Re: [802SEC] 802 Banking account proposal
John-
My response was going to be along the lines of Buzz' but with a little
different twist. At the moment the IEEE credit worthiness "should give us
some headroom"
BUT
it swings both ways
it is not unimaginable that the institute could have a financial situation
that could negatively impact our credit worthiness.
My preference would be that our credit worthiness would remain solely the
result of the things that 802 does (and can explain).
Geoff
At 01:19 AM 11/2/2006 , Rigsbee, Everett O wrote:
>John, I have an issue with 2) below: You said,
>
>" 2) Can a hotel or other organization with which 802 needs to
>establish an account/credit get confirmation of the 802 account and
>other appropriate 802 account specific information as can be obtained
>from an independent bank account?
>
>And Geoff piles on: I am curious as to the credibility (from a hotel or
>other vendor's point of view) of somebody at the IEEE vs. talking to a
>bank when seeking to establish our credit worthiness. It seems to me
>this might be an issue.
> I assume that if our banking is concentrated that our vendors
>can not call the bank directly for information on a sub-account. If we
>expect that this sub-account information is to be available directly
>from the bank then we need to definitively establish that this will be
>the case.
>
>[JH: The vendor would speak directly to the bank, and the bank would
>provide information based on the entire IEEE account. IEEE is aware of
>this practice and allows it. The credit worthiness would be established
>with the entire IEEE. So, we should benefit in that the credit
>worthiness for the IEEE 802 activity would be based on the entire
>holdings of the IEEE, not just those of IEEE 802. We have not had
>issues with this in the past, but alas, it would give us some
>"headroom]"
>
>I would suggest that credit-worthiness is much more than the matter of
>the account balance. It looks at history, volatility, and liabilities.
>
>So under concentration banking our credit worthiness now becomes an
>amalgam of all other groups and conferences, some of which have had less
>
>than sterling histories and may in fact cause us to achieve lower credit
>
>worthiness scores than we have achieved and maintained on our own. I
>think we also run a serious risk from possible lawsuits and outstanding
>judgments that may name that account as a liable asset and thereby put
>our credit worthiness in serious jeopardy. So let's not be too quick
>to join the amalgam without an assay of the true risks involved.
>
>We have made and maintained an excellent rating for ourselves over the
>years. I'm not at all sure I would want to trade that away for the sum
>total of the amalgam. As I'm sure you have noticed in reading our hotel
>
>agreements, the penalties for not passing the credit-worthiness muster
>are severe and in many cases would make it impossible to fund the
>advance
>deposit requirements under our current pay as you go method of
>operation.
>That would be a killer for me.
>
>
>Thanx, Buzz
>Dr. Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
>Boeing IT
>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
>Seattle, WA 98124-2207
>NOTE: New phone & Fax numbers; please update your address book.
>Ph: (425) 373-8960 Fx: (425) 865-7960
>Cell: (425) 417-1022
>everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Hawkins [mailto:jhawkins@NORTEL.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 4:18 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [802SEC] 802 Banking account proposal
>
>
>I wanted to post answers to Bill Q's and Geoff T's questions from a few
>days ago on the proposal for concentration banking. They are all great
>questions, so let me address them one-by-one. My answers are in brackets
>below. My thanks to Anita Ricketts, Bus Manager of IEEE SA office for
>helping me track these down.
>
>So reproducing the questions:
>
> 1) What if any are the restrictions on the life of a
>concentration banking account and will there be any change in the
>account number or other identification of the account during the life of
>the account?
>
>[JH: There are no restrictions, nor are there anticipated changes in
>the IEEE relationship with Wachovia which might lead to a change in the
>account number. The account will be open as long as IEEE 802 is around.
>I'd be careful about saying the account number/ID would "never" change,
>but it would be an out-of-the ordinary situation, were that to occur.
>Who knows, Wachovia could get acquired, they could adopt an alternate
>numbering convention, etc... which might lead to a change. But then
>again, that would be the case with any bank including our present one.
>Concentration banking would not add to or subtract from that risk.]
>
>
> 2) Can a hotel or other organization with which 802 needs to
>establish an account/credit get confirmation of the 802 account and
>other appropriate 802 account specific information as can be obtained
>from an independent bank account?
>
>And Geoff piles on: I am curious as to the credibility (from a hotel or
>other vendor's point of view) of somebody at the IEEE vs. talking to a
>bank when seeking to establish our credit worthiness. It seems to me
>this might be an issue.
> I assume that if our banking is concentrated that our vendors
>can not call the bank directly for information on a sub-account. If we
>expect that this sub-account information is to be available directly
>from the bank then we need to definitively establish that this will be
>the case.
>
>[JH: The vendor would speak directly to the bank, and the bank would
>provide information based on the entire IEEE account. IEEE is aware of
>this practice and allows it. The credit worthiness would be established
>with the entire IEEE. So, we should benefit in that the credit
>worthiness for the IEEE 802 activity would be based on the entire
>holdings of the IEEE, not just those of IEEE 802. We have not had
>issues with this in the past, but alas, it would give us some "headroom]
>
>
> 3) Under what conditions would the IEEE withdraw funds from the
>account and if funds were withdrawn, what are the justifications for
>such a withdrawal, what notice would be provided to 802 and what is the
>timing of such notice?
>
>[JH: Currently, there are no conditions under which IEEE withdraws funds
>from concentration banking accounts. The Director of Treasury is of the
>opinion that a wholesale commandeering of the funds in Concentration
>Banking would require an action of the IEEE Board of Directors and would
>impact Regions, Sections and Conferences as well as Standards. In other
>words, it is not impossible, but it is highly unlikely and
>unforeseeable, just as it is today with the staff signature on the
>existing IEEE 802 bank account.]
>
>
> 4) What is the mechanism and approval chain for 802 to cause a
>domestic or international wire transfer to issued?
>[JH: Approval: the request must come from a signer on the account and
>there must be sufficient funds in the account to cover the transfer
>amount. Mechanism: signer sends the request via email to Standards, (at
>this time = Anita). Standards makes the request of Treasury and
>Treasury executes the wire transfer with the bank. It is not clear to me
>at present if this can be done online with Wachovia. That would be my
>preferred method. (I'll work with Anita to look into that)]
>
>
> 5) What fees and additional exchange rate (in excess of the bank
>to bank exchange rate) are imposed on domestic and international wire
>transfers?
>
>[JH: None. IEEE does not charge a fee for executing the request.]
>
>
> 6) Does the use of concentration banking require that 802 use
>the IEEE for credit card processing services? In the past the IEEE
>charges for credit card processing were significantly greater (3x-4x)
>than the rates 802 paid using it own merchant accounts. Or can the
>existing 802 merchants be used and linked to a concentration banking
>account? If the existing 802 merchant accounts can be used, is there
>any additional charge imposed for this linkage to a concentration
>banking account?
>
>[JH: No, it is not required. We will need to set it up initially, of
>course, but no fees are incurred from IEEE or Wachovia's standpoint. The
>merchant accounts may have a one-time adminstrative fee to change over
>to a new bank account (I need to look into that).]
>
> 7) What other restrictions would the use of concentration
>banking impose of the financial activities of 802?
>
>[JH: None beyond the ones listed on the Concentration Banking site I
>pointed to earlier:
>http://www.ieee.org/portal/pages/services/financial/treasury/concentrati
>on.html ]
>
> 8) Are there any limits on the dollar amount of a check written
>on the account?
>
>[JH: There are no dollar limits on a check.]
>
>
> 9) Are there any requirements for multiple signatures on checks
>or for checks greater than some threshold amount?
>
>[JH: There are no such requirements on the accounts]
>
>On the local access issue:
>
> 1) What is the drill required to change signatures on the
>account? Can that all be done by mail?
>
>[JH: The 802 EC would need to approve the signer via motion. Anita then
>would be alerted when this is complete. She will email the form to the
>person or persons to be added to the account. They will fill out the
>forms and mail forms to her attention. Standards will confirm the
>signer is an IEEE Member (Member Grade or higher) in good standing.
>Standards will forward to Treasury for action with the bank. ]
>
>
>On the advantages of concentration banking:
>
> 1) The IEEE made it clear on multiple occasions in the past that
>it did not want 802 to have any credit cards. Such cards were available
>from US Bank and would have been useful for certain 802 purchases and I
>considered getting one or two. But no cards were obtained due to IEEE
>objections. Has the IEEE changed it policy or is this just a ploy to
>encourage groups to use concentration banking?
>
>[JH: That policy remains in effect. What is issued is a MasterCard debit
>card. It looks like a credit card, but is, in fact, a debit card. Any
>charges against the card will be withdrawn from the IEEE 802 account. It
>has the convenience of a credit card, without actually being one. Having
>said all this, I am not convinced we would use this benefit, but it is
>an option. The vast majority of our transactions are satisfactorily
>accomplished by check.]
>
> 2) On line access is available from all major banks including US
>Bank.
>
>[JH: You are correct. I've investigated US Bank's online offer in the
>past, and haven't bothered to apply because it buys me nothing.
>Ironically you have to visit a branch in person to get it set up...
>(sigh). Traditional wire payments are not possible. A bank transfer is
>possible, but the vendor's bank account number/info must be spelled out
>in the initial online banking appplication. And that application (you
>guessed it) needs to be delivered in person to a branch location (double
>sigh). Finally, it's not free, although I can't find out anywhere online
>that tells me how much it would cost, just that there is a fee. Other
>banks, I'm sure, are a bit more enlightened in these areas.]
>
>[JH: I hope this helps answer these specific questions. Are there more?
>]
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This
>list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.