As a reminder of what the entire industry has been doing, ChangeInTerms.com is introducing its new Stink^SM card.  “The concern for warning small businesses is due to our insights about the true intentions of credit card companies and their ‘desires.’  For example, one promoted ‘life of the balance loans,’ only to later coerce and bully cardholders into accepting higher rates (such as double), with a fixed duration,” said Dr. Robert Lahm, founder of ChangeInTerms.com, who is also the developer of the new product.

The new ChangeInTerms.com "Stink" card: "The smell of credit card company abuse is everywhere."

The Story Behind “Stink”

Behind every act of abuse perpetrated by the credit card industry is a story: destroyed credit ratings, ruined household finances, stressed out borrowers deciding between food or card payments, defaults that banks actually pushed people into, businesses that layoff people or close altogether while card issuers like Chase raise minimum payments from 2% of the balance to 5% of the balance.  “We’re sick and tired of it, and we’re creating a ‘Stink’ card,” said Lahm.

“We don’t like the trickery and traps that have long been used by the credit card industry, and we’d like to let them know that small businesses are vital to the economy, struggling, and not to be abused.  There are no rewards, and there is neither flexibility nor control, when card issuers scheme and have a deceitful plan: imposing onerous new terms after you’ve signed up.  That’s called bad faith.”

“The name for the card was easy to come up with from a creative point of view, a result of thinking about the low-life characteristics and evil-doing on the part of credit card companies: they’ve proven to be inflexible with customers, coercive, rude, unethical, and mean-spirited. We’ve been listening to the agonizing screams of consumers and small businesses, and determined that the C.A.R.D. Act was nothing more than a carefully negotiated settlement riddled with loopholes.  Further, credit card companies are able to change terms for the worse and make rates go up in the blink of an eye, but stopping at least some of the abuses: they lobbied Congress in order to gain over a year’s time for that to occur.  Entrepreneurs especially, have gotten a raw deal — and that’s why we’re reminding everyone, this really ’stinks,’ for them, for the American economy, and for ordinary citizens who have to pay for the greed and mistakes made by the banking industry.”

The new “Stink” card doesn’t have a powerful interactive marketing agency behind it or plans to run ads on  CNN, FOX, or other business related news and information outlets.  Implementing a major media buy would be interesting in the Wall Street Journal, Fast Company, Business Week, Inc., Entrepreneur, radio and transit, “but we’re just a ragtag group like our forefathers, revolting against an aristocracy — only the Goliath-sized banks have the money, after fleecing consumers, for that kind of campaign.”  Fortunately, thanks to the viral nature of the Internet and the fact that people are already outraged about credit card companies, which have now managed to become one of the number one consumer complaints, “I still think the ‘Stink’ will spread rapidly,” said Lahm.

Editor’s Note: For downloadable reports, artwork, and other materials, they’re all over the ChangeInTerms.com site.  It’s what we’re here for, to fight back.  Members of the media can also contact us through the press room.

ABOUT CHANGEINTERMS.COM

ChangeInTerms.com is a consumer protest site, founded by Dr. Robert Lahm (who is also a Western Carolina University entrepreneurship professor), in response to credit card companies and their mistreatment of millions of account holders (including himself). The site provides vibrant discussion and analysis, links to government, regulatory, and advocacy organizations, and sometimes more than a little sarcasm — along with serious critique — about the activities of credit card companies both individually, and as an industry. When credit card issuers change terms for the worse, the site leads the way in fighting back with viral anti-card marketing tools which hit back hard, from a consumer perspective.  ChangeInTerms.com declares to credit card companies: NOW WE’RE COMING AFTER YOU.

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: small business

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Further, speaking as someone whose work as an entrepreneurship educator and researcher on the subject of credit card usage by small businesses has led me to be extremely concerned about how banks at large are undermining the economic recovery, I will say my personal reaction in light of Chase’s behavior is “that dog won’t hunt.”

Do you want to support small businesses Chase?

I’ve been telling you how for months and months.  Bottom line, issue the other press release that I have demanded, and take back the 5% minimum payment that you unilaterally imposed on a million customers (as a coercive technique to switch customers from a low rate “life of the balance” promotion to a higher rate, limited duration account).

Chase: you can’t smooth over what you did with a glitzy ad campaign.  I admit, the stories of entrepreneurial aspirations, smiling faces glowing in the sunlight of supposed achievement, and other imagery that you’ll be using will be extremely compelling.  These portrayals make us feel good.  They are the American story, and what makes us who we are.  But those are the dreams of the entrepreneur, whereas apparently, your executives are up all night scheming and in their cauldron, they have definitely stirred a potion that causes nightmares.

Just like TV tobacco ads (when they used to be legal), you’ll show attractive, happy people who “glow” with energy and exude sex appeal and success.  But credit card companies are just like a pushers, and all they want to do is get customers hooked.  Then, they’ll change the terms and sink their teeth in until victims express the agony and frustration, like that which is evidenced in hundreds of thousands of stories — told and untold.  These are the real, true stories as told on the Internet, at kitchen tables, and in the workplaces of struggling small businesses, not the advertising pitch; they serve to reveal the dark side of being a Chase customer.

I’ve already seen spots running on TV.  However, I think every time one of those spots runs, this clip from CNN (or one of many others just like it) should also be aired, as a warning about the aforementioned “dark side”:

Forget the ads, forget the glamor, forget the entrepreneurial dreams, welcome to the real Chase.  I also don’t appreciate the defamatory excuse (the portrayal that these are slow-paying account holders who deserved it, quoting from the statement that was reportedly issued to CNN):

“TENS OF MILLIONS OF CHASE…LOANS HAVE BEEN PAID BACK IN LESS THAN 24 MONTHS…THERE HAVE BEEN A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMERS THAT HAVE NOT MADE AS MUCH PROGRESS.  OUR DESIRE IS TO HAVE THESE BALANCES PAID BACK IN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME.”

I know you’d like me to lose my cool and start spewing expletives.  Believe me, I am tempted.  Very tempted.  But instead, I have a response that “reasonable people” can understand:

The impacted account holders were paying on time and in payment amounts that you established, Chase.  In numerous cases that I have documented they were paying, “more than the minimum.”  Nevertheless, as I have discussed many times, this game of shifting blame and obfuscation is irresponsible, harmful, and just plain mean-spirited.  Shame on you, Chase, for trying to chastise and lay blame on the very people who you previously called your “Most Valued Cardmembers,” as though they had become irresponsible laggards by slow-paying you.  If there’s anyone whose expectations are unreasonable, Chase, it is you.

In the future, you need customers who are mind-readers.  Your “Valued Cardmembers” have been honoring their obligations and acting in good faith.  You have impaled any semblance of honor and exposed your true nature as an organization that acted in bad faith, and now wants to get away with it.  But you won’t.

You remind me of some alien changeling creep shows, the kind with creatures presenting themselves with a beautiful face on the outside (when you issue statements to the media, which is certainly beholden to revenues from the splashy and extensive marketing campaign that you’ve just unveiled), but behind that facade is an organism whose sole purpose is to consume its victims, in some horrible way.

By playing hardball with entrepreneurs — slashing credit lines, imposing new and higher fees, jacking up rates and payments, closing accounts, and using other tactics — while hiding behind claims like “managing risk,” the banking industry has demonstrated that it is the arch nemesis of small business, lately, and certainly NOT a “supporter.”

Here’s a new slogan for the way the credit card industry at large has treated consumers and small businesses:

“When times get tough, we take all your cash, run you over, and leave you in a ditch, to die.”

The new card is called the “Ink” card.  But at ChangeInTerms.com (which is more concerned with making sure that no one ever forgets the one million or so cardholders who have been abused and disrespected by Chase), we would point out that it would be foolish to forget what Chase did to its existing customers: as “Truly, this is the single most abusive credit card change in terms that I have ever seen” (CNN clip, Joe Ridout of Consumer Action).  Me too, Joe.  Any notion of “fairness” has certainly been tossed out the window by virtue of this loathsome behavior.

NEVER FORGET.

Don’t fall for all the new ads that the credit card industry will be producing to gloss over the despicable lows to which it has been willing to sink in abusing consumers and small businesses.

Who appointed me a defender of small businesses against the abuses of credit card companies?  You did, Chase.  The banking industry did.

I didn’t use the artwork from the Business Wire press room page to further support your news release, Chase.  I did not want to help spread your announcement, because I don’t believe your products, or your people, are sincerely interested in “supporting small businesses” (I’m still waiting for you to correct me, by issuing the other press release that I’ve been demanding as mentioned above and numerous other times in my correspondence and on this site).

My Western Carolina University graduate students (Master of Entrepreneurship Program) have just created a new Website (WCUEntrepreneurs.com), culminating from hundreds of hours of interviews with “real” entrepreneurs (not actors, or the “pretty, pretty people” who are typically used in ad campaigns).  If anyone is interested, you can read about the stories of guts, glory, defeat, and victory, on their site (which I am proud to mention, here).

Chase, you shouldn’t have messed around with your “Valued Cardmembers,” consumers or small businesses:  It’s my job to protect present and aspiring entrepreneurs.  I consider your behavior toward both to be inexcusable, and a danger to the entire economy.  I would therefore highly recommend to your prospects that they should NOT adopt your new card.

Haven’t you heard that old saying, Chase, “You can’t polish a turd”?

Good luck with your marketing campaign, Chase: If the customer experience is anything like what we’ve been witnessing in astonishment and disgust lately, the “Ink” card will stink.

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: credit, small business

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

You might recognize Louis and Margaret as the delightful creative duo who also brought us the “Chaise Diet” and “Revolution.“  Folks, it’s really important that you help these films “go viral.”  My own (re)view is that the Chaise Diet film certainly “captured the flavor” of how Chase’s onerous 5% minimum payment demand might be relative to its impact on one’s household finances.

Revolution did a fabulous job of suggesting what we need to do (i.e., revolt) as we face one of the coldest, most calculating and callous decisions that has been made by any bank in modern times (implementing the decision also included outright deception, such as by trying to fool customers by claiming that adding a so-called “service charge” that was indeed “a finance charge” would not impact APRs).

Meanwhile, Mission, is the best film yet relative to outlining the facts that are most relevant as underlying issues for Chase credit card customers (and those of other banks).  Since day one, in my own response letter to Gordon Smith (CEO of Chase Card Services), I was among the first (if not the first), to point out to Chase that its lack of an opt out is inconsistent with the testimony its executives delivered before Congress about the means by which Chase treated customers “fairly.”

Other issues, such as defamation and Chase’s influence over Congress and the mass media, and Jamie Dimon’s position on the Federal Reserve Board (not mentioned by name, JP Morgan Chase’s CEO, Dimon, is called the “highly placed agent”), are also brought to the attention of viewers.

I’m guessing that not everyone will “get it,” relative to some of these nuances which are present for those who have educated themselves about just how many and how long the tentacles are, that Chase has wrapped around its victims.  Nevertheless, any Chase (or other) credit card account holder can easily relate to what it feels like to be surrounded, squeezed, trapped, and destroyed by an organization that treats its very best customers (who have paid on time and as agreed), like “the enemy.”

How do you make this film “go viral”?  Play it, share it, send it to journalists, post it on other blogs (if you have one of your own), post links in comments you may make on other sites, and talk it up!

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: banks, credit, Testimony

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Apparently, her video, “DEBTORS REVOLT BEGINS NOW!,” is drawing a lot of attention on the Internet.  According to Mr. Delaney, the video (released on September 8, 2009) had received “96,000 views as of Monday morning [September 14]“; in checking just now, the site reports 175,023 views (it was 151,204 yesterday, when I started composing this post!):

Click here to view the embedded video.

Not surprisingly, with that kind of trajectory in viewership, comments have also been robust.  Many are supportive, and many are not.  Since I have this blog as a platform, obviously, this post is my primary place for adding my own “comment.”

First of all, I personally have not taken the same approach in refusing to pay (actually, her refusal appears to be “unless she was offered a lower rate,” which was raised to 30 percent as of July).  I do think 30% is obscene (in the questioning period after my testimony before Congress I remarked along the lines of “how high did interest rates need to go before everyone agreed that it was legalized loan-sharking…40%, higher?”).

I do understand that such a refusal as has been pursued by Ms. Minch may appear to be the “biggest stick” that an individual borrower may have if he or she feels that it is impossible to negotiate any other way in the face of interest rate or minimum payment hikes.  I am not a lawyer, so I can’t really advise someone one way or another in taking such an approach.  However, I can say that generally, “it depends” (on the value of one’s assets, his or her credit rating or concern for that rating, and other circumstances).

Notwithstanding the above, relative to her premise — starting a revolution — I agree that fighting back is necessary.  (Respectfully, she claims that hers is “the proverbial first shot fired in an American debtors’ revolution,” but she is not the first — consumer advocates and others have been fighting this battle for years.)  Nevertheless, how or even if one chooses to fight back is matter of heated debate (judging by comments under her videos).

The ChangeInTerms.com site has predominantly featured Chase since I began actively blogging here, but as you will note, “the cause” is ending the abusive treatment of customers by the credit card industry at large, and I have long been against that abusiveness.  I think that fighting back is best approached using well researched information, along with technologies to disseminate anti-marketing messages (obviously, a viral video is one such technology, regardless of how one feels about the negotiation tactic that Ms. Minch has decided to employ).

In reading some of the negative comments, I found myself saddened.  Numerous remarks were personal attacks against this individual, accusing her of buying cosmetics, or whatever (the point was, according to the comments, that she borrowed money frivolously and she shouldn’t have done that — time to pay the price).

What made me sad was that it’s hard for me to stomach some of the negative comments underneath a video like this.  Many people seem to assume that anyone in debt has gotten in that position because they were frivolous, or stupid (“read your contract”).  These individuals who make such assumptions about “read your contract” completely ignore, however, other tenets under the law, especially “bad faith” versus “good faith.”

The contracts written by credit card companies are bad faith agreements, which seems to be alright with anyone who is able to “pay cash.”  What is interesting to me, is that many of these holier than though individuals passing judgment would “holler to high heaven,” if they were on the receiving end of a bad faith contract themselves.  What are other “bad faith” contract examples?

How about the nightmare stories concerning home improvements (when jobs go bad, or are not completed)?  Let those “paid cash for my home” buyers get into one of those bad faith deals, and they’d scream, too.  The mechanic “said” your transmission was rebuilt, but a minor repair was made, instead (because that was all that was really needed: again, “bad faith”).

I could go on and on…but if “screwing the other person over is fine, as long as you don’t do do it to me” is the mentality out there, what a merciless, horrible future, we face.  Our unsuspecting children will have it even worse, and eventually they will learn to lie, cheat, steal, and otherwise be “out to get the other person, before he or she gets me.”  What a vicious downward spiral.

I would venture to guess that 99% of the “read your contract” folks slept through the part about the necessity for good faith that underpins all contractual agreements in whatever business law class they may have taken (if they took one at all).  For that matter, the “rule of law” itself means nothing, to individuals or a citizenry at large in the situation under which laws apply, when the intent of parties is to willfully act in bad faith.

What really frustrates me, is questioning my own life in the face of such mean-spirited, presumptuous, holier than thou “don’t spend what you don’t have” remarks.  It’s not my video, but I (too) spent money “I did not have.”  I get the feeling that these critical individuals who are passing judgment, would not care that I did so going to graduate school, so that I could be academically qualified to teach.  I wanted to try to help people, and I have.  Thus, I question myself: “But at what cost?”

The comments from those who “do have” (apparently some have a whole lot — they even think that beyond credit cards, people should have no debt, not even a mortgage — must be fabulous, buying houses for cash) really hurt.  Some were laden with expletives and made me feel like anyone who is in debt, for any reason, is scorned.  They really are merciless, barbaric, Roman Emperor “thumbs down” callous; many are not even civil to one another.  If comments like that come to this blog, I do not want them.  We can all disagree, but I’m not interested in a brawl.

Did I make a mistake, going to graduate school?  Well, it was certainly a financial mistake.  Did I make a mistake, thinking I could make a difference by teaching?  I don’t think so.  Not every student is going to like every professor, or learn, but most seem to learn from what I provide in the classroom (or on my faculty site, et cetera).  Am I sorry I borrowed money to go to graduate school?  Absolutely, yes.

Could I have gone to graduate school without borrowing money?  I would have been too old to teach, if I waited and saved enough to “pay cash.”

Would I live my life differently, if I had it to do over again?  I would not change some things:

I’m far from perfect, and I’ve certainly made mistakes, but I’ve always done the best I could;

I pay my bills on time and meet my obligations;

I’m a good citizen: I pay my taxes, although I’m very concerned that government is spending “our money” on the wrong things at the wrong time, and at levels that are beyond all of our means (for example, see my previous article, “A low cost ‘2-3-4′ assumable step-loan program would have prevented much of what has ailed us and what will be ailing us for decades“);

I earn an honest living: I don’t wake up each morning trying to think of ways to screw people over (like many credit card companies do); instead, I try to help them;

I am a hard worker;

I take pride in maintaining my home and I take care of what I do have;

I was a very good student, in graduate school;

I have been completely faithful to my wife (I do tell “wife jokes” on occasion…but wives, including mine, tell “husband jokes,” too); I love my wife and my children;

I am a person of faith (but I do not believe that is my right to judge others in their faith, or any lack thereof);

I accept other people (and their individual and cultural perspectives — indeed, I love learning about these);

When I am gone I will leave what I hope will be pleasant “memories” for some whose paths in life have crossed my own;

My writings, art, and photographs (as forms of expression) may be seen as a contribution, by somebody.

Meanwhile, the other thing that really hurts is the selfishness and ignorance suggested by some comments under the aforementioned video.  When I say “ignorance,” I mean the inability to think (apparently) about the interconnectedness of it all, beyond individuals, consumers and what they buy using credit cards.

This is not strictly a consumer or consumption issue.  It’s a lot of interrelated concerns that are at stake here: “fairness,” whatever that is ultimately defined to be (in consideration of usury), being the biggest one.   Political processes and corruption (credit card industry lobbyists having more influence that “we the people” — millions upon millions of credit card holders) is also a major issue.  This is especially exacerbated with the media too afraid to engage in real journalism because of the threat of lost ad revenues, so they make these things a “last page” mention (or ignore them).  (I have not seen one hard hard-hitting story about the Congressional testimony delivered by Chase executives who used opt outs to describe the means by which customers were treated fairly, yet Chase turned right around and refused to provide an opt out with its infamous 5% — payment-jacking — change in terms.)

I am also referring to issues related to the economy, which is especially in need of nurturing small businesses (the vast majority of which are started by entrepreneurial “bootstrapping,” and may very likely entail using HELOCs, credit cards, and/or other non-traditional sources of capital).

Importantly, bootstrapping, including using credit cards to start businesses has been done successfully.  I would offer Google as a bootstrapping start-up example, a company that has gone on to generate wealth and employment for thousands.

Now, I am not saying that start-ups should use credit cards; rather, I am merely pointing out that they do use credit cards.  And they do so in very large numbers.  Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t, but entrepreneurs are typically passionate people who are driven to try (there are so many obstacles, they need to be).  Furthermore, without the successful efforts of some who do make it, civilization as we know it would not exist (if you’re reading this on a computer, thank many entrepreneurs who each played a part in bringing that computer to market).

And yes, I acknowledge that it would be nice to “save up” and “pay cash” to start a business (buy a house or a car, or go to graduate school).  Unfortunately, in many instances, it would be too late; i.e., with entrepreneurship, it can be the case that an opportunity or market that isn’t seized promptly, is lost permanently.

Despite this present post, or all of the ChangeInTerms.com site’s content, there apparently will always be comments by dismissive, naive, selfish individuals who either cannot or will not grasp the issues.  Have I make a mistake, fighting the abusive treatment of customers by credit card companies (again, I have asked myself)?  I’ve outlined who I am and what I believe in, and I don’t think so.

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 13 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: "Bail Out", consumers, credit, credit cards, debt, interest, interest rate, small business, Testimony

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Please read the aforementioned post, and HELP! Download the flyer (click on it, and save the pdf).

Print out as many as you can, and hand them out (or distribute them in other ways, suggested under the post, “50 Ways to Leave Your Chase Banker“).

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 5 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Chase wants to give BIG rewards to holders of this card unlike their egregious loan-shark-like actions implemented against the peons who were upholding their side of the agreement by diligently paying off their credit cards. Playing reverse Robin Hood, no doubt….squeezing the the little guy to make credit card life better for the affluent.

Excerpt: Quote from Joan Bassett, marketing director for Chase Sapphire “We’re giving cardmembers more value and positioning Chase well for the long term,” said Ms. Bassett. “What we’re seeing in our data is consumers are looking to get more out of their reward programs, looking to redeem them and expected to be rewarded more for their loyalty.”

Change-in-terms for the Wealthy

Chase – Targets high-income consumers in multimedia effort

“NEW YORK JPMorgan Chase is kicking off a national ad campaign in support of its new credit card, Chase Sapphire, a service for upscale consumers that rewards users for spending.

In a bid to reach shoppers with deep pockets, Chase Card Services is investing an estimated $30 million in measured media to introduce Chase Sapphire, ….. Sapphire is being marketed to consumers in the upper 15 percent of all U.S. households, with incomes of $120,000 or more.”

This effort is a little different than the change in terms we all experienced with Chase. Since Chase continues to empty our pockets, it stands to reason as our pockets get emptier, Chase would go hunting for deeper pockets. Recently I’ve been reading complaints posted by people whose Chase Reward cards have also had a sudden change in terms – regular folks who will no longer receive the rewards they signed up for and have been enjoying for years. When asked for an explanation, Chase continues to recite the “it’s the economy, it’s market forces, it’s because we can” mantra they used with us…ad infinitum, ad nauseum…

Apparently the “economy, market, and because we can” are motivation for this new breathtakingly expensive marketing gambit. Amazing, isn’t it? The exact same market conditions which cause one group of long-term, reliable customers to be cruelly punished is the reason a huge carrot is to be offered to another group of customers that does not yet exist.

Chase Long Term Positioning Plan : A bird in the hand is worth nothing, while hypothetical birds in the bush are worth, well….a speculativeTHIRTY MILLION DOLLAR AD CAMPAIGN!!!

Watch for the $30,000,000 Sapphire ad campaign – coming to a television channel near you! There must be a untold thousands of affluent customers who have had their heads buried in the sand this past year and either don’t know and/or don’t care that Chase has been treating millions of their customers like dirt. Rich, deep pocketed consumers, who are just dying to hop on Chase’s Sapphire Band Wagon.

Chase will treat wealthy Sapphire card holders right and will never change the terms on them, right?

If you believe that, I have a bridge I want to sell you…..

A Chase Promise made is a Promise you can count on (Chase breaking).

© pdurant for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 18 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: change in terms, complaints, consumers, credit, credit cards, economy, interest, interest rate

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

While the ChangeInTerms.com site is devoted to fighting abuses against consumers and small businesses by the credit card industry relative to its primary mission, we can’t help but notice that Chase is involved in numerous class action cases and/or investigations across the gamut of its various businesses, all of which seem to be related to some form of legalized loan sharking.

I also asked for, and was granted, permission to promote the link that lists these class action lawsuits and investigations.  It is therefore my great pleasure to point out that not everyone is as quiet as most members of the media, and Chase can at least still be challenged through litigation.

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 8 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Class Action, consumers, credit, small business

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

“I would print out flyers and leave them outside a chase bank near me, but am afraid of hidden cameras. do they have any recourse?” 

The updated flyer arose after “FightChase” contacted me and sent a copy of his original version (one that he was passing out to Chase Bank branch managers while protesting in front of their respective branches with a sign), and I worked to make some improvements.  Subsequent suggestions for even further improvements have been made (I don’t mind making revisions, but, I actually think it would be nice to have tons of people creating their own version of flyers as a form of self-expression and revolt). 

Meanwhile, I responded to Steve with some remarks about hidden cameras, but I also suggested that it’s probably going to be more effective to distribute the flyers to “everyone on the planet,” besides Chase (or at least in addition to, Chase).  I then indicated that I would create a list of ways to distribute flyers (without having to hand them to someone face-to-face).  I’ll start the list, and call upon site visitors to add other suggestions.  (I frankly am engaged in this fight because I think that what Chase is doing is flat-out unconscionable, so be open-minded about who may be concerned or in a position to influence others; it is essential to leverage the fact that one person might transmit the message to another, and another — you get the idea.)

You must see this situation much like the science fiction movies, “War of the Worlds“  or “Independence Day.”  Chase has the powerful weapons and intends to conquer and (economically enslave) the planet, and the only weapon we have is a virus.  In this situation, Chase’s “powerful weapons” are the media influence it exercises as a result of its tremendous ad spending capacity, and the fact that it manipulates the legal environment (with lobbying or “do-gooder projects,” while sweeping the stories about its victims under a rug).  Thus, we have to spread the word on the Internet, and via old fashioned word-of-mouth (also related to the term, “viral marketing”). 

Perfect example: Chase is spending heavily in The Orange County Register, and which newspaper seems to be ignoring this issue?

As I have been writing, a hit song from Paul Simon has been playing in my head, “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover” (I’d like to end up with a list of 50 ways to distribute flyers, thereby encouraging consumers to “Leave Their Chase Banker”).  So here’s a start:

Post on public bulletin boards (e.g., in grocery stores, on college campuses);

When mailing your payments for ordinary bills (such as a power bill), stuff one in the envelope (if you think it is processed by a human being);

After dining in a restaurant, leave one on the table (or better yet, if there’s a newspaper sitting around, place it inside – that way the flyer will probably circulate more widely);

If you take public transit, leave one in places where you (or other passengers) sit, wait, or ride;

A variation for “public transit,” in airports, leave them in waiting areas (an if you are flying, stick one inside the free air traveler magazines in the seat pocket in front of you);

Leave one in a public rest room (the way Chase acts — and gets away with it because it practically “owns the law and the media” reminds me of vulgar graffiti, anyway);

Send a flyer to any of Chase’s affinity partners (those with branded cards, with Chase, for instance);

Send a flyer to every bank or credit union in your town, other than Chase;

If you are visiting a doctor’s office, your dentist, etc., leave one in the waiting room (again, following the logic above about inserting flyers in newspapers, you may want to place it inside a magazine);

Send them to legislators (maybe with a respectful note: “Either you work to stop this abuse, or you will lose my vote for reelection”);

Leave one in a shopping cart (people will often opt for a cart with nothing in it, so the flyer will just sit in a cart — but the headline might grab some attention);

Send the flyer to any CPA (bookkeeper, accountant);

Send the flyer to individuals who provide financial planning or similar advice;

Some libraries and public buildings have places to post flyers;

If you identify “opinion leaders,” make sure they have a flyer;

If you are an alum from a university that happens to have partnered with Chase in selling credit cards, send one to your alumni association president, university president, and board members (they probably will care, if the relationship might lead to bad PR);

Send them to mortgage lenders (may be a long shot for people to refinance homes, but Chase has certainly given a reason to do so, if that is an option);

Okay, like I said, the above was a start; you all can keep going.  Please comment with more “creative ways” to spread the flyer, and our message to Chase:

NOW WE’RE STILL COMING AFTER YOU

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: consumers, credit

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Several weeks ago, Louis Roth and Margaret Conley of Binary Star Productions (who brought us the “Chaise Diet” film), and I enjoyed some time in a conference call with one another discussing possible short films as one means to mount a resistance against the abuses of credit card companies.  They have just released a new work entitled “Revolution.”

By the way, these “shorts” are produced on a low budget, so try to remember that their efforts–like those of revolutionaries before them–are meant to work at a grassroots level.  I think they’ve done a fabulous job (especially in light of not having the pizazz of a Hollywood-style budget), knowing a bit about what’s entailed “behind the scenes” (and reaching back to my film school days).

However, that’s really not the point.  Rather, the real point is that you need to support the fight by spreading the word, so that Louis and Margaret can continue with their work.

Please visit the YouTube site and promote the link(s) to their films.  Promoting their work means adding links to your ordinary outgoing emails, voting and commenting on the films, and if you are feeling really ambitious, contacting members of the media.

For that matter, after all we’ve been through thus far (ChangeInTerms.com site visitors, contributors, and me), have you considered wearing a ChangeInTerms.com t-shirt today?  You can wear a free one that you make yourself, or one that is printed for you by CafePress (at a cost, with a portion of the proceeds supporting the continued operation of this site, and “spreading the word” at the same time).  We’re not pandering for money (those of us who are protesting, blogging and producing films, et cetera), but we can’t do this by ourselves.  So please, join the fight!

© Dr Robert Lahm for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: credit

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Thus, it was pure pleasure to read that Stephanie could not comment after a Federal Judge ruled against Chase today. The issue is not exactly on point with our issues but hey, any ruling against Chase is a step in the right direction. May the future hold many more headlines like the following….

JPMorgan loses court ruling over credit cards

Excerpt:

NEW YORK, May 19 (Reuters) – A federal appeals court reinstated a claim by a JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) credit card holder accusing the bank of failing to properly disclose risk factors that allow it to suddenly raise rates.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said the bank failed to make “clear and conspicuous disclosure” of the annual percentage rates it could impose, as required under the federal Truth in Lending Act, by burying the reason for an increase in the fine print of a cardholder agreement….

…He said this was “buried too deeply in the fine print” for a reasonable cardholder to realize the bank could raise the APR not just for events of default, but for “any reason at all.”….

…Chase spokeswoman Stephanie Jacobson said the New York-based bank does not comment on pending litigation.”…

May the lawsuits continue to multiply. May court rulings against Chase gain momentum. May Ms. Jacobson be unable to comment on many occasions as lawsuits against Chase wend their way through the court system.

I hope having to hold her tongue is driving Stephanie nuts. Being powerless to counter her many derogatory comments about me and my fellow account holders kind of drove me crazy. Ah….the sound of (Stephanie’s) silence. So sweet.

© pdurant for ChangeinTerms.com, 2009. | Permalink | 19 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: change in terms, credit, credit cards

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh