Hacker News Reader

Comment by rchaud | Hacker News Reader

Seems like a weak market to go after, given that people likely to respond to a "cool" financial services brand may be a poorer demographic that maybe doesn't have any prior experience with "legacy" financial services providers. So just because they create accounts @3% doesn't mean they'll also open trading accounts.

View on HN

> So just because they create accounts @3% doesn't mean they'll also open trading accounts.

From the Robinhood website fine print “Robinhood Checking and Savings is an added feature to existing Robinhood accounts and is not a separate account or a bank account.”

So, yes, opening a Robinhood Checking & Savings account does mean that they will open a trading account, because they aren't actually different accounts. (And it's a waitlisted feature where you get moved up the waitlisted by referring others to RobinHood, so it's a clear way of getting the overall service in front of more users.)

Millennials may not have money now, but they'll accumulate more wealth as they get older. If you can convert them now, the friction to changing again is high enough that you'll probably still have them when they're worth something.

Yep that's a good play, but their page says that the 3% can change depending on the market. So if that percent changes a few months after you create an account, I would bet many people would leave cause of the bait and switch.

And many won't leave, because many of us are lazy.

That's a good point. A friend of mine in medical school told me that banks are itching to give loans to broke med school students because they know building the relationship now is going to pay dividends when the now-broke student becomes a doctor looking to buy a new car or new house.

> Seems like a weak market to go after, given that people likely to respond to a "cool" financial services brand may be a poorer demographic that maybe doesn't have any prior experience with "legacy" financial services providers.

Yeah but people do grow up. And I don't know about you, but I've got some super long term relationships with some banks. They are in it for the long game.

I find legacy banks a nuisance. They're always trying to get me to come into a bank branch.

Huh. I don't have much of a problem going in to a bank branch, given that there's one every half mile. A quick in-person meeting is fine compared to the shitstorm of unusable menus and nearly unintelligible communication that is calling your bank on a cell phone.

(I mean it would be great if there were a bank that did all its customer service over text chat, but that's too much to ask for, right?)

Well, they’re trying, with chatbots

And I’d really wish they’d just stop

I'd prefer a usable website in addition to guarantees of prudence in investing the money. My $ for both. If Robinhood replaced SIPC with something as credible, I'd go for it. They could probably do it with US Treasuries and bonds from Google, Apple, Facebook, etc.

I've used a legacy bank since the credit union I used in college slammed me with a wall of fees.

The branches have only been to my benefit, never really required, just faster.

Poor now, wealthier once they have brand loyalty.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com