By iPhone
kaychoro writes to mention that at least one privately held bank is planning on removing a little bit more legwork for the consumer by allowing the electronic submission of paper checks via a new iPhone app. The app would allow users to take a picture of the front and back of the check and submit that to the depository. "Customers will not have to mail the check to the bank later; the deposit will be handled entirely electronically, and the bank suggests voiding the check and filing or discarding it. But to reduce the potential for fraud, only customers who are eligible for credit and have some type of insurance through USAA will be permitted to use the deposit feature. Mr. Peacock said that about 60 percent of the bank's customers qualify."
Some countries still use personal cheques? How quaint!
What would REALLY be a laugh would be if Apple deletes this app from the App Store. If they do that the way they normally do, it will be without explanation and without appeal. I'd like to see how it turns out if they try that against someone with clout like a bank.
I was involved in a conversion to "Check Imaging" (take a picture of all of the checks, so you don't have to physically sort all of the originals into customer statements) back in the 90's. Now some banks are going a step past that and having the customer take the image.
I wonder how much "reverse fraud" is possible with this? I take a picture of a $1000 check, and the person who wrote the check says "hey, wait a minute! I only wrote that check for $100, the person who cashed it faked that image!"
I think if I ever cashed checks that way, I'd keep the originals in my firebox for a couple of months so I could produce the original check if there were any questions.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
When I voted for Obama, I voted for change. Not the kind that jingles in the purse pocket of the 90 year old lady standing in front of me at the Piggly Wiggly searching for her checkbook in her handbag. I understand that we probably can't leave these grannies without their paper checks, but at some point, probably during the Obama administration, a bunch of them will die off. We should use that as an opportunity to do away with checks completely.
Electronic bank transfer is where it's at. Paperless society. Swipe and go at the grocery store.
Please Mr. Obama, implement real change. Get rid of checks.
you're aware that the US government can't abolish checks, right?
What would REALLY be a laugh would be if Apple deletes this app from the App Store. If they do that the way they normally do, it will be without explanation and without appeal. I'd like to see how it turns out if they try that against someone with clout like a bank.
I'd be interested to watch the progress. The Bank of America app flew right through apparently. Now only if theirs was more useful, I'd use it.
Reply to That ||
Taking a picture of a paper check really sounds like state of the art in electronic banking :-).
Living in Europe, the last time I used a check was maybe 10 years ago.
USAA has allowed customers to scan and electronically deposit checks for quite a while. The only new thing here is the iPhone app. Still, it's pretty cool, especially compared to mailing checks in. (For those who don't know, USAA doesn't have physical branches. They were established by and for members of the military, and they've pretty much always been pioneers of remote banking, first by mail and phone, and now over the internet.)
Well, the only problem here is that when you write a check, there isn't an electronic record authorizing the release of funds. Which means it's entirely up to the debited account-holder to verify that the amounts are correct. This depends entirely on OCR. Even with a 99.99% accuracy rate, it's going to read some of those numbers wrong and some of those errors will not be detected for days, weeks, or even a month. I'm betting they didn't change their terms of use though to give the debited account-holder more than 48 hours to report fraud (pretty standard), meaning the bank is compromising the security of all of its account-holders and expressly disclaiming liability for this -- all in the name of convenience. If that's true, I'd consider not banking there anymore; They've bypassed most of the safeguards electronic and paper checks ensure -- namely the accuracy of information and longer audit trail.
Disclaimer: I haven't verified their terms of use. I could be wrong.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
The sheer number of intricacies involved that are up for exploits just blow my mind, not to mention the faint awkward idea in the back of my head about uploading a picture of Knuth's reward cheque...
*This* is why you voted for Obama? I'm not sure this is the kind of change he had in mind... I think he was talking about more the "government as usual" type of change, not "I'll make your every fantasy come true" kind (although, admittedly, he did all but say that during the campaign). Me? I don't want a paperless society. I prefer to pay in cash for things (no, not a check card) and use the credit card only when I have no choice. I use checks to pay for services for the house like appliance repair, contractors, etc. I like it this way and can't see any reason to switch. Heck, I'd make the argument that my way of doing it is *less* prone to fraud than all electronic. You use your check card and leave my cash and checks alone.
*This* is why you voted for Obama?
This and the unicorns.
Processing paper is expensive. Banks realize this, which is why they've been promoting ATMs, online banking, reducing hours for brick and mortar branches and reducing the availability of human bank tellers.
