Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck

Wells Fargo Bet on a Flashy Rent Credit Card. It Is Costing the Bank Dearly. (wsj.com) 46

Wells Fargo's co-branded credit card partnership with fintech startup Bilt Technologies is causing the bank to lose up as much as $10 million monthly, according to a WSJ report. The bank agreed to a co-branded program with the fintech startup that most other big banks -- including JPMorgan Chase -- passed on, incorrectly modeled key assumptions and sees no path to profitability. The card, which allows users to pay rent without fees while earning rewards, has attracted many young customers. From the report: There is a reason why credit cards hadn't gained traction in the rent sector until Bilt came along. Most landlords didn't accept them because they refuse to pay card fees that get pocketed by the banks issuing them and often run between 2% and 3%.

Bilt structured the card so landlords won't incur the fees. Wells instead eats much of that. About six months after the credit card was launched, Wells began paying Bilt a fee of about 0.80% of each rent transaction, even though the bank isn't collecting interchange fees from landlords.
It appears that the problem for Wells Fargo is that Bilt customers are savvy. They are making the rent payments, but not carrying balances or doing any other transactions through the card.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wells Fargo Bet on a Flashy Rent Credit Card. It Is Costing the Bank Dearly.

Comments Filter:
  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cusco ( 717999 ) <brian@bixby.gmail@com> on Monday June 17, 2024 @09:45AM (#64555317)

    Losing $10 million a month? Couldn't happen to a more deserving bank, their sleaze and history of ripping off customers is almost unparalleled.

    • by boulat ( 216724 )

      Wells Fargo spent $179M in 2023 on legal expenses and $207M on customer remediation, in addition to $797M of "other" expenses, whatever that means.

      This bank knows how to lose money, after all money is debt, and you can't get taxed on debt.

    • by aaarrrgggh ( 9205 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:03AM (#64555371)

      I only wish they were losing more money. Wells Fargo was by far the worst bank I ever dealt with.

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:36AM (#64555477) Journal

      LOL - They staff at Well's probably collectively spends that much of fancy coffee each month.

      Spending 10m a month for a could years while you market test and find out what the real consumer behavior is, part of being a big fish in that business.

      Is it a disappointing result sure - and maybe someone isn't get a bonus this quarter, but they are not losing their job either. Meanwhile Wells and their partners will either start closing down the product offering and or restructure it to try to get customers to also use the card for other purchases and maybe run a NET30 balance once in a while. Its just another week in finance...

      • by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @11:21AM (#64555635)
        I could easily imagine it becoming profitable over time as more renters who "meant" to pay it off every month eventually yield to the temptation of taking a month or two off paying rent and fall into paying interest thereafter. Especially when the next recession comes along.
    • by Xenx ( 2211586 )
      Bank of America would like to say a word.
      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        While you definitely have a point, I don't think that BoA ever went so far as to take out credit cards in their customers' names without their knowledge.

        • by Xenx ( 2211586 )
          I just know the two are in a close competition. Last I looked, Wells Fargo is ever so slightly ahead in customer satisfaction.
    • "Wells Fargo" has not actually existed for more than 25 years. The transition started in 1986, when Wells merged with Crocker Bank, and the combined entity kept the Wells Fargo Bank name, but adopted Crocker's charter, because it allowed them to engage in businesses that Wells' original charter did not.

      Wells bought bank after bank throughout the "merger fever" period of the 1990's, but the deal that fundamentally changed its management culture for the worst was its 1998 "merger of equals" with Norwest Corpo

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The government is sending a check by courier. Thoughts and prayers for Wells Fargo in this difficult time.

  • by eepok ( 545733 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:03AM (#64555365) Homepage

    They are making the rent payments, but not carrying balances or doing any other transactions through the card.

    It's sick that this is considered a failure in business. Ya, I get that all the rewards given to people who use a card are funded by the inability of others to make their credit card payments on time, but still... It just seems wrong that an article gets published pitying a company that had HOPED that people wouldn't be able to pay their debts.

    • by Junta ( 36770 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:27AM (#64555449)

      I get that all the rewards given to people who use a card are funded by the inability of others to make their credit card payments on time

      Actually, generally those are funded by high transaction fees inflicted on the merchant. There's a reason other financial institutions passed, they don't want to bet solely on people carrying a balance, it's widely recognized as a bad bet. Certainly profitable, but still bad to risk losing money on each transaction in a systematic way on something as uncertain as carrying a balance.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I know reading comprehension is not required to get tech jobs but you have somehow quoted a single sentence less than 20 words long and failed to comprehend it in TWO different ways. So, uh well done?

      The sentence says: "not carrying balances" or "[not] doing any other transactions through the card". Neither of those is "the inability of others to make their credit card payments on time."

      • "Carrying balances" means you pay off less than the full balance each month. Roughly 50% of people with credit cards car
    • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @11:04AM (#64555575)
      it's usually the business accepting the card that pays them. That's what a huge chunk of those fees are.

      The idea is that the merchant makes it up because people paying with cards spend more. e.g. you go to best buy for a TV and walk out with a TV, a new Playstation game and a fancy overpriced HDMI cable.

      That doesn't work with rent & utilities because you can't really tack on anything to them. They are what they are.

      It's painfully obvious what this was, Wells Fargo was gonna run this for a bit, get everybody into the ecosystem and used to paying this way, then jack up the fees.

      Those fees may or may not get passed onto the renter. On the one hand landlords have pretty much maxed out what they can charge w/o people becoming homeless (they don't care, btw, but they *are* worried about government action) on the other hand they've been pretty bold of late...
      • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        Quite honestly, the land lords should get used to paying the fees and they should like it.

        The worst thing about being a mom-and-pop land lord is handling rent collection. You have people paying late, you have people doing strange things like showing up with cash on rent day, rather than a check. Which you then have to deal with or risk having sitting around. You have checks bounce. In the last case ACH drafts don't eliminate the problem either. Its a pain in the butt.

        Having your tenants have a card on file

    • They are making the rent payments, but not carrying balances or doing any other transactions through the card.

      It's sick that this is considered a failure in business. Ya, I get that all the rewards given to people who use a card are funded by the inability of others to make their credit card payments on time, but still... It just seems wrong that an article gets published pitying a company that had HOPED that people wouldn't be able to pay their debts.

      It is not that the bank -- which is, objectively, an evil enterprise that should have been destroyed (with prejudice) when its practices of wanton fraud and theft from everyday customers were revealed -- hopes that people can't "pay their debts"; it's that they hoped that a line of credit would encourage people to carry some debt, which is a fairly normal thing for people to do.

  • To be fair (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FeelGood314 ( 2516288 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:06AM (#64555381)
    Wells Fargo's card holders are generally terrible with money and credit. I can easily see how Wells Fargo's models would show that giving credit to a middle income demographic could seem like a profitable business. They didn't count on the large number of reasonably fiscally savvy people realizing what a good deal this was. My girlfriend works in medical research and I see this statistical failure all the time, where someone uses a model, formula or tool but doesn't realize that the required assumptions are not there.
    • I can see this being a good deal if you planned on paying rent with a credit card to begin with. But if you just pay with a check or a debit ATM, you generally don't pay a fee either?
  • by marcle ( 1575627 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:07AM (#64555383)

    Wells Fargo made a wager that they were smarter than their customers. Turns out the opposite was true.

    • Gasp, H.L. Mencken was wrong! "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." ;^D
  • by jddj ( 1085169 )

    Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of venal assholes.

    • It brings tears to my eyes that they will now need to divert some of their money laundering profits to this program.
  • by RockDoctor ( 15477 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @10:32AM (#64555463) Journal
    No further comment necessary.
  • I'll bet all the people involved in this card hadn't lived in an apartment since the one their parents paid for in college and assumed they only needed to get this thing into the hands of obviously financially illiterate renters and let the money roll in.

    If they're too stupid to buy a home at 23 like I did I don't see how they could possibly have the sense not to run up their cards and carry a balance like I did when my parents bailed me out at 25

    --- 31 year old director of whatever at

  • That's because... (Score:5, Informative)

    by JDShewey ( 1060926 ) on Monday June 17, 2024 @11:25AM (#64555659)
    My family has been doing property management for almost half a century now. It's a family business - grandpa started it, and my parents took over after he passed. They do small properties - apartment complexes with 8 units, duplexes, individual houses, etc. They make between 4% and 8% of the monthly rent on the property. So yeah - add a 3% credit card processing fee on top of that, and the economics don't make any sense. That's half or nearly all of their management fee And you can bet the owners aren't going to eat that cost. For many of them, that's their retirement, or they are trying to make their own mortgages.
  • Instead you can pay 29.49% APR interest on balance from last month's rent. For an $1800 rent that's $44.24 (1800 * (.2949 / 12)). Not bad, but it's going to really compound if you can't pay off both this months and last months rent before the credit card is due. Then you'll be 2 months behind, and soon you're paying hundreds of dollars in interest every month because you're never able to get ahead.

    You know what, fuck these guys.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    > it appears that the problem for Wells Fargo is that Bilt customers are savvy. They are making the rent payments, but not carrying balances or doing any other transactions through the card.

    Debt is a trap, and Wells Fargo honestly expected its customers to be dumb enough to fall for this trap, and now they're losing money because their customers are smarter than they thought?

    This is the best news I've heard all day.

    • using the credit card issuer's month for up to a month isn't a trap though. I run $2K a month through my credit cards, with no fees and no interest, just paying off full balance each month.

      I have astounding credit rating. docked a few points for not carrying a balance.... which is useless anyway since I won't borrow, lolz

  • by Anonymous Coward

    ...nothing is happening.

  • If $10M/month is 0.8% of each rent transaction then that makes up $1.25B / month in rent transactions.
    Probably a drop in the land lord sea, but still looks like an insane amount to me.
    • by Xenx ( 2211586 )
      The summary mentions that they're not charging the usual 2-3% transaction fee, along with paying out 0.8%. So, we're looking at at more like $300 million.
  • I would hardly call that "costing it dearly"...

  • What's wrong, did somebody rob the stage coach but you can't call it identity theft? Funny how the customers you prefer and profit from the most no longer accept your terms and head out the door.

  • You can't have both. You either lend to risky customers who carry large balances, or you lend to customers who won't be stupid enough nor need to.

  • Don't use credit cards transfers. You ARE A BANK. Just use Swift, or another direct transfer, it costs nothing idiots.

A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson

Working...