ted@inmet.UUCP (10/01/85)
This is my fist time in this notes file, but I'm here for a reason.
Does anyone out there have experience with Merril Lynch and/or their CMA
(Cash Management Accounts)? I need to get some unbiased opinions before
I dump money into one of their accounts.
Thank You in Advance...
ted bailey @inmetdlp@akgua.UUCP (D.L. Philen [Dan]) (10/08/85)
About ML-CMA accounts: My wife and I have been using one as our regular
checking account for several years now. We deposit all our checks to it
and write all our checks (groceries, laundry, bills etc) from it.
We think it is great. We get money market interest (what bank does that)
and we have the advantage of a checking account. The rule is a minmium
of 20k deposit to open an account (they may have changed that by now)
but you only have to have the 20k there when you open the account.
You can withdraw the 20K after you open the account if you want to.
Also you can bounce protection by drawing against securities in the
account. This is nice when your checks pass in the mail ie. the
savings and loan deposits your mortgage a day before your paycheck is
posted. Your local bank will barf at that one. I don't have much
nice to say about local banks. My opinion is that in our local area
all the local banks are in colusion. Ever try to shop interest rates
and get a true story from them. Enough of the soap box!. The bottom
line is I don't have anything bad to say about ML-CMA. We have been very
pleased with it. While we maintain a SMALL amount in a local bank to keep
an account open, we use ML for everything else. Great service. No problems!
Remember the call of the week-end shopper,
"CHARGE!"
akgua!dlpgadfly@ihuxn.UUCP (Gadfly) (10/09/85)
-- > Does anyone out there have experience with Merril Lynch and/or their CMA > (Cash Management Accounts)? I need to get some unbiased opinions before > I dump money into one of their accounts. > > ted bailey @inmet I've had a M-L CMA for about 7 years. For the $35/year they charge me, I get: (1) them to keep all my stock certificates (which were a pain for me to squirrel away--safety dep. boxes are expensive!); (2) a checking account on which I can write any number of checks for any amount I like; (3) a VISA card that I never get a bill from (it's a debit card and shows up on the very clear and concise monthly statement); (4) no minimum balance requirement (though it took $20K in cash + securities to start). On the minus side, (1) their fund has a slightly less-than-average yield; (2) you get a lot of their propaganda in the mail, which is occasionally tempting. I take it as axiomatic that anyone who actually follows the market advice from the M-L party line (really sorry for that pun) has rocks in his head. At the time I got into the CMA it was a new thing for M-L and no one else (that I could find) had one. For all I know, there's better companies out there now with lower rates or better services. What I'm planning to do in the next month is to take all but a token amount (a few $K) out of the CMA (whose services I like) and put it in one of the socially responsible investment funds. The ones I've looked at so far all do *better* than M-L (whose CMA is heavily into some corporations I don't like), but provide few if any services. I'll post a summary of what I found out and what I did when I do it. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 09 Oct 85 [18 Vendemiaire An CXCIV] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7753 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***
brett@ucla-cs.UUCP (10/12/85)
> I've had a M-L CMA for about 7 years. For the $35/year they charge > me, I get: > > (1) them to keep all my stock certificates (which were a pain for > me to squirrel away--safety dep. boxes are expensive!); Most brokerage firms would prefer that you not take delivery on your certificates. Some will charge you a fee if you want them delivered (i.e. Brown and Company). Saving money on a safe deposit box is not a good justification for their $35.00 charge in my opinion. > (2) a checking account on which I can write any number of checks > for any amount I like; So you could have a money fund that charges you nothing and a bank account. Draw in 500.00 increments from the fund and deposit to the bank account. Many funds have lowered the minimum on checks you can write anyhow. I don't see this as worth $35.00. > (3) a VISA card that I never get a bill from (it's a debit card > and shows up on the very clear and concise monthly statement); Yes, it may seem convenient to use a debit card EXCEPT: debit cards are like cash. If they are lost or stolen you are liable for up to $500.00. With a credit card the maximum liability is $50.00. So you have to protect your debit card expecially well from theft. You also lose the valuable intervention that the bank can do on your behalf when the goods you purchase are "defective". With a credit card you have more consumer protection; the bank can intervene on your behalf. You lose this with a debit card. In my opinion, you are better off with a credit card if you can get it. If you can't you are still better off with a credit card with a credit line secured by the actual cash. There