Unfortunately for the banks, many individuals and businesses still do business via paper checks. This is one means for the destination bank to save paper processing costs at their end. It's interesting that they've decided to do this by means of an iPhone app.
This space left intentionally blank.
Well, their Deposit@Home feature, which allows you to use a scanner to scan them in. Only works in Internet Exploder 32 bit version, which is annoying. But USAA is by far the best bank out there, frequently topping Four Seasons for the best customer service available. I don't have an iPhone, but this is a natural extension to their Depost@Home feature.
Those were an important platform.
I have to admit that my sarcasmometer was registering at 50/50. I couldn't figure out if you were being facetious or not. This leads me to believe you were, so I'm sorry.
P.S. Why did Chrome's spell-checker accept "sarcasmometer"? Does this exist? Can I get one?
USAA (United Serviceman Automobile Association) is not your normal bank that has offices all over where you can make a deposit. It is a banking service available to military personnel and their dependents. It has always been set up so that servicemen deployed around the world can access their accounts. Before they wrote the iPhone app, members could scan their cheques and email them to the bank for credit, this is just an extension of that service, nothing new.
I can already hear the script kiddies cracking their knuckles in anticipation of this one.
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." ~Ozzy Osborne
Keep Cheques. Get rid of Cash. Nothing erks me more that "cash only" establishments. If you are too cheap to buy a card reader than you should take my cheque. Cash is for crooks and tax evaders.
When I voted for Obama, I voted for change. Not the kind that jingles in the purse pocket of the 90 year old lady standing in front of me at the Piggly Wiggly searching for her checkbook in her handbag. I understand that we probably can't leave these grannies without their paper checks, but at some point, probably during the Obama administration, a bunch of them will die off. We should use that as an opportunity to do away with checks completely.
Electronic bank transfer is where it's at. Paperless society. Swipe and go at the grocery store.
Please Mr. Obama, implement real change. Get rid of checks.
you're aware that the US government can't abolish checks, right?
They don't have the Constitutional authority for the War on (some) Drugs (particularly the asset forfeiture laws) or the bank bailouts or the Federal Reserve or warrentless wiretaps or detaining citizens without charges and due process or collusion with ATT either. Those were stopped by a lack of authority, right?
That and people who want to buy things as anonymously as possible, cash is still the only real anonymous payment method left.
As per cash only places, they may very well be cash only to avoid having to pay sales tax, which in certain places in the world(ie Europe), ends up being a lot of money.
Monstar L
*This* is why you voted for Obama?
Actually, scanning checks locally has been a feature for a number of people who accept checks for a number of years now, but hey why not take any opportunity to whine about Obama. No really, please do, as in the end your just betting against the American worker.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
Like I said. Cash only is the realm of crooks and tax evaders
Seems like any camera phone should be able to snap a picture of a check and send it to the appropriate online location. In any case, sounds like a whole lot of risk for something that, at least in my current situation, is not very common. The last time I deposited a check was months ago.
Some people like having a physical record that they paid something
You mean like a bank statement?
In that case, some people like having a physical record that they paid something that they can use in disputes with a bank.
West Virgina United Credit Union already has this app deployed...
Check fraud? Yep, there's an app for that. Need to know how to plead for a lesser sentence? There's an app for that too. Only on the iPhone 3GS.
USAA already lets customers deposit checks by scanning them on their computers. Has for years. Very nice feature....if you have a scanner. Now that I'm only using a netbook, I don't have that luxury now.
USAA was also very quick to embrace the iPhone, and came out with a very nice dedicated app a while ago. In addition to letting you check balances, transfer funds and pay bills, it has a ATM locator (location based app), accident checklist with notepad, loan calculator, roadside assistance button (also location based), rental car locator, insurance card access, etc. Someone there is clearly thinking about things. It doesn't surprise me at all they are pushing the envelope a bit.
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
(Smash amp, burn guitar, take home the groupies)
Nothing erks me more that "cash only" establishments. If you are too cheap to buy a card reader than you should take my cheque. Cash is for crooks and tax evaders.
Not all sales are performed at "establishments". For instance, an individual holding a yard sale might not make enough to cover the cost of a merchant account and terminal.
I LOVE Piggly Wiggly!
Go home and shave your giant head of smell with your bad self
"Cash only" establishments are just trying to get by.
They're not evading taxes, they're avoiding the service charge that Visa/Mastercard charges them on every transaction. In most businesses profit margins are very small, and the extra 5%-10% that the credit card companies skim off the transaction (particularly on small purchased) can eat up the entire profit.
