Competition Commission: final Report on Banking

[mudda]

CAPE TOWN ? The

Competition Commission has laid criminal charges against the unknown

hackers who lifted the lid on highly confidential information about the

South African banking system that the four big banks wanted to keep

under wraps.

 

http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/topstories.aspx?ID=BD4A913093

here is the report

 

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/South_African_Competition_Commission:_unredacted_final_Report_on_Banking%2C_12_Dec_2008

 

I hardly find it suprising that banks rip off customers while pursuing profits.

 

[Edition 507]

CAPE TOWN ? The Competition Commission has laid criminal charges against the unknown hackers who lifted the lid on highly confidential information about the South African banking system that the four big banks wanted to keep under wraps.

http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/topstories.aspx?ID=BD4A913093

here is the report

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/South_African_Competition_Commission:_unredacted_final_Report_on_Banking%2C_12_Dec_2008

I hardly find it suprising that banks rip off customers while pursuing profits.

 

Hooray to these hackers They should be knighted not prosecuted

We are being butt fcuked left right and centre by the banks. It is about time their collusion and thieving practice is exposed.

[nathrix]

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Simple_Investor:_Banking_on_Wikileaks

Simple Investor: Banking on Wikileaks

January 8, 2009

By Robert Laing (The Times: On The Money)

 

The most interesting thing the brouhaha over the uncensored

Competition Commission report on banking has brought to light is

fledgling ?open source? investigative journalism project wikileaks.org.

 

The website uses the same software as Wikipedia, tweaked to

make whistleblowers untraceable. The veracity of leaked documents is

checked by volunteer journalists much like Wikipedia uses volunteer

encyclopaedists.

 

Wikileaks?s website states: ?We believe that transparency in

government activities leads to reduced corruption, better government

and stronger democracies. All governments can benefit from increased

scrutiny by the world community, as well as their own people. We

believe this scrutiny requires information.?

 

According to Wikileaks, it created the ?unredacted? version of

the commission?s banking report by simply downloading the version found

on www.compcom.co.za and then decrypting it.

 

The commission claims whoever un-blacked out portions of its

file transgressed South Africa?s Electronic Communications and

Transactions Act. The commission has called for the whistleblower to be

hunted down and prosecuted.

 

Problem is, the perpetrator may live in any country with

Internet access, and courts in a more technically savvy country are

unlikely to be sympathetic to an organisation that left confidential

information in a freely downloadable file.

 

Sadly, by trying to prosecute Wikileaks, a government

organisation here is again showing the ?new? South Africa to be a

country on the wrong side of the digital divide. Wikileaks is

ultimately a force of enlightenment and modernity, against which the

incumbent government is simply going to look authoritarian and

unenlightened.

 

Interestingly, instead of lauding what looks to be the most

exciting citizen journalism project the Internet has produced so far,

local newspaper hacks have tended to regurgitate the commission?s line

that the people behind Wikileaks are ?criminals? who deserve to be

prosecuted.

 

Wikileaks? ?About? page explains the site is still a work in

progress. The Competition Commission?s efforts to prosecute whoever

cracked its portable document format (pdf) file will possibly be its

first big test.

 

Reading the blue highlighted sections that were blacked out in

the original version the Competition Commission put on its website begs

the question: why was it censored in the first place?

 

The report said: ?The Commission pointed out that the Enquiry

would be on the record, which would be made public subject only to the

protection of genuinely confidential information as provided for in the

Competition Act.?

 

The uncensored version shows the commission allowed the banks

to remove public domain information such as price comparisons ? ironic

considering a key charge made by the commission is that banks obfuscate

their charges.

 

One eye-opener is that FNB upped its ATM revenue by 11 percent

after following the other banks in charging in per-R100 bands instead

of a fixed percentage.

 

Some of the censored text is simply embarrassingly lame excuses

from the banks on why their profit margins are higher than would be

possible among properly competing players.

 

The report can be downloaded from: http://www.wikileaks.org/leak/uncensored-competition-commission-report-on-banking.pdf

 

 

[Red Zone]

The bottom line is, is this going to reduce bank charges in SA. NO WAY! The Banking Cartel may tweek some of their charges to save face but they will simply redistibute the charges and we will end up paying the same high fees.

[AndreZA]

The bottom line is' date=' is this going to reduce bank charges in SA. NO WAY! The Banking Cartel may tweek some of their charges to save face but they will simply redistibute the charges and we will end up paying the same high fees. [/quote']

 

the same with this bread price fixing scam. They make more money with the increased prices then what the fines are.

 

 

[nathrix]

Anyone downloaded and watched this?

 

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

 

Note on the site:

?Limited Copyright 2008 http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/

We allow/encourage respectful duplication of this information

 

Yes, another movement, but these okes don't like banks at all.

 

Well, it's only part of the story...

 

[TNT1]

 

The bottom line is' date=' is this going to reduce bank charges in SA. NO WAY! The Banking Cartel may tweek some of their charges to save face but they will simply redistibute the charges and we will end up paying the same high fees. [/quote']

 

the same with this bread price fixing scam. They make more money with the increased prices then what the fines are.

 

 

 

Yeah, and us the consumers get fock all benefit out of the fine as well. I'd far rather see the competition commission force these bastards to sell there bread at a set price (much lower) for a certain amount of time... That way, at least the victims (us) of these cartels get some benefit