are many outfits like "Timesaver" that can fix you up. Also, typical fees for credit cards are not 35.00. (American express is a charge card). Two of my three credit cards are no-fee cards. So, I still dont see how Merill comes up with $35.00. Merill does have nice statements though. It's amazing how much better they are then the American Express format, which I think is the pits. > (4) no minimum balance requirement (though it took $20K in cash + > securities to start). If it falls below $1000.00 Merill can close out the account, if I recall from when I read the prospectus two years ago. The $20K is a killer though. -- Brett Fleisch University of California Los Angeles LOCUS Research Group 3804-f Boelter Hall Los Angeles, CA 90024 Phone: (213) 825-2756, (213) 474-5317 brett@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU {...sdcrdcf, ihnp4, trwspp, ucbvax}!ucla-cs!brett -------------------------------------------------------------------------
johnl@ima.UUCP (10/16/85)
It's true, safekeeping of stock certificates is a standard service provided by every broker for free, including discount brokers who charge half of what M-L does for each purchase or sale. Ditto a free checking account from any bank around, if you have substantial assets in that or other accounts. I gather that M-L charges something like $2.00 apiece if you actually want your checks back. Is that true? John Levine, ima!johnl
bruce@ISM780.UUCP (10/16/85)
>> (3) a VISA card that I never get a bill from (it's a debit card >> and shows up on the very clear and concise monthly statement); > Yes, it may seem convenient to use a debit card EXCEPT: > debit cards are like cash. If they are lost or stolen you are liable > for up to $500.00. With a credit card the maximum liability is $50.00. Unless Regulation E (aka, The Electronic Funds Transfer Act) has changed dramatically since the last time I looked at it three years ago, you're incorrect about the liability limit and whether it's a credit card or a debit card. I seriously doubt whether the CMA Vist card would be considered as a debit card if I use it to charge a purchase and sign a credit card voucher. I don't have a M-L CMA account so I can't be 100% sure, but under the terms laid out under Reg E it sounds like it's a combined credit card and debit card with a pre-authorized transfer to pay off the credit line on a regular basis. As such, the card-holder gets to choose which half of the card is being used at the time it's used. (When I worked at First Interstat Bank, we used to call them "two-sided cards" and at one time plained to print the Mastercharge or Visa logo on one side and the debit card logo on the other side; this idea got dropped because at that time Visa and Mastercharge had very restrictive rules about what was allowed to be printed on the cards). Even if it is a debit card, Reg E says that if you promptly report the loss of the card then you're only liable for the first $50 charged. You're only liable up to $500 only if you lose the card and fail to report the loss within 2 days, or if there's an unauthorized transaction on your statement and you fail to report it within 60 days. (Note: they're supposed to make allowances for extenuating circumstances such as being stuch in the middle of nowhere without a phone or post office handy). For those of you that do have CMA Visa accounts (I don't), I suggest that if you ever lose the card that you immediately notify M-L by the quickest means possible of the loss of the card and also demand that they cancel the pre-authorized transfer from your CMA account to the Visa credit line. Although they might claim that they have no means to immediately cancel the pre-authorized transfer feature, just get it on the record that you made the request. You might also want to close that account and open a new account and transfer your money to it so that you get a new card with a new account number and a new identificaton code. You're only liable for the $50 if it gets spent before you notify M-L. Your best bet is to send a certified letter or a telegram so that you have a record of the exact time you sent them notification (it doesn't matter when they receive it, the clock stops at the point you transmit the notice). >So you have to protect your debit card expecially well from theft. I would do the same for my credit cards especially if one lives off of their credit card as so many yuppies seem to do. The danger is that your CMA funds may be unavailable for two business days until the problems are resolved and your account is re-credited. I don't know how quickly credit card errors must be resolved, but it's probably more than two days. > You also lose the valuable intervention that the bank can do on your > behalf when the goods you purchase are "defective". With a credit card > you have more consumer protection; the bank can intervene on your > behalf. You lose this with a debit card. This would be true if the CMA Visa card were in fact a debit card, but it's not. Bruce Adler {sdcrdcf,ucla-cs,vortex}!ism780!bruce INTERACTIVE Systems Corp. decvax!yale-co!ima!bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Never explain. Never make promises. Split before dawn.
ekwok@cadsys.UUCP (Kwok Ed) (10/23/85)
In article <109000007@ima.UUCP> johnl@ima.UUCP writes: > >It's true, safekeeping of stock certificates is a standard service provided >by every broker for free, including discount brokers who charge half of >what M-L does for each purchase or sale. Ditto a free checking account >from any bank around, if you have substantial assets in that or other >accounts. I gather that M-L charges something like $2.00 apiece if you >actually want your checks back. Is that true? > >John Levine, ima!johnl I will hesitate to call it a service. They don't "safekeep" your stock certificates; intead, the stocks are registered in "street name" or in other words, their name. They get to lend it out to people who short the stock, charging a "rent" for such use. Also, brokerage houses also "makes market" and keeps an "inventory". Sort of create stocks by a stroke of the pen; they will sell you stock from their inventory, if their trading desk think the stock will go down - when they maintain a "negative inventory" position - in other words, you may get to buy what they short. You may find yourself at the disadvantaged end of the "bigger sucker" theory. Brokerage house don't provide the service out of the kindness of their hearts, that poor souls may lose their certificates if they are not careful. -- So there ... Disclaimer : Why do a need a disclaimer? All opinions above are mine and nobody else's. So if you would please step outside ... Edward C. Kwok Intel Corp., Santa Clara, CA 95051. (408)-987-8080
brett@ucla-cs.UUCP (10/27/85)
> > I will hesitate to call it a service. They don't "safekeep" your stock > certificates; intead, the stocks are registered in "street name" or in > other words, their name. They get to lend it out to people who short the > stock, charging a "rent" for such use. Also, brokerage houses also > "makes market" and keeps an "inventory". Sort of create stocks by a > stroke of the pen; they will sell you stock from their inventory, if > their trading desk think the stock will go down - when they maintain a > "negative inventory" position - in other words, you may get to buy > what they short. You may find yourself at the disadvantaged end of > the "bigger sucker" theory. > > Brokerage house don't provide the service out of the kindness of their > hearts, that poor souls may lose their certificates if they are not > careful. > > Not quite accurate. On cash accounts they are not allowed to lend your securities out, but on margin accounts they may.
wildstar@nmtvax.UUCP (11/13/85)
I have a question concerning the various television and newspaper ads ( i.e. "Special Report" at midnight on Ch 7 Albuquerque would be a good example ) about investment methods that manipulate mortgages and other real-estate vehicles by buying with "other people's money". I have questions about the legality of the procedure. 1) Does it violate Security Exchange Commission laws because of the required leverages involved? 2) Has the IRS condemned the method as an abusive tax shelter, or as abusing tax loopholes? 3) Does it violate various laws on mortgages, such as Fannie Mae regulations on what you can and can't do with FNMAE's? 4) If it is not already illegal by the above or any other criterion, I have heard that Congress is about to drop a 40 ton axe on it anyway because of fairness issues involved. Is that rumor true? 5) Does the Alternative Minimum Tax render the method ineffective by taxing profits no matter where the source? I and probably many other would like to see this "nothing down" craze laid to rest one way or the other. If I am allowed to use it, fine, but otherwise I want to know how much of a scam it really is. Thank you. Andrew Jonathan Fine