Many businesses depend on cash customers because they make zero profit on credit card customers -- they just accept credit cards to increase their volume so to bring overall costs down, and hope and pray that they get enough cash customers to make a profit.
You know that "cash back" that credit card companies give you on each purchase? They're just giving you a cut of the money that they're wringing out of the merchant.
I'm a USAA member, and I know for a fact that many USAA members have needs above and beyond a "normal bank" customer. Imagine trying to buy a new car in Florida when you are deployed to Iraq. Think of how difficult it is to have both of your signatures on one sheet of paper... its not a big example, but it is the kind of thing you run into. Think about this, I once worked in an on-base video rental store - we had a guy rent a movie and then get orders that night to deploy... the computer just kept racking up late fees, even automatically reporting to his CO (also deployed) - we cleared it up after a month or two, once someone noticed. Military situations are just plain different.
meh
And the government doesn't want the competition?
You deposit a check using this method
You lose the check (normally not a big deal)
Person contests every writing you the check
Now you can't prove the person wrote you a check
People lose things all the time. There are dishonest people who will try and welsh on funds they are supposed to pay. Couple that with the billions of transactions that happen on any given year and you get a recipe for some problems.
This new method should include the option/requirement to scan the check in.
I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
There is some risk involved in taking a check. Assuming the piece of paper is in fact legitimate, one has no way of knowing if the account has enough funds or if the account is even open. There is much less risk when using cash or electronic payments.
Plus, retailers that want to reduce the risk of fraud will require customers to present valid government issued photo identification when paying with a check - and this is very time consuming for cashiers to verify. It is especially annoying when people use checks in the express checkout lane.
Cash has a place. Do you write a check to a kid to mow your lawn, buy something at a yard sale, or when giving a random tip? Cash can be easy to manage too if one is using the 'envelope system' for household budgeting - you can't accidentally spend more than you've decided at the outset because when the envelope is empty, you're done for that pay period. This is important if one has a spouse that as the "I have a checkbook/debit card, so that means I can buy w/o thinking" mindset.
If the 'cash only' businesses are too cheap to pay for a card reader and the associated transaction charges, they are also probably too cheap to want to pay bank charges for check deposits. Although there are some costs to taking cash (employee theft and possibly a need for an armored car pickup for bank deposits), it's easy to quickly set up shop (ex: flea markets). Some cash only businesses take advantage of some people who prefer cards by installing ATMs at their location and get a cut of the ATM fees.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
USAA already allowed check deposits by scanner, so this really isn't anything new. But mix anything with IPhone and it makes the Slashdot homepage. Sigh.
I see no way that this system could possib-lie go wrong.
I've noticed that "cash only" places seem to be a lot cheaper than ones that take CC. For me - it's worth it.
My bank here has a link to a number of companies many of which are companies that I have bills with. I can put in a "bill" to my bank and it will retrieve the bill and when I prompt the system to do so it will submit a payment electronically, free of charge. It might take a couple days, but it takes less than a check in the mail. If the company I send the payment to doesn't have a link to my bank, my system automatically simply cuts a paper check for me.
How does the UK system differ?
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Wow, you must know this guy we have around here that says the internet is only for crackpots and pornographers. Or maybe he knows you, hmmm not sure how that works...
Why bother
Im a European and I admire Americans for using cheques. Here cheques are seen with suspicion and most people dont accept them. But cheques are good because they give you independence and freedom. Credit cards and electronic transactions make you a slave.
P.S. Why did Chrome's spell-checker accept "sarcasmometer"? Does this exist? Can I get one?
Yeah. Like everything else, you can buy a sarcasmometer on eBay.
My blog
> This and the unicorns.
You know, I had to go out and have a custom unicorn horn tip cover made, just for my own safety. Those things are pointy!
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Did you try to read the entire summary in under 1 second or something.
Can I take a picture of my bills to deposit them?
Edith Keeler Must Die
>the extra 5%-10% that the credit card companies skim off the transaction
You misspelled "one or two percent."
Can you even show me a merchant account agreement that charges the low end of your claim?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
The last two checks I wrote (and the only two in some time) were to municipal taxing authorities. The State finally got around to being able to do ACHs recently, and the IRS has been able to take your money that way for a while (as opposed to the more traditional way of sending goons over to take your kids' piggybanks).
