Savings Maximiser 4.80% p.a. Interest on Balance up to $100,000 (Monthly Deposit, Balance & Spend Requirements) @ ING

3723

Savings Maximiser 4.80% p.a. Interest on Balance up to $100,000 (Monthly Deposit, Balance & Spend Requirements) @ ING

puglikesabargain on 09/02/2023 - 16:56 ing.com.au (1998 clicks)
Last edited 10/03/2023 - 15:07 by 1 other user

Just Announced - a new rate on Savings Maximiser according to the ING Facebook page and Internet site, a full 0.25 percent increase: https://www.ing.com.au/rates-and-fees/interest-rate-announce…

Effective from Tuesday 14 February 2023 -

4.80% p.a. highest variable rate calculated daily (made up of the standard variable rate and 4.25% p.a. additional variable rate) for customers who also have an Orange Everyday Bank account and do these things each month.

Deposit at least $1,000 from an external source to any personal ING account in their name (excluding Living Super, Personal Loans and Orange One)
Make 5 or more settled (not pending) eligible ING card purchases
Grow their nominated Savings Maximiser balance (excluding interest earned for the current month).

When the criteria is met in a calendar month, the benefits and additional variable rate will apply in the next calendar month. The bonus interest is available on one (1) account for balances up to $100,000.

The standard variable rate is 0.55% p.a (remains unchanged).

Savings.com.au and Open Comparison Leaderboard provide information on other rates currently available in the market - https://www.savings.com.au/news/rba-savers-february-2023 , https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/145iM6uuFS9m-Rul65--e….

Please note you can open up to nine (9) Savings Maximiser Accounts in the same name but only one (1) can be nominated for bonus interest. You can easily change the nominated account at any time online.

For those who are very near or exceeding the $100,000 balance limit to qualify for bonus interest, one strategy to meet the ING growth requirement is to open and "juggle" two Savings Maximiser Accounts - based on a past OzBargain comment :

"Month 1 (say February 2023):-
SM1: Earns bonus interest. Your SM1 balance is sitting around 100K.
SM2: On-line or through the app, nominate SM2 for the next month (March), then add any amount to grow the SM2 balance

Month 2 (March 2023):-
SM1: No longer earns bonus interest. Move preferred balance to the SM2 on first day of month. Move remaining funds elsewhere.
SM2: Earn bonus interest on your new SM2 balance.

**when you nominate an account to get the bonus it only takes effect from the 1st of the following month. In the meantime you continue getting the bonus on the current account. You need to transfer 1 cent to the new account to meet the balance increase requirement. Then move the 100k (or less if you want a buffer) on the 1st of the following month. Only miss out on the bonus interest on the 1 cent.

**better long term plan is open a second SM account and nominate that for bonus interest in March – you nominate the account prior to the month. Transfer 95k or whatever on the 1st March from your existing SM account"

Referral Links

Referral: random (511)

Until 30/6/2024, referrer and referee will each receive $75/$100/$125 for opening new Orange Everyday & Saving Maximiser Accounts.

Referrer: Do not participate in the referral system if you do not have a current $75/$100/$125 referral code.

Referee: To qualify, you are required to deposit a minimum $1,000 and make at least 5 (settled) card transactions within any calendar month.

Financial Bank Account Savings Account

13 Mar 2023

Related Stores

ING

closed Comments

hyatc on 09/02/2023 - 18:09

Deposit at least $1,000 from an external source to any personal ING account in their name (excluding Living Super, Personal Loans and Orange One)

Can I withdraw once I’ve completed 5 transaction requests and get the bonus interest rate? Say $995 after buying 5 $1 items.
- SomeGuyOnOzB on 09/02/2023 - 18:29
  
  Remember to increase the account. Withdraw $990 not $995?
FrenchiePerth on 09/02/2023 - 18:16

+1

Looks very interesting, thanks OP!
Whats your thoughts on Virgin Money in comparison? 4.60% p.a. with Lock Saver up to a combined total balance of $250,000, should be increased following the RBA annoucement this week. The hoops seem manageable:
** Deposit at least $2,000 into your Go Account from another financial institution. - You can transfer $2k in and out, no growth requirement.
** Make at least 5 purchases on your Go Account that settled in that month (not pending). - You can BPAY your CC, i.e. does not need to be a card transaction.
The downside in comparison to ING would be the lock saver which requires 32 days’ advance notice to unlock your account or withdraw your money.
The previous post didn't seem to attrack that many comments, just wondering why… https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/743766
- puglikesabargain on 09/02/2023 - 18:29
  
  +2
  
  I also maintain a Virgin Boost Account (with Lock Saver). I like both, the 'hoops' are not too onerous. I guess I prefer Virgin Money as the bonus rate applies up to $250,000, no growth requirement, and it is usually offers a higher rate. There is also a points-based rewards program attached to the Go Account. Money can also be obtained without "unlocking" the Lock Saver (and losing the lock bonus) - by simply scheduling a withdrawal transfer from the Boost Account to the Go Account 32 days in advance. The transfer essentially becomes a pending transaction. :)
  - Sweet Berry on 09/02/2023 - 20:56
    
    Apparently this changes the available balance? Has anyone done the calculation manually to check if this affects the total interest calculation?
    
