home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
010989
/
01098900.005
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
80 lines
<text id=89TT0072>
<title>
Jan. 09, 1989: Back To The Velvet-Roped Lines
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1989
Jan. 09, 1989 Mississippi Burning
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
TECHNOLOGY, Page 49
Back to the Velvet-Roped Lines
</hdr><body>
<p>A pioneer pulls the plug on its electronic home-banking service
</p>
<p> When Chemical Bank introduced its home-banking system five
years ago, the Manhattan institution touted the new service as
a breakthrough in consumer finance. For $12 a month, customers
equipped with personal computers and telephone modems could tap
into the bank's electronic ledgers and handle many of their
banking chores from the comfort of home. Chemical viewed it as
both a high-tech lure to draw new customers and a strategic
first step toward a checkless, cashless future.
</p>
<p> Alas, the system, called Pronto, was too slow in catching
on. The bank has advised an estimated 25,000 home-banking
subscribers that their accounts will be canceled, as of Jan. 31
for individuals and Feb. 28 for small businesses. The move has
jarred the banking industry and raised doubts about the future
of all home financial services.
</p>
<p> In the brochures, at least, home banking comes across as a
great advance. Customers can pay bills with a few keystrokes.
They can instantly move money from one account to another,
enabling them to keep cash in interest-bearing money-market
accounts until the exact moment it is needed elsewhere.
</p>
<p> Yet consumers have not rushed to gain this edge in speed or
convenience. Of the 3.3 million U.S. homes equipped with
computers and modems, only 95,000 subscribe to one of 41
different home-banking systems. Many who tried home banking
complained that the software was often bug-ridden, difficult to
use and slow. Moreover, inexplicable delays -- sometimes lasting
weeks -- cropped up between the time customers ordered bills
paid and the arrival of the payments.
</p>
<p> Another drawback has been the cost. Home-banking customers
pay up to $144 a year for the service, far more than the
average household spends on the checks and stamps used to pay
bills. But the biggest obstacle is that home computers have no
way to produce hard cash, so they fail to eliminate a
customer's periodic trek to the bank or automated-teller
machine.
</p>
<p> While failing to excite customers, home banking has been a
costly proposition for the banks. One problem: although many
large creditors like utilities have computerized accounts that
allow their bills to be settled electronically, most small
businesses do not. So when a home-banking user hits a button to
pay, say, a doctor's bill, someone at the bank often has to
print out a check, stuff it in an envelope and put it in the
mail.
</p>
<p> Chemical apparently decided to cut its losses after
investing tens of millions of dollars. At the moment, other
institutions plan to give the technology more time, but if
customer interest does not pick up, there are likely to be more
dropouts from the home-banking business. "For a technology to
affect the way we live, it has to be cheap, simple to use and
offer a strong reason to use it," says Timothy Bajarin, an
analyst at Creative Strategies Research International in Santa
Clara, Calif. "So far, for computer banking, those signposts
aren't there."
</p>
</body></article>
</text>