Comments on: Why ACH Went Away http://www.billrini.com/2007/01/24/why-ach-went-away/ Bill Rini's Poker Weblog Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:54:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Gene Bromberg » Blog Archive » Listen to the Man http://www.billrini.com/2007/01/24/why-ach-went-away/#comment-136199 Gene Bromberg » Blog Archive » Listen to the Man Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:53:09 +0000 http://www.billrini.com/2007/01/24/why-ach-went-away/#comment-136199 [...] Unfortunately, everything he’s said on the subject so far seems to be spot-on correct. Terrifyingly so. I don’t have Bill’s expertise in building ACH networks, but I did work for a bank for a few years and know a bit about how those transactions are, uh, transacted, and it would be as nothing for banks to turn off the spigot. Indeed, Bill has a post today titled Why ACH Went Away that explains the situation quite nicely. [...] [...] Unfortunately, everything he’s said on the subject so far seems to be spot-on correct. Terrifyingly so. I don’t have Bill’s expertise in building ACH networks, but I did work for a bank for a few years and know a bit about how those transactions are, uh, transacted, and it would be as nothing for banks to turn off the spigot. Indeed, Bill has a post today titled Why ACH Went Away that explains the situation quite nicely. [...]

]]> By: Haley http://www.billrini.com/2007/01/24/why-ach-went-away/#comment-118616 Haley Thu, 25 Jan 2007 19:37:34 +0000 http://www.billrini.com/2007/01/24/why-ach-went-away/#comment-118616 15!! 6+9=15, dammit!! Actually, this is good work... it clarifies why some NETeller transactions on Jan. 16th went back to "pending" after previously having been listed as "accepted." 15!! 6+9=15, dammit!!

Actually, this is good work… it clarifies why some NETeller transactions on Jan. 16th went back to “pending” after previously having been listed as “accepted.”

]]>