HawthorneVillager.com

Would you deposit your money with a bank that didn't know how to make money? Would you invest in bank shares if it wasn't extremely great at making money?
Most banks have 4 locations in Milton alone and still expanding. That's a lot of local jobs.
No other company has nearly that level of retail operation. It takes a lot of people and stores to pull off those profits.
Hell, anyone with the balls to open 4 stores in Milton and duplicate the model across the country should have $7 bill in profit.
Edit: CIBC eff'd Milton. TD and RBC just opened new stores last week. They got to pay the rent with attractive offers to CIBC customers until the next glutton of Mattamy closes.

_________________
No, no. You know who was right all along? The Mongolians. They knew that you just can't wall yourself off from the outside world. Putting walls up never helps anything. Tearing them down brings us together.
-Randy-South Park

This is old news. CIBC seems to have a perimeter approach to branch location. they certainly have left a big gap in the center of town, hoping the 4th bank opening at STL. and bronte is a CIBC though since we moved out of town, just think, LCBO, beer store and bank only 6 km from my house, good times! As far as people relying on big brother/employer to provide them with the financial means to get through life long term, I have trouble grasping that supposedly educated people put so much of their future in others hands. I guess it's not for everyone, but went into self-employment in my 20's and I rely on me getting out of bed everyday to provide for my paycheck AND retirement. Doing it more than 15 years and life's been good.

Day to day transactional banking is a money looser for the bank. Service charges did not get them a 7 Billion dollars in profits. Think about it, it costs them 50k to have a teller in the branch. A teller is not doing anywhere near 210 transactions per day. (Assuming 1 dollar charged per transaction). Retail banking is a money looser.

I'm not asking for a branch with "1000 employees". I'm not griping about $7B profits.

I just want a flippin bank machine. Downtown.

You'd think that's a no-brainer. After all it's "Downtown".

We got that. We just decided to hijack your thread and talk about something more interesting.

Nobody banks with CIBC. You’re the only person who even noticed they have no ATM’s.

The smart people go with Scotia or TD. If you hate hipsters, you go RBC. CIBC is for people who like abusive relationships and listen to Ghomeshi on the radio.

And, don't forget, Hubs fans go with BMO

CIBC isn't always the best one for selection of their workers, at least they have a lot of locations, elsewhere, but not in downtown of Milton.
This is really strange.

But real morons in terms of customer service are with Scotia B..leep.

_________________
Let me know if you need a picture or two

Nice dodge. You didn't answer the question. Didn't even try.
By your logic (and with your dodge) not cutting those jobs would result in what? 6.9BILLION instead of a little over 7? (And that's being ridiculously generous with wages and benefits to account for a 100million difference) That would make them "The Bank of Bleeding Hearts"? 6.9BILLION would make them inefficient? That 6.9BILLION doesn't get "recycled into the economy" either. Oh sure, some of it might make it back into the waters somewhere, but most of it is being sat on. Waiting for "the right deal." Too bad that most of "the right deals" are acquisitions of foreign assets. That doesn't help the economy here much.
I get it, Bremer. You're a dyed in the wool capitalist. The almighty dollar reigns supreme. I'm not against capitalism. It's afforded us some great things. Un-fettered, however, capitalism will turn on us and consume our society. The pursuit of ever more profit leads to bank bailouts, auto bailouts and internal memos about how it'll be cheaper to pay off the wrongful death suits than to replace a $0.30 part.
So I'll ask you again. What's the magic number that equals "enough" when it comes to profit? When will you be satisfied?

The basis of my argument rests on the reality that if the company choose to save this 1,000 jobs, it would have been making those sorts of decisions in the past as well. So it wouldn't ever lay off anyone when it was turning a profit - because that would make baby Jesus cry. So it wouldn't just be 100M in lost profit - it would be billions, because you could never lay a person off, close a branch, or sell an asset that employed somebody.

"capitalism has afforded us some great things"??? Are you kidding me? It's afforded us everything. No country in the history of mankind has ever raised it's living standards above that of poverty and starvation without capitalism. None. Ever. Not even close. Many have tried.

Bank, and auto bailouts have more to do with democracy and spineless politicians then capitalism. Nothing about capitalism says you can't let banks fail. And you get a lot more shotty products that kill people in non-capitalist societies then you do with. Free markets make those things more unlikely to happen, not less, as customers tend to stop buying products that kill them. Unfettered is bad. Regulation and prosecution should be weeding out the bad apples. Sadly, in the US corruption and money seem to take priority these days. That's not because of capitalism.

Gtota tell you, I am completely lost in the logic of your rant. Is there any way you can say the same thing in plain English?

43 Canadian banks have been allowed to fail.
http://www.cdic.ca/WhereInsured/Failure ... fault.aspx

_________________
No, no. You know who was right all along? The Mongolians. They knew that you just can't wall yourself off from the outside world. Putting walls up never helps anything. Tearing them down brings us together.
-Randy-South Park

Capitilism good. Socalism bad.

So you still don't have a number. No amount of profit is EVER enough for you. That's all I can get from your diatribe.

Sure, but if RBC or one of the other really big banks ever flopped, they would never let it fail. You and I would be forced to hand them as much money as necessary to keep them alive.

That’s the sort of stuff the left has a legitimate beef with. Big business gets all the resources it needs while the average joe goes broke and left with nothing. It’s bullshit. I understand why it happens, and I think letting them fail is the worst of two bad options, but perhaps it would be good if the government made a bailout really suck. Like, every CEO and senior manager tied to that failure be fired, and they be forced to repay every penny he earned to the bank, banned from working for any mega corp ever again, and the company broken into pieces when it recovers. I dunno, what the right answer is, but the way they do it now reeks of sh*t.

JTP, so exactly what dollar amount of profit do you think is good enough to stop hiring, funding homes, financing small business, growing retirement funds, processing you payroll, operating ATM's, paying your bills or contributing millions into Income tax?
At what point did you stop accepting raises?

_________________
No, no. You know who was right all along? The Mongolians. They knew that you just can't wall yourself off from the outside world. Putting walls up never helps anything. Tearing them down brings us together.
-Randy-South Park