Some companies (like my property management company) which really ought to be able to do better still take only paper checks. I enter the payment into my electronic bill paying application. My service company then writes a check out and mails it to them. They physically deposit into their bank... their bank then images it, electronically clears it, and destroys the paper copy. Pretty silly, when I know they could arrange for a direct transfer. Probably their bank charges them such outrageous fees for doing it that it's cheaper for them to hire someone to carry real checks to the bank.
Note that in the US, with "Check 21", you're not guaranteed to get your original cleared check back in any case.
I use Bank of America's online banking system, which has a facility for electronic payment of bills. As a result, I don't write checks for any of my monthly bills anymore (which essentially means I don't use checks at all).
Bank of America will allow you to set up any mailing address for automatic payment, so I can even use it to pay my landlord (who doesn't have his own arrangement with the bank like most utilities do). The caveat is that it takes 5-7 days for the payment to be processed into his account, because as far as I am aware, what Bank of America actually does is print up a check and mail it to him. :-S But at least I don't have to pay for the stamp.
My landlord once told me that Bank of America used to let people do automatic wire transfers into each others accounts, but they eventually suspended that service. Neither of us knows why.
Breakfast served all day!
Discover might, although I think they top out at 4%
more than compensates for them making me do that small portion of their job for them so I can access my money same-day rather than in 3 to 14 business days.
I can, if I can dig it up. I've since cancelled the account.
Very low-volume businesses get charged this. I ran a photography studio, and probably received 5-10 transactions per month via credit card. I was charged 7.2% plus fees for this service.
Learn about Photography Basics.
"and the bank suggests voiding the check and filing or discarding it"
Dumb as a blade of grass. Void the check, void the deposit, smart.
I am *so* in the wrong business.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Where do the people come from who want the government to step in and force everyone else to do what they think is a good idea, just because they think it is a good idea?
If enough people don't like checks, and enough people stop using them, they may eventually go away. Until then, if enough people like using them that they continue to use them, just why should the government step in and abolish them?
If I'm reacting inappropriately to a sarcastic comment, please ignore what I just said.
Doing financial business in bits and bytes is ridiculously simple and easy, the cost is nearly nill, the banks are just robbing folks as usual. I worked for several years in a Global Funds Transfer department for a huge bank. GFT technology is OLD OLD OLD, think like telegraph/fax old, that is why it works to anywhere, in Mexico, or say Nigeria, or that little village in Tanzania. You just got screwed because the big banks OWN all the wires, and they have divided up the playing field so they seem to compete but don't really do so...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Adult sites can easily have to pay 15-20%. It's pretty ridiculous.
Identity Theft - there's an app for that.
In Soviet Russia, contraband iPhone deposits YOU, into gulag!
Like the ones that think that buying lottery tickets is a good way to make money? Especially the idiots who give their tickets to convenience store clerks and ask what they've won.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
The other reasons that there are "cash only" places...
1. They may wish to avoid paying the "credit card tax"... not sales tax, which they actually just pass directly on to you (at least here they do... I get a subtotal that goes to the store and then a final total that includes sales tax). But most credit card companies take a certain percentage of the sale as their processing fee... not to mention actually have a transaction fee at the same time.
2. They may not want checks because they are such a hassle to deal with. If one bounces, they have to go after you directly to collect that money.
Cash doesn't bounce... and it doesn't mysteriously divert itself to some processing company. Sometimes it disappears, but theft has been a problem long enough that most places have some means to deal with it.
Not that I like the processes... heck, I dislike it when places won't take my desired card even though they accept other cards. I rarely carry cash and only use checks for person-to-person transactions.
Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
So, cheques: a piece of paper laced with security techniques to dodge copying/photographing/duplicating/forging is going to be accepted in photographed form? That seems more than idiotic.
It's more than just the transaction fee. My uncle owns a bar and we were just talking about this two days ago. His bank charges him 1.7% per transaction. Then they charge him a monthly account fee, a statement fee, deposit fee, and the list goes on. Most of these fees are totally unavoidable. By the time it's all added up it's about 4.5% of the CC revenues. That's only if it's Visa or Mastercard; Discover and American Express are slightly worse.
FreeBSD.org - The power to serve
Right, like the only money the credit card companies make is on the merchant fees. I'm pretty sure some of that cash back I'm getting is from other card holders who are in debt and paying upwards of 18% interest rates.
We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
I had a Merchant Account of some sort (I honestly don't remember the details) a few years back. I could accept Visa and Mastercard but the fees for other cards (Discover, American Express) were pretty insane. I'm not going to guarantee that my statement is factual but I think Discover cards were between 4-6%. That is a pretty significant percentage.
Heck, even 1-2% can be significant for small business owners. There is a local liquor/basic grocery store across from my house. I've helped them install security cameras and some POS software in exchange for some free merchandise so they talk pretty freely with me about their margins. About a month ago we were talking and the owner was telling me that One of the highest volume things they sell are individual packs of cigarettes. They charge $6.41 for a pack of Marlboro's. They make $0.21 off the transaction, or ~3.3%. Not exactly a really high mark up. Make the prices any higher and the customers may start traveling two extra blocks to a chain gas station. I'm real close to a college campus and they get tons of college kids that come in and swipe the credit/debit card every other day for $6.41...of which 1.5% goes to credit card processing fee. It literally cuts their profit in half but they have to accept it or business will go elsewhere.
Interesting. I'm a USAA customer and I just loaded up the app. For security-purposes, it seems that the application requires the phone's location before it will allow a user to deposit a check. Presumably this is to combat fraud, such as detect a user in Seattle depositing a check and then the same user in Vienna attempting to deposit a check 10 minutes later. When the window asking whether I wanted to let it use my location popped up, I hit cancel and it did not let me go any further with the deposit. Unfortunately, I don't have any checks handy that I need to deposit, but I can't wait to test this out.
A friend of mine owns a fabric store. You wouldn't believe the number of people who would use a credit card to purchase items less than $1.50. She actually loses money on these transactions, but comes out ahead when she sells fabric by the yard (or better yet by the spool). She has no choice on the matter, since her bank agreement forbids any minimum purchases or additional fees. She doesn't want to raise the prices because it penalizes the people who uses cash.
She likes checks from her regular customers. She seldom has a NSF (non-sufficient funds) and when it happens the customer usually takes care of the bank fees. Best of all, she doesn't have to share the proceeds with some financial network.
Besides I see nothing wrong with "Cash only" establishments. I think it's ridiculous for it to become acceptable that VISA or Mastercard get a cut of every monetary transaction.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
AFAIK, the merchant agreements prohibit fees for credit card users, but don't prohibit cash discounts.
Amex used to be 5 or 6%. I don't know their current rate.
Um... The president doesn't have control over this. Checks are not money, the government does not control them. Checks are simply a record of money transfer which the banks allow their customers to use.
I'm surprised by how much of a stir this story is creating. I've used USAA for almost 5 years now and the whole time they've had a "Deposit@Home" javascript that allowed you to scan your check and deposit it immediately the same way. It's the quickest and most convenient way to do it, considering that USAA is an internet-only bank. They're also pretty much the best bank in the world...ATM fee rebates, a decent web interface, and scanning (or sending them in snail-mail in postage paid free deposit envelopes) deposits? What more could you ask for?
Nope, you get what's called and IRD which replaces it. Paper checks == teh evil.
Check processing is actually a cool space to be in for IT, as long as you don't have to deal with IBM.
The largest credit card issuers make more money on transactional fees volume then on interest income, it's not even close. Not only does the issuing bank get a cut, but VISA/mastercard/etc and merchant bank get a cut.
PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
... an iPhone version of Rate-my-Poo?
"Checks" indeed. Grow up NA - the word is Cheques!
Right, like the only money the credit card companies make is on the merchant fees. I'm pretty sure some of that cash back I'm getting is from other card holders who are in debt and paying upwards of 18% interest rates.
It's not. Cash back rewards are almost always under 1.5%, and percentage cuts of transactions are almost always over 2%. Not to mention the transaction fees, bank fees, monthly service charge, etc. As has already been shown elsewhere, the credit card+bank typically takes at least 4% of credit card transactions in straight fees.
Their service agreements with the merchants require "no minimum purchase" and "no credit card fees". They have effectively colluded with the rest of the oligopoly to ensure all credit card companies have the same requirements. They then use the cash back "rewards" as a lure to convince customers to use their cards more often. Most consumers intentionally use their credit cards more often because it gives them a cash back reward. Merchants are forbidden from passing the costs on to the consumer in a direct, obvious way, so the consumers are unaware that they are actually costing themselves money by using credit cards.
It's a giant, brilliant scam.
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
By my math, that's at the top end of his estimate. Because a lot of transactions are small (now that CC companies forbid minimum charges in their TOS), the per-transaction fees often chraged - esp to small merchants - make the percentage large.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I, like many people I know, use credit/debit cards to avoid carrying cash or dealing with ATM fees.
I really wish the US had a sane payment scheme as credit cards (at least as they are currently setup) are clearly not it.
So what? That doesn't mean the cash back money comes directly from the merchant fee money. It's not like American Express keeps a separate account where they put the merchant fees and only pays out cash back to card holders from this bank account. They get income from a number of different sources (I'll go out on a limb and suggest the biggest portion of which is from interest paid on debt) and they have a number of things they pay money out on. Just because one outflow of cash is slightly less than another inflow doesn't mean that all of the outflow comes from that one inflow.
Imagine you have a regular job from which you make most of your income. But you also have a little side business that makes $100/month. Your cable bill is $75/month. By your logic, your main job doesn't pay for cable at all, it comes 100% out of the side business. How would the customers of this side business feel knowing that the only reason they have to pay such high prices is to cover your cable bill? If you didn't have to watch cable, they wouldn't have to pay as much, right? Let's say you also pay a cell phone bill of $50/month. This is also less than your income from your side job, so again by your logic it must come 100% from the side job. But now you're paying out $125/month out of an income of only $100. That obviously makes no sense, and neither does tying cash back rewards directly to merchant fees.
We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
>Make the prices any higher and the customers may start traveling two extra blocks to a chain gas station.
Yes, I did exactly that to get them for $1.20 a pack instead of $1.60. Of course I started smoking when they were 65 cents. I think I quit at $1.75. I can't imagine paying six bucks. That passed the commodity price of tobacco a long time ago, but that's not really the issue. People are not only addicted to nicotine, they are also addicted to the whole experience, which includes the packaging and the point of sale. Buying commodity tobacco at market price and rolling your own cigarettes isn't part of that experience (except for old people and hippies, and I *am* just talking about tobacco in this instance.)
Five ounces of Drum or American Spirit is about $20 still, right?
Most smokers wouldn't recognize a bushel of tobacco leaves if you dropped it on their head.
But people don't just want tobacco, they want *cigarettes*, and they want a certain brand, down to the very strain of tobacco used, the fertilzer used, the climate it's grown in, the way it's cured and dried, the stuff that's added, the shape of the filter, it's even down to the specific crinkle of the cellophane wrapper. Nobody has solved this equation more effectively than Marlboro, and that's why they can get -- my god -- six bucks a pack now -- and not only that, they can get it while giving a three percent margin to the retail outlet. This is amazing.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Actually, I used to "Roll My Own" smokes. Actually it wasn't so much "rolling" because I purchased loose tobacco and tubes with filters attached and had a machine to stuff them. When I started doing that (I'd say about 7 years ago) I was paying about $12 for a Carton (200 Cigarettes). I stopped doing it out of laziness about two years ago but recently was going to get back into it. They had increased bags of tobacco enough that I was looking at $40 per carton to do it myself. The savings was not worth my time (see below for my purchasing habits)
So now I bounce between buying them online (yes, I have a good overseas source that does not report to the IRS. No, I will not talk about who they are) and buying whatever brand is on sale. While everyone else pays $6.50 for a pack I pay $2.40 from the online sources, and usually $2.50-$4.00 for on sale brands (it is not unusually for something like Camel #9 to be buy one get one free. The cheapest cigarettes I get around here are the Marlboro 72's when they are buy 1 get 1 free. They go normally for about $4.75 a pack so they are somewhere around $2.50 when they are B1G1.
But yes, there are plenty of smokers that freak out if they cannot get their usual brand of smokes. That is odd to me as I dislike smoking the same thing all the time. All cigarettes (From roll your own, to American Spirit, To Marlboro Lights, to Parliments, to Camel really all have very subtle nuances when it comes to flavor, filter texture, smell, and overall smoking experience.
I'll fully admit to being pretty addicted to Nicotine. At this point in time in my life...I have no problem with that fact. I never think "I wish I had never started smoking" or "I wish I could quit" or "I don't even enjoy it" which are comments you year from a lot of smokers. I really like smoking cigarettes. I enjoy nearly every cigarette I smoke (sometimes I get a few crappy smokes in a pack or something). I have not even considered quitting. Future lifestyle changes may change my mind (I intend to have children in the next few years and I don't think I want to smoke with an infant/toddler in the house) but until then....I'll be enjoying my smokes.
I couldn't agree more! It's ridiculous that it's gotten this insane, and that the average consumer doesn't know or care.
For ATM fees, though, I like to use USAA. They refund my ATM fees :D
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling