Talk:USAA

Chaotic talk page archives

There are many non-conventional talk page archives here. Ideally someone would take the time to refactor them so that the archive bot can count them in the usual way, "Archive 1", "Archive 2". etc. As things are now there are two archiving schemes, "Archive_1" and "Archive01", which confuses the bot.

There are additional problems. In 2006 when Wikipedia was wilder there were different standards, and many of these archives are proposed drafts rather than discussion. Perhaps the draft content could have one sort of special archiving, and the actual talk page discussions could get the conventional archiving.

Finally a lot of the talk in the archives is unsigned. Archive bots depend on signatures to sort content, so content without signatures gets improperly archived. I think it would be too much labor to sort all of this and there is no good automated way to clean it. However, going forward, it would be nice to clean the latest archive, number 10 or 11, and to confirm messages from here on get proper archiving.

I was looking at this as one of the bigger businesses in the United States. I have no particular knowledge of this company. Blue Rasberry (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BlueRasberry. It is nice to see you again. You're entirely correct about the chaotic state of the archives for this talk page! I don't know why that is the case. USAA Federal Savings Bank is approximately the 25th largest by assets in the United States, and it is a major property and casualty insurance company. I'm not sure what was going on in those archives though... and it isn't typical of the company culture, especially since a lot of the dates were from before 2010 or even 2006, when the company was doing very well. I will make an effort to clean up Archive 11 if I have time. Thank you for pointing this out!--FeralOink (talk) 12:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

@FeralOink: You take a first pass, let me know when you are done, then I will look again. Someone has to make a decision and if there are two of us here, we should complete it now. The end result should be normal archives going forward. Thanks, good to meet again. Bluerasberry (talk) 12:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

FYI, those old talk pages are probably full of disputes regarding a particular editor (and sockpuppets) who was fixated on USAA. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:32, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

you nailed it. i was an employee at usaa and became aware of someone that had an issue with the company. the person was on security's watch list of threats - there was much concern that the person might get into the HQ. from circa 2005 to 2016 there were frequent false accusations and slanders made about numerous offices and former officers of the company added to the article's text. there were also false statements about the company and its products, and me. at the time, i was doing technology research for the company, and having been one of the people that built the business case for developing a website circa 1996, i decided to look at the usaa wikipedia article. when i saw what "puck slider" aka "polish laywer" aka other names and at times just ip addresses had written i approached the public relations office and corporate communications about keeping it accurate. they had zero interest so for over a decade i would reverse and or correct statements.

at the same time, another factor was that many others added content. the article was not only large, but inanely detailed at times, and also biased. i fought, textually, with people that insisted on including information about competitors - felt more like a way to direct customers to the competitors, especially with the links conveniently included...

i also fought format. the article was not formatted like that of the competitors, again, containing too much irrelevant detail (compared to the competitors) and often inaccurate (even when "substantiating" sources were included - one can weave a logical but incorrect story when using deductive reasoning...).

so, yeah, the talk was a mess... it wasn't my job, i tired of the wikipedia rules, i tired of my co-authors, and "wikipedia" the institution stood back and watched - let it all happen... 70.123.141.129 (talk) 12:56, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

ahhh, the name returns to me now, Robert J. Koenig. long ago i was the "hillcountrygrump". as recently as circa 2016, Koenig was trying a new approach. connect with employees (20+) via linkedin. he tried to add me to his linkedin network. i read his profile, figured out who he was, then noticed that over 20 usaa executives had accepted his invitations. reported him to security because there was a concern he would attempt to arrange a meeting in the HQ office. the risk that he would get violent was considered to be unknown, but not zero... 70.123.141.129 (talk) 13:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

USAA assets, apples and oranges

@The Financial Scribe: Thanks for your efforts to update the assets of USAA. However, can the dramatic drop from $200 billion to $110 billion be due solely to the passage of time?

• The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council reports $204,720,000 total assets for the United Services Automobile Association, as of yesterday, 2023-07-31.
• You changed that to report $110.88 billion However, this latter figure was for USAA Federal Savings Bank, which is a subsidiary of USAA, with just over half of USAA's total assets. I haven't studied this, but I believe that most if not all of the rest of USAA's assets are in other securities to back their insurance business.

I appreciate your work to update these numbers, but I worry that you may have misinterpreted your source, at least for this. I do NOT plan to revert your edit. I'll leave that to someone else. Thanks again, DavidMCEddy (talk) 15:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey David, thank you for informing me about this. I will revert the changes to this and my listings. The Financial Scribe (talk) 15:34, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

my understanding, just retired from usaa, is that as usual the company is heavily invested in long term bonds. when the fed began raising interest rates to fight inflation this crushed the "market" value. however, if one examines the "face" value or "par" value of the bonds the net worth will rebound on maturity of the bonds. at usaa, for decades there was a saying, "when the economy does sucks usaa does great, when the economy does great usaa does okay." goes back to the conservative investment approach of the company. 70.123.141.129 (talk) 13:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

the part about joe taking over from bob is still goofy

when ceo's leave without warning it means the board wanted different behavior. regardless, the board was done with the ceo whether they were fired or quit. end of story.

joe might have thought he would be temporary ceo, but what does that have to do with bob? whether joe was temporary or not, bob was already gone... logic 101... 70.123.141.129 (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)