Flt Express

[starchkr]

CAPNDAN....

Actually Airnet has been behind this legislation the entire time. We actually support it's passage and added our own amendment which was accepted by the legislature. We were the ones who added the part about the FED being required to disclose its transportation costs to everyone in their reports. Why do you say we were against it? Maybe he who preaches should head their own advice first. Look, electronic or not, there will always be a need for check haulers. Although the transfer of "cash" will be handled electronically there still must be a hard copy of the transaction on file at the issuing and receiving bank... which leads to transportation needs. While a great deal of the banks will use this system, not all will because as of right now it is extremely expensive for this electronic transaction process to take place, and the smaller banks will pay more for this new processing than they will for the old check in hand method. Now yes there will be some smaller companies that if they do not evolve their services they will go the way of the Do Do, but the larger ones will be just fine. As for Airnet, we are evolving to a more specialized medical and express package service company to offset the slow down in the check business. Others will do the same. I am not too up to par on how FEX is doing, but i bet they will survive.


Jeff...

Hey, paint those birds up real nice and maybe we will buy ya. Then you can have a shot at our lears Be nice wouldn't it. Hey drop your resume over here and i'll give you a reccomendation. We should be doing some hiring here real soon. I know of a few that just got on. You might have to fly the 58 a little while, but at least you can upgrade to something a little bigger (and faster). We could probably even get you closer to home.

 

[capndan]

B]Although the transfer of "cash" will be handled electronically there still must be a hard copy of the transaction on file at the issuing and receiving bank... which leads to transportation needs.[/B]

You obviously have NOT read and understood the law. The PIVOTAL PROVISION of Check-21 that disproves your "theory" is the "SUBSTITUTE CHECK". It may also be referred to as an "Image Replacement". Essentially a facsimile of your original check with the same legal authority. (Again, research the actual bill) Original checks (the actual paper) will no longer be FLOWN to the fed, etc. After they are electronically archived they will either be TRUCKED at the banks convenience, or SHREDDED.

The clock is running. Remember...October/2004. That's the day ALL banks large and small will be in full compliance. Remember, it's a LAW, not an alternative.

The Government Accounting Office is to issue an impact study on Check-21 five years after full implementation. In other words, the GAO will release it's cost/benefit analysis of Check-21 in October/2009. Just what do you think the GAO will be studying? This law will save the banking industry BILLIONS per year in transportation costs.

Chicken Little I aint...but the sky IS falling. Of this I'm certain. And, yes...you can "take it to the bank".

 

[starchkr]

You know i have never been one to sit here and argue on this board, but i must inform fellow checkers of the need for check haulers past 2004.

Capndan...

Again, i must say heed your own advice... word for word off the Federal Reserve web site " the law DOES NOT require banks to accept checks in electronic format NOR does it require banks to use the new authority granted by the act to create substitute checks." This actually says that the act only grants them the authority to process checks this way, but NO they do not have to be done electronically. This means that there will still be a need to transport "paper" to its destination over night.