meant to lure millennials with zero fees and emojis
and then
By killing off Finn, the bank removes some confusion over the product: While the app was designed for the digitally-inclined, users still had access to the bank’s ATMs and tellers, although that access wasn’t heavily promoted.
So I'm curious here, would signing up for a bank account through the Finn app have been classified as a different type of account to get "zero fees"?
Asked perhaps in an illustrative way, if I sign up for an account through Finn and get zero fees, would my girlfriend be able to sign up for a checking account at a physical location the "good old fashioned way" and be able to get the same zero fee checking account type?
As a millennial trying to be more attentive to the minutia of his personal finance and uses his current bank's mobile app quite heavily for everything from transfers to travel notifications (so my card doesn't get flagged if I'm visiting family five states down I-35), I'm missing what the appeal of Finn was supposed to be. They had my attention at zero fees, and immediately lost it at "emojis".
Or is my confusion because I'm one of the "older millennials" and therefore not the target market for this service?
Zero feel typically means no monthly fee to have the account, no per check fee and free ach transfers in and out with a limited number of linked accounts. Accounts like that can be had a most banks now days. They still charge fees for overdrafts, wire transfers and other services.
I know what "no fees" means, what the article doesn't help me understand is what the real value add to my banking experience Finn would have been that I wouldn't get from walking into a brick and mortar and opening an account with a banker sitting across from me and opening a checking account and using the "normie" mobile app.
Nothing. You save yourself the hassle of going to a bank. But you can open accounts with most banks online now. I think this was part of a larger streamlining of the JP Morgan Chase Brand.
and then
By killing off Finn, the bank removes some confusion over the product: While the app was designed for the digitally-inclined, users still had access to the bank’s ATMs and tellers, although that access wasn’t heavily promoted.
So I'm curious here, would signing up for a bank account through the Finn app have been classified as a different type of account to get "zero fees"?
Asked perhaps in an illustrative way, if I sign up for an account through Finn and get zero fees, would my girlfriend be able to sign up for a checking account at a physical location the "good old fashioned way" and be able to get the same zero fee checking account type?
As a millennial trying to be more attentive to the minutia of his personal finance and uses his current bank's mobile app quite heavily for everything from transfers to travel notifications (so my card doesn't get flagged if I'm visiting family five states down I-35), I'm missing what the appeal of Finn was supposed to be. They had my attention at zero fees, and immediately lost it at "emojis".
Or is my confusion because I'm one of the "older millennials" and therefore not the target market for this service?