    I just leave mine unlocked.
    - nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 21:16
      
      +1
      
      As per their FAQ the pending transfer amount would still incur the bonus interest rate until it is transferred out. BTW what do you mean leave it unlocked? Isn't it a condition to lock it to qualify for the bonus rate?
    - puglikesabargain on 10/02/2023 - 12:05
      
      +1
      
      The pending transfer amount still earns interest until the day it is ultimately processed. Although you must keep it locked to get the 'lock bonus', you can schedule a transfer 32 days in advance (therefore not "unlocking" the account). Unlocking the account means ready access to funds BUT loss of interest.
esque168 on 09/02/2023 - 18:27

For those wondering, if you satisfied all the requirements and had max balance of $100k, the interest paid for the month of January was $390.29.
wouldyou on 09/02/2023 - 18:30

+2

Better off putting it in an offset if you have a mortgage. No tax that way
- Markusaus on 09/02/2023 - 20:36
  
  Depends on your circumstances. I’m ahead already with 2 years of fixing still to run, with tax taken into consideration
gunso on 09/02/2023 - 18:32

-5

Paid by mortage holders
- No ONE on 09/02/2023 - 19:12
  
  +7
  
  Interest paid by taxpayers, principal by renters, financing by savers. Mortgage holders get a free ride and still complain.
- Cluster on 09/02/2023 - 19:27
  
  +2
  
  Inflation is running over 8%. Technically mortgage holders are still getting a free ride, with everyone else getting punished.
  
  If you keep money in a bank earning 4.8%, before tax, and inflation is at 8, you're still losing. It just feels better to lose a little less.
  - wouldyou on 09/02/2023 - 20:06
    
    -5
    
    But we’re getting screwed on interest rates, when really there are better ways to manage inflation than putting additional financial strain on people by continuously raising rates. Government needs to do more, period.
    - KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:14
      
      There arent "better ways to manage inflation".
      
      The whole reason there is inflation is that there is too much "consumption" and gradually our dollar is getting de-valued. The RBA is trying to get people to stop spending money where they can so that the buying power of the dollar starts to go up again.
      
      The gauge for inflation (i.e. the basket of things most people will buy) does not include price of housing, which has rocketed in some areas more than 5x in the last 20 years.
      
      There are lots of contributors to this (apart from the housing "crisis"), rent increasing (in part due to the housing "crisis), war in ukraine, suddenly making petrol 25%+ more expensive, China's gradual labor market inflation (meaning that "Made in China" isnt as cheap as what it used to be), not to mention the 'economic war' that Aus and China have engaged in over the last few years essentially de-valuing a lot of Australian goods such as iron ore, coal, food, wine, etc..
      
      Letting inflation run away is a deadly spiral, and if you dont control it, we will all go back to bartering
    - KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:37
      
      If you're feeling the strain because of interest rates, you probably arent paying attention to the strain you are already feeling due to inflation.
      
      The thing is, you either feel it now while you still have margin, or you feel it later when you have none. With inflation at 7.9% and annual wage increase is last i remember about 2%, whether you realise it or not, essentially it works out similar to you getting paid 6% less per year.
    - Notacommie on 14/02/2023 - 20:40
      
      -2
      
      We should have thought of
      It when we shut down the country for 2 years and handing out free money to everybody. All that printed money diluted money. Time to pay it back with "interest ". Cop it on chin bro like rest of us or should have not participated in that madness to begin with
      - wouldyou on 14/02/2023 - 21:17
        
        @Notacommie: I can afford to cop it, but some can’t and struggle. There are better ways that the government can handle the situation here in aus. The way we’re going they will slow the economy to the point of recession.
      - Igaf on 14/02/2023 - 22:20
        
        +2
        
        @Notacommie: The $20B Morrison gave to 'ineligible' businesses was money down the drain, the rest was well spent, as was Rudd's stimulus during the GFC. The discussion around relative economic outcomes is out there if you want to be better informed.
        
        Notacommie on 15/02/2023 - 09:40
        
        +1
        
        @Igaf: Yes Morrison was wrong so was dan andrews
        
        Igaf on 15/02/2023 - 10:35
        
        @Notacommie: About lockdowns, or Andrews' pressure on the feds to continue payments to affected people when Morrison and Frydenberg wanted to cut them off to punish Victoria for having a Labor government? Apparently a large majority of voters disagree, in pretty much every state. Pity they can't poll the dead - including those who missed out on critical health care due to hospital overload - and won't poll health workers to get their thoughts eh? Nurses are voting with their feet now, Imagine what would have happened had authorities 'let it rip' like ignorant, irresponsible and selfish "freedom" junkies wanted.
        
        All that "printed money" as you naively called Jobkeeper payments actually went to keeping the economy going - and of course preserving jobs and income for individuals and families affected by the pandemic. As I said above, there's plenty of commentary about Australia's economic response and outcomes if you want to improve your understanding of the basics.
        
        Notacommie on 15/02/2023 - 13:46
        
        -4
        
        @Igaf: You bought into the propaganda machine. Read more from opposite side. Thank me later.
        
        Igaf on 15/02/2023 - 13:51
        
        @Notacommie: I didn't buy into anything, I accepted the realities of living in a society with values beyond selfishness and ignorance.
        
        What opposite side? What was Andrews wrong about? Spit it out, or are you afraid to express your views?
        
        Notacommie on 15/02/2023 - 14:41
        
        -5
        
        @Igaf: Curfew 8pm or something? 5km radius restrictions, vaccines stop the transmission, if you get vaccination you wont get covid, longest lockdown in the world only to realise it does not work, more harm done by lockdowns than covid itself, and hospital still refusing to offer a heart transplant to a sick dying lady becuase of dan andrews policy on unvaccinated.
        
        Igaf on 15/02/2023 - 15:09
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie: Looks like your rabbit hole was full of the usual waffle treats. Do yourself and the rest of us a favour and inform yourself of some basic facts about what vaccines do and don't do, their benefits and possible side effects; the efficacy of lockdowns here and overseas, and what history told us about the "Spanish Flu" and isolation; long and short term covid harms (death being just the worst); economics; and the dangers of being self-centred and credulous.
        
        Andrews doesn't make decisions on operation availability, those are made by hospitals and specialists. He and his govt - like all responsible governments - take the advice of CHOs and expert health groups. Even Coatsworth supports Vic Health's decision, which prima facie looks extremely harsh but her comment that "Patients like myself, we‘re being pushed into a corner and coerced to take something that goes against what we believe in" doesn't gel with her other comments about not being anti-vax. Surely she should be taking the advice of the medical experts she expects to perform the operation and nurse her back to good health? They know the risks far better than she does.
        
        https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/no-…
        
        EDit: I didn't neg you btw, you have enough on your plate.
        
        Notacommie on 15/02/2023 - 20:29
        
        -4
        
        @Igaf: You are classic example of "just trust the government and science bro" even though they have been wrong on multiple occasions in last 3 years. Lets try again?does vaccination stop the spread or not? Did dan andrews told us vaccination stop the spread therefore lockdowns are justified? Therefore shut down economy and now we are paying inflation tax? What was the point of 8pm curfew? Pfizer executives told us they never tested the vaccines wether it stops transmission of covid or not yet danny boy told us a made up lie based on nothing. So called health expert never cared to call pfizer whether it stops transmission or not. If you disrupt the economy based on wrong information or unreliable information then you got to say as leader its your fault.
        
        Igaf on 15/02/2023 - 22:55
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie: Your credulousness is only matched by your self-induced ignorance, It comes with the territory in my experience, as does your scorn of experts who clearly are better educated, and have far more knowledge, experience, wisdom and social awareness than you.
        
        Lets try again?does vaccination stop the spread or not?
        The information about what covid19 vaccines do and don't do has been freely available for a long time, as has data about their efficacy. Time you caught up to what most informed Australians have known for nigh on 2 years. The basics were repeated ad nauseam but I guess you missed them or they went over your head. Vaccines don't stop transmission, virus acquisition, hospitalisation or death but they significantly reduce all those risks - something most people knew in 2021.The question is why don't you know these elementary facts?
        
        Did dan andrews told us vaccination stop the spread therefore lockdowns are justified?
        You seem to be a tad confused about both the messages from authorities and why lockdowns were necessary. Again a few minutes of reading will (should) lift your fog. Did Andrews say vaccines would stop transmission? I very much doubt it because he, like 90% of the population, knew that wasn't the case. But if you can provide evidence of him saying that I'm all ears. Lockdowns may have been unnecessary - or at least less likely/stringent - had Morrison got his finger out and ordered enough vaccines for the country. But as we know "it wasn't a race". Turns out it was - a race against illness, hospital and health worker 'meltdown', economic downturn, and of course death.
        
        Therefore shut down economy and now we are paying inflation tax?
        The economy wasn't shut down thanks to the feds and state leaders. Again, the outcomes of decisions to minimise death and transmission and limit the huge impost on hospitals and health workers are there for you to read and absorb but you prefer to wallow in your own ignorance. How did the Au economy fare compared to other countries?
        
        Current inflation does have obvious links to covid and worldwide disruption but it has sfa to do with our spending on Jobkeeper. You apparently missed Putin's invasion and the massive fires and floods in this country.
        
        What was the point of 8pm curfew?
        My guess is that it was necessary to ensure that people with certain anti-social attitudes didn't fcuk things up for the majority and hence extend the pandemic.
        
        Pfizer executives told us they never tested the vaccines wether it stops transmission of covid or not yet danny boy told us a made up lie based on nothing.
        Pfizer - which we had little of initially - wasn't required to do that test because as you know (cough) there was a race against a virus to get started. This might help with the Pfizer point, although I very much doubt it in your case: https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-vaccine-pfizer-trans…
        Andrews didn't lie about vaccine efficacy in reducing transmission. By the time we got ours (AZ mainly) the data was already in regarding its efficacy against transmission, serious illness and death in the UK - something you'd know if you took up reading.
        
        So called health expert never cared to call pfizer whether it stops transmission or not.
        You wouldn't have a clue what "so called health experts" - yourself obviously excluded - knew about the two readily available vaccines, let alone who they spoke to or what data and information they had before making recommendations. It's obvious you also haven't even reached first base in your knowledge journey about who is involved and how these pathetic experts (lol) reach their conclusions before providing advice.
        
        If you disrupt the economy based on wrong information or unreliable information then you got to say as leader its your fault
        What wrong or unreliable information are you talking about? Vaccine efficacy? We've already established that you know nothing about that topic. Our leaders undoubtedly made mistakes but overall they did a very good job at balancing the unprecedented public health, economic and social issues before them. Economies recover, dead people don't.
        
        Igaf on 16/02/2023 - 11:10
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie: A neg is your answer? Grow up. Found the statement you claim Andrews' made about vaccines stopping transmission or did you copy and paste that from your Facebook/Telegraph feed? Rhetorical question.
        
        Notacommie on 16/02/2023 - 12:17
        
        -2
        
        @Igaf: Nothing will convince you. You are narrowly looking into one objective. Which is to prove yourself right. You dont care about people could not say goodbye thier loved one for restrictions, pregnant lady was arrested for posting against restrictions on Facebook, people who were protesting were kicked in the head for crime of protesting while at the same time black lives matter protest was just fine. People have been forced to get a jab for a disease with 99.9 percent survival rate for young and healthy, police arresting journalists with opposite view, locking people in north Melbourne tower, nearly 1000 died in aged care mostly in Victoria under dan andrews.
        Here is the link government health website
        Video they say it out with clear words
        
        https://www.health.gov.au/news/top-3-covid-19-vaccine-questi…
        
        Igaf on 16/02/2023 - 13:40
        
        +2
        
        @Notacommie: Wrote that looking into the mirror I presume. Haven't found the Andrews link yet? That would be because you either invented it or got it from your usual source of disinformation.
        
        The generalised waffle about random events is not surprising - it's also typical of your ilk. I'd ask for your proof of those claims (eg which journalists were arrested and why?), but as it doesn't exist or the actual facts have been intentionally ignored, I'll be waiting a long time, and quite frankly I've put enough effort into trying to educate you.
        
        The reason people in aged care died is far beyond your comprehension level it seems. Responsibility starts with Richard Colbeck who failed to act on RC recommendations(look him and it up), then is shared with home operators, contract staff who ignored instructions and went to work with covid, VicHealth whose quarantine mgt was puerile, Morrison who failed to secure vaccines, and everyone who ignored health warnings for their own selfish reasons. You likely fitted into the latter cohort.
        
        Did I care about people being unable to be with ill and dying loved ones, businesses which didn't survive due to covid restrictions etc? Of course. I also understood why most of those restrictions were necessary for the greater good. On top of that, unlike you I accept the fact that there are people with greater knowledge, experience and expertise than me and hence I should heed their advice. But I'm a skeptic, so unlike you I like to inform myself before blindly following the pack. One look at events OS was enough for most people, although others, like you, obviously failed to comprehend the obvious urgency and implications.
        
        Was the tower lockdown handled well - I don't think so, but as most people understand humans aren't perfect, and there was no playbook for authorities to use. You missed the part about how Palaszczuk's border closure left some families with kids stranded in tents for months. Unacceptable to all normal people I'd suggest but bureaucracy often fails under pressure. Was Berejiklian wise in allowing a covid infected cruise ship to dock and people to go into their communities without checking or quarantine? That would be a definite no, but again I don't expect people to be perfect and accept some mistakes will and did, occur. In hindsight many restrictions were overly proscriptive and arguably could have been managed differently, but everyone's a genius with hindsight and no public responsibility.
        
        I watched the video, it confirms what most people knew a long time ago. What "clear words" are you referring to? The ones where he tells you that vaccines don't STOP transmission, or those where he tells you that vaccines are highly effective in preventing hospitalisation and death? What has Andrews to do with the video or its content?
        
        Notacommie on 16/02/2023 - 14:46
        
        -2
        
        @Igaf: Whats has andrew to do with government health website? Are you kidding me? Its a government health website? Buck stops with him. Oh Thats right He was the one who ignored WHO advise against lockdowns. Why wouldnt he ignore this now. Ring him up and let him know that your own heath department is spreading misinformation and risking lives instead of wasting time here.
        You seen to have selective hearing.
        Watch and listen again with your blinders off this time @ 1.40 min. He clearly says vaccines stops transmission
        
        Igaf on 16/02/2023 - 15:22
        
        +2
        
        @Notacommie: I'm not kidding you kiddo. That link was from a federal govt website, nothing to do with Andrews at all. It is dated 20May2021 so you also need to understand the context and knowledge at the time.
        
        I'm still waiting on your Andrews words about vaccines stopping covid and now I'm also waiting on what the "clear words" you think corroborate your rants in the video? Any chance you'll provide them this decade?
        
        I don't recall WHO advising against lockdowns (another reference you need to provide) but even if they did there would have been caveats. Au health authorities weighed up advice, experiences and data from around the world before making decisions on vaccination, masks, lockdowns etc. You seem to think they simply rolled the dice. Again putting your own inadequate understanding and knowledge above the combined wisdom of experts which is typical of a particular group in some western countries.
        
        Watch and listen again with your blinders off this time @ 1.40 min. He clearly says vaccines stops transmission
        
        He doesn't say anything of the sort.
        Here's the transcript:
        However, there is emerging evidence that the vaccines may have a pretty significant protective factor in preventing transmission. We know the vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing getting Covid at all, but they are nearly 100% effective at preventing getting very sick from Covid. Studies in the United Kingdom that are published by the Public Health England, as well as studies looking at how the virus is behaving in populations that have received a high rate of vaccination already, show that both vaccines that are used in Australia, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, are having a pretty significant impact in reducing symptomatic disease and reducing transmission from the virus. So it’s really encouraging that this early data including a very large study from Public Health England, with hundreds of thousands of participants in real-life situations, showed a marked reduction on the transmission following vaccination. Again, we will keep monitoring what that looks like and what that means for our public health campaign. We are very certain that the vaccines are very good at preventing severe disease and it’s really good to see that more and more evidence is showing that they have significant impact on preventing transmission. But we know, even if you are fully vaccinated, that doesn’t not mean that you cannot catch Covid at all, it just means that you have a lower risk of being very sick from it and it appears to be that there is also a lower risk of transmitting the virus onwards, but we will keep reviewing the evidence internationally and domestically and any new information will be regularly updated on health.gov.au.
        
        Context is important as you know (cough). He was talking about the early variants of covid. Similar studies of Omicron showed vaccines were far less effective against transmission. He also specifically mentions the high rate of vaccination in the UK.
        
        You struggle with reality and obviously have no interest in informing yourself so I'll leave you with something to cogitate upon Mr "Notacommie". (what are you trying to say with that moniker?).
        
        Australia's systems of representative government, law, and the media are very much flawed yet when weighed up against alternatives they are pretty damn good. Does that mean they all shouldn't be accountable? Of course not but nor should we expect perfection, or that we'll agree with everything they do or say. Suffice to say there are far wiser heads among those fraternities those than yours or mine, that most of them are acting with integrity for the greater good, and we should always remember that. If you're intent on criticism the very minimum you can do is try to get your facts and context in the right ballpark.
        
        Notacommie on 16/02/2023 - 16:12
        
        -2
        
        @Igaf: "may have a pretty significant protective factor in preventing transmission"
        There it is kid. It took you while. But you finally got it. Keep reading more. It's only a matter of time when you will realise that you been duped. Think for yourself son. Don't just believe the "experts". Those experts most time have financial incentives to day things they say. They been wrong quite a lot of time. Be a critical thinker. You almost there son.
        
        Igaf on 16/02/2023 - 18:10
        
        +3
        
        @Notacommie: And in what world does that mean "stop"? Kindy and primary school maybe? He also qualifies his comments, something you choose to ignore - yet another trait of the opinionated ignorance cohort you've joined of your own volition. Did I already mention that he was quoting figs for mostly vaccinated people? I believe I did (as did he). Did I mention that the data related to early less transmissible Alpha and Delta variants? Why yes I did. I'll leave you to work out why that's significant.
        
        Here's a question for you. There are no tricks, it's something even an upper primary school kid might answer correctly. What approx percentage would STOP TRANSMISSION imply to you? 95+% maybe? And what reduction in transmission would be SIGNIFICANT in a population of ~20,000,000 adults? 5-10% say? Yet you'd have us believe that 95 is the same as 5-10. In your credulous world perhaps, certainly not in the real world.
        
        A propensity for misunderstanding, misinterpreting, misrepresenting and cherry picking (aka as lying by omission) is a common trait in your chosen demographic. No surprises there. Also no surprises that the puerile furphy about "financial incentives" rears its head. Simple retort - not everyone is what you think they are, nor is your distrust of expertise, knowledge and government in general a logical or defensible adult response.
        
        Sorry to destroy your carefully constructed house of cards but there's a HUGE difference between being ignorantly critical and a critical thinker. Your place is cemented in the former, and conversely - based on your irrational and ignorant comments here - you have yet to take your first step towards the latter. Hope springs eternal but reading your posts I doubt you have the will let alone the capacity.
        
        No apology for lying about Andrews? No acknowledgement that Andrews has nothing to do with fed govt web content?
        
        Found the names of those journalists yet or can we take it that's another of your inventions?
        
        Notacommie on 16/02/2023 - 22:17
        
        @Igaf: https://youtu.be/PvVaKFB65lw
        Here plenty of examples.
        
        Igaf on 16/02/2023 - 23:18
        
        +3
        
        @Notacommie: So we've moved on from your, er, Andrews mistake have we? Thank heavens for small mercies.
        
        Sky and Panahi? Roflmao. I'd never have guessed who's feeding your outrage and ignorance - much. You do realise that you're at the extreme right wing end of the "media" (and I use that word advisedly when talking about SKY) spectrum there surely? Obviously not.
        
        It all makes sense now. You get your disinformation/hyperbolic outrage from, and have your opinion provided to you by, that SAD cesspit of shrill stupidity, smallmindedness, bigotry, and ignorance. You have my sincere sympathy. Hope they find a cure for your illness soon. Wait a minute, they have. It's called anti-gullibility training, aka e-d-u-c-a-t-i-o-n. Does require the ability to reason and you'd have to start thinking for yourself though. Grapevine suggests Albo could introduce rwnj conversion therapy funding at budget time. Unlikely imo because as some wag opined the hardest thing on the planet to open is a closed mind, but do keep an eye out on 9 May. Good luck.
        
        Notacommie on 16/02/2023 - 23:33
        
        -1
        
        @Igaf: Instead of addressing the police (under dan) brutality and crimes you want to shoot he messenger? Right wing media. Never mind the fact they are showing the actual videos of police on camera. Stop it son. Thats embarrassing. You are determined to defend dan and its gangs that even actual crimes committed by police are invisible to you. That is classic example of brainwashed character who does not know he is infected by mind virus
        
        Igaf on 17/02/2023 - 11:52
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie: That "messenger" doesn't present balanced journalism so she's a fair target I'd suggest.
        
        But you got me with the mind virus comment I admit. Probably the result of my four covid vaccine shots, or maybe that and the annual flu shot I had last year in conjunction with the hours I spend keeping myself relatively well informed and hopefully rational. Can't be 5G because I don't use it, although apparently I should don a tin foil hat when I go outside.
        
        The Victorian police have always been a law unto themselves. Reform by Vic govts of both colours over the years have slowly improved its culture but it's only been in the last decade or so where sections have been significantly cleaned up. Andrews doesn't direct them any more than other leaders did. The Commissioner is responsible for their actions and is regularly called to account for same. Thank heavens for a relatively free and unbiased media eh? Random takes by Panahi and other SKY dribblers is of course excluded from that group. They drip feed anything they can to influence their credulous audience.
        
        Having seen some of the footage from various "freedom" demos and knowing a little about the backgrounds of the prime agitator groups, I'm quite surprised at the police restraint. Many of those demonstrators were/are self-centred hypocrites, "sovereign citizens", and far right anarchists, who ironically offer society no alternatives while themselves partaking of its multitudinous benefits. And lets not forget the threats some of these wonderful citizens made to public figures. Did Panahi happen to do a story on those things? Again a rhetorical question.
        
        The attacks by your SAD marionettes on "Dictator Dan" Andrews have been both unrelenting and pathetic. Ironically they probably helped his massive election win as people confirmed their distaste for the right wing extremism that gutter trash media group represents and encourages.
        
        Is Andrews perfect, or a saint? Not by any measure, but as far as integrity goes he's the length the straight ahead of anyone at SKY. But as you - well maybe not you personally, or your tone deaf drip feeders for that matter) know, overall the public holds him and his values in much higher regard than the garbage at SKY and what they represent. Tough having to face up to that every day is it?
        
        Still no apology to Andrews and the readers of this debate for your lies about him?
        
        Notacommie on 17/02/2023 - 17:12
        
        -1
        
        @Igaf: https://news.sky.com/story/past-covid-infection-as-good-as-v…
        
        Some more information for you that would normally not see in your group. Maybe help you see some of hasty decisions that should have been left for people's individual choices and not forced upon them with a threat of job loss and providing for thier families.
        
        Igaf on 17/02/2023 - 17:47
        
        @Notacommie: What, still no apology?
        
        Your comment simply and sadly confirms your ignorance.
        Question - was that report based on assessments by the experts you so proudly disdain?
        
        In fact that sort of information has been available since the very early days of the pandemic - something you might have known if you didn't rely on Sky spoonfeeding. Public Health England had a chart as early as 2021 which set out in simple terms the relative protection provided by covid infection antibodies and vaccines against serious illness, hospitalisation, and death. That advice was updated as the virus mutated and the effects of vaccines dissipated. In summary their early data statistically suggested that having one shot was marginally less effective than having had covid, and that having had covid and having a shot offered significantly better protection again. Of course as a "critical thinker" (self-professed) you'd already have worked out what some of the many riders and variables are.
        
        Any idea why health authorities didn't recommend getting covid as an alternative to being vaccinated? Don't be shy the answer should be quite obvious, even for a one eyed right winger.
        
        Notacommie on 17/02/2023 - 23:51
        
        -2
        
        @Igaf: If you read it properly you will see its quite a comprehensive study from reputable source in America. Btw vaccine mandate did not exempt people who already got covid. Even though they been through like i had which was very mild in my case at least. My company told me you had to take or else sit home. Now study confirms it. It all happened and enabled by people like you who thinks you and your experts are only people who can make decisions on everyone's behalf despite the fact "experts" have been wrong multiple times. Now many people are suffering from reoccurring cold and flu infections like me. Young people are having heart attacks. Athletes are dropping dead. It could be covid or it could be "safe and effective forced vaccine". All we know is that these heart issues such inflammation and heart failures became noticeable after vaccine roll out all around the world. Vaccine injury is quite common. Lot of people dont trust this jab and for good reasons. My body my choice should apply here too.
        
        Igaf on 18/02/2023 - 11:42
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie:
        
        If you read it properly you will see its quite a comprehensive study from reputable source in America.
        
        I read the article, might even take a look at the study later, unlike you. As I said - the same expert sources you distrust, deride and ignore when it suits?
        
        As noted previously, your critical thinking needs an appreciable amount of work. There were reasons why previous covid status wasn't taken account.of. Again I'll leave you to look those up as clearly you have no/little capacity to work them out for yourself. One the reasons you don't is because you failed to take any interest in pandemic information as it became available. You were too busy agitating about how YOUR rights and those of you SKY loving mates should trump the rights of the broader society, including the most vulnerable - those who you cried crocodile tears over earlier : "You dont care about people could not say goodbye thier loved one for restrictions". What appalling hypocrisy.
        
        I'll give you a clue to kick you off. Early studies showed that in households with covid some people stayed perfectly healthy (or at least were asymptomatic, while others got covid more than once. UK health experts discussed the point about covid acquisition-one shot vaccination equivalence a long time ago, as did people in my own in-expert circle, so I'm absolutely sure our imperfect health experts also considered that option. At the time there was even an idea about a $$$$$covid passport or similar being floated.
        
        Now many people are suffering from reoccurring cold and flu infections like me. Young people are having heart attacks. Athletes are dropping dead. It could be covid or it could be "safe and effective forced vaccine". All we know is that these heart issues such inflammation and heart failures became noticeable after vaccine roll out all around the world. Vaccine injury is quite common. Lot of people dont trust this jab and for good reasons. My body my choice should apply here too.
        
        This is a reflection of the mixture of complete bullshit, ignorance and context-free hyperbole you've been fed and swallowed without thought or research. Here's another clue. We know - because experts told us and made recommendations based on the data - that a small number of people with particular conditions died as a result of complications from the AZ vaccine. We also know that vaccine could and did produce mild heart inflammation in a very small number of people. What you obviously don't know is that covid also caused myocarditis and pericarditis in a small number of people but it was usually significantly worse. Covid also disrupts brain function due to its effects on nerves. We (not you) also know that covid acquisition can have significant long-term deleterious affects - "long covid", look it up.
        
        Your body your choice? How often have you applied that in your life? Are you vaccinated against measles, TB, whooping cough etc? Do you take prescriptions for various ailments? In a fully covid vaccinated/immune (relatively speaking) society that MAY be a tenable position but it certainly wasn't when your cohort was demonstrating about THEIR rights. I suggest you sign a do not treat waiver so valuable health resources aren't wasted (it will be ignored so you're safe), and ensure you have no contact with vulnerable people.
        
        Your hindsight wisdom is marvellous. That's sarcasm in case it wasn't obvious. Pity they don't hand out special SAD awards for 'better late than never knowledge' eh? One thing which IS heartening is that you apparently now accept some expert knowledge - even if it is blindly, without question or curiosity, and because it suits the story you've been fed by the detritus at SKY.
        
        As I see it you have a choice. You can continue to wallow in the lies, ignorance and half-truths of the SKY world, or you can join an imperfect but real society which broadly respects others, understands the role of experts - and their limitations - and which provides most of us with what we need via collective effort and consideration. That doesn't equate to blind adherence, nor does it mean that agitation and protest aren't valid expressions of disenchantment. Be skeptical, be curious and READ widely. One more thing - before you sprout nonsense at least take the time to do some basic research. Oh yes, and another thing - research what "correlation isn't causation" means and learn to apply it when you read commentary AND scientific studies.
        
        Mad Max on 18/02/2023 - 15:40
        
        +1
        
        @Igaf: All good until the government decides to implement something you don't agree with.
        Then it is no longer good.
        https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/115489/101763/smartsel…
        
        Igaf on 18/02/2023 - 15:46
        
        +1
        
        @Mad Max: What's no longer good? Democracy? Government? Life? Yep plenty of shysters, dishonesty, poor integrity etc, bad policy etc exist but when you compare Au with the UK, USA and plenty of other countries we usually manage to avoid the worst because we broadly don't support extremism of the left or right.
        
        Mad Max on 18/02/2023 - 15:43
        
        @Igaf: Then in the end "the pack" realises that not all the were told was the truth
        https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/115489/101764/smartsel…
        
        Igaf on 18/02/2023 - 15:52
        
        @Mad Max: That meant to be a serious view? As I suggested to the "notacommie", hyperbolic exaggeration may be appealing to the credulous and ignorant but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny a rational adult world.
        
        Notacommie on 19/02/2023 - 08:39
        
        @Igaf: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11760449/amp/Flor…
        So here it is guidance from state government where everyone loves to move to. So government there wants to act a certain way under democratic ways. So it should be respected and not questioned right? Btw it is based on science
        
        Mad Max on 18/02/2023 - 15:54
        
        @Igaf: Your freedom, Notacommie (not a fan of your name by the way) freedom, my freedom and everyone's freedom should always be respected.
        It has nothing to do with party, country, race or anything else.
        Everyone's freedom should be respected. And forcing people to do something they don't want to do is not freedom. Who gets to decide that it is for the common good? The ones in power?
        
        https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/115489/101765/smartsel…
        
        Igaf on 18/02/2023 - 16:37
        
        +1
        
        @Mad Max: That quote is a variation on two others about evil and democracy. Each of them has obvious connotations which many if not most would support in this country. Hence the disdain for the more extreme and partisan sections of the Murdoch media. Your purloining of a serious observation for your own narrow purpose is instructive.
        
        Good old libertarianism, embraced by people who have benefitted from 'socialism' and are almost invariably relatively well off.
        
        Freedom - define it. Your personal freedom is not my freedom by the look of it. In societies freedom comes with responsibilities - the same as "free speech". Should I be free to be racist, fascist, etc and express views of hatred?
        
        Societies have cultures and rules they broadly agree to follow. It's how order is maintained and people and societies prosper. Who decides? Democratically elected governments via the people, with the help of a relatively impartial media and legal systems. Don't like the rules then try to get support to have them changed - happens every day of every year, live in isolation, or move to somewhere where the values better align with your own.
        
        Do govts overreach and make mistakes? Obviously. And thanks to our collective freedom we're able to comment and protest about those issues - within reasonable parameters.
        
        SuperLate on 18/02/2023 - 16:48
        
        +5
        
        @Igaf: Can we stop this political debate here. Everytime I get a notification of new comment from here I thought it's a financial comment related to deal but find this argument is going too far now. Guys please take this to a forum.
        
        Igaf on 18/02/2023 - 17:07
        
        +2
        
        @SuperLate: Reasonable request. Sorry to have intruded.
        
        MicMac on 17/02/2023 - 22:27
        
        +2
        
        @Notacommie: Gee, SkyNews!!
        Says it all really
        
        Notacommie on 23/02/2023 - 22:03
        
        -1
        
        @Igaf: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-…
        Just leaving it for you.
        
        Igaf on 23/02/2023 - 23:26
        
        +1
        
        @Notacommie: First up apologies to SuperLate. and others not interested in the politics of covid etc.
        My last word on this deal.
        
        Thanks. Interesting. Didn't read his opinion piece after finding that his opening pars were clearly contradicted by the actual study and the fact that he didn't bother to mention the study caveats or what it was based on (see below). After seeing his background I now understand why he failed to provide that very important context. The NY Times should know better but it is just an opinion piece.
        
        Did you read the study or its summary? If so you SHOULD have noted these very important points:
        
        (1) The evidence summarised in this review on the use of masks is largely based on studies conducted during traditional peak respiratory virus infection seasons up until 2016. Two relevant randomised trials conducted during the COVID‐19 pandemic have been published, but their addition had minimal impact on the overall pooled estimate of effect.
        
        (2) Do physical measures such as hand‐washing or wearing masks stop or slow down the spread of respiratory viruses?
        Key messages
        *We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.
        
        (3) What are the limitations of the evidence?
        Our confidence in these results is generally low to moderate for the subjective outcomes related to respiratory illness, but moderate for the more precisely defined laboratory‐confirmed respiratory virus infection, related to masks and N95/P2 respirators. The results might change when further evidence becomes available. Relatively low numbers of people followed the guidance about wearing masks or about hand hygiene, which may have affected the results of the studies.
        
        It's is patently obvious that where people are ignoring mask mandates those mandates will have little effect on transmission. What we want to know is whether high adherence to mask mandates (eg Taiwan) had an effect on transmission (especially pre-vaccine), and approximately what percentage improvement (or otherwise) was involved. This study doesn't attempt to do that.
        
        Many studies have a narrow focus but given its aim it's very surprising that they didn't compare mask usage, transmission rates and overall outcomes in countries with high moderate and low mask use. Perhaps there were too many other parameters which can influence outcomes but a rough correlation (requiring follow up) could likely/possibly be found.
        
        Just found this rebuttal. Seems others have major objections to both the opinion piece AND Tom Jefferson's portrayal of it, AND the study itself. It will be interesting to see what the expert community thinks of the Cochrane paper or whether it is ignored because it was inconclusive and too restricted. Science at work.
        https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/02/23/2e51-f23.html
wilko23 on 09/02/2023 - 18:36

Bloody shame they closed my account and wouldn't tell me why!
- NorfolknGlue on 09/02/2023 - 18:52
  
  +1
  
  Are you a high class escort?
  - wilko23 on 09/02/2023 - 18:55
    
    +1
    
    Haha I saw that article when i was trying to find out what the deal was! I wasn't even just doing the bare minimum with the account I used it quite often… Now I've got to find an account that is as good for atm withdrawals when I go OS!
    - Yola on 10/02/2023 - 13:33
      
      +1
      
      Look at Citi. Not as good but arguably next best.
muwu on 09/02/2023 - 18:58

-4

Issue with product (For example:)
It does not work the way it should

This product has been discussed on OzB to the nth degree.

It's not a savings account, which is a cash deposit account with a fixed interest rate allowing complete liquidity.

ING's product is a cash deposit account with a variable interest rate that is determined on whether it is utilized as a running month-to-month term deposit account (growing account balance, i.e. deposited amount is not withdrawn) or a liquid savings account.

I'd ask not to neg based on opinion alone, and also not to positive vote on opinion alone too.
- Igaf on 10/02/2023 - 13:09
  
  +1
  
  It's a "savings" account linked to a transaction account, with particular conditions governing earnings. Many banks have something similar. If you can't meet the conditions, or want something much simpler, or with higher thresholds, then this isn't the setup for you.
  
  I don't get the point of your deal neg.
- Igaf on 10/02/2023 - 15:32
  
  +1
  
  You negged me for pointing out some elementary facts? Refer your last sentence and then look up hypocrisy, irony and puerility.
souths123 on 09/02/2023 - 19:53

+5

cue the bitching of rules to get the bonus….we get it, you don't like it. I don't care about the hoops, to me they are worth it
Tee Rex Arms on 09/02/2023 - 21:16

Yeahhhh I’ll just put savings into my offset instead thanks
jjacob on 09/02/2023 - 21:19

+1

Funny right, all banks imposes the same percentage on the whole loan amount, but when it comes to paying back, they have a limit. Nothing against ING personally but just came to my mind when I saw the limit.
nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 21:25

+1

can't wait to see the rate VM would offer now. They currently lead with 4.6% and hopefully retain it.
alamodey on 09/02/2023 - 21:32

so do the 5 transactions have to come out of that saving account or just any ING account belonging to you?
- snappy1234 on 09/02/2023 - 21:46
  
  +2
  
  Orange everyday Debit
  Works for me.
donotuse on 09/02/2023 - 22:00

-8

From a Wealth Creation perspective, I don't think it's a good idea to be keeping more than $100k in Savings Acct. Perhaps learn to invest.
- muwu on 09/02/2023 - 22:05
  
  +3
  
  How 'bout if your portfolio is a few mil and you want a cash allocation of a couple 100K for liquidity, defensive allocation, and funds for new investment opportunities?
  - donotuse on 09/02/2023 - 22:10
    
    -4
    
    Still too much. $100k should just be a Rainy Day Fund. Should learn how to deploy excess cash immediately.
    - Mdjz76 on 09/02/2023 - 22:47
      
      Deploy it on what crypto?
    - cloudy on 09/02/2023 - 22:51
      
      terrible advice
    - muwu on 09/02/2023 - 23:54
      
      +1
      
      Let's say, as an example, Bill's portfolio is 2.2mil and he has 100% growth assets in super (equities and RIETs) and 100% growth assets outside super (residential property ownership, ETFs)… would it be okay for Bill to hold 10% ("couple of $100K") as a cash allocation, either in offset or savings, for the reasons above (liquidity, defensive allocation, and funds for new investment opportunities) as well as an emergency fund for personal contingencies?
      - abctoz on 11/02/2023 - 16:17
        
        @muwu: no that would be too defensive you have to live life to the full YOLO
- Never pay retail on 09/02/2023 - 22:17
  
  +1
  
  As someone saving for a home deposit over the next 6-12 months, what options are there other than a HISA? I'm not interested in investing in individual companies, and the returns from a HISA seem to beat out term deposits or short term bonds.
  - KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:32
    
    -2
    
    probably use something like Commsec pocket and invest in ETFs like the ISHARES Core S&P ASX200 ETF. If you invested that money in 2020 during the Covid Lockdowns, you would have gained about 25% in value, with some dividends in there.
    
    I think the dividend value is somewhere in the ballpark of 5.86% annual yield.
    
    Im not sure about whether this performance in dividend yield matches these interest rates (since theres variability based on compounding on interest calculation interim) but im 99% sure that the performance so far has beaten the banks, especially since during covid lockdowns the interest rates were sub 2%.
    - SuperLate on 10/02/2023 - 01:30
      
      +1
      
      If I'm saving for a home deposit, which is a critical stage for most people towards financial independence, I personally would stay away from shares until paid off that first home. Either I would go for Term deposit or Bonds. Current saving account interests are lucrative compared to term/bonds due to liquidity. The only issue I'm finding is these hoops and conditions which beats the whole purpose of a stress free savings account for me.
- KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:18
  
  indeed but i guess if you're saving for a deposit…
- RotundPolarBear on 10/02/2023 - 17:02
  
  Invest in what?
iglot on 09/02/2023 - 22:01

What does this article about ING mean? Is it talking about what happens when their terms and conditions change and we have to agree to the new ones?
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/ing-bank-systems-upgrade-coul…
- donotuse on 09/02/2023 - 22:10
  
  no big deal
Mellows on 09/02/2023 - 22:03

So if you already have an ING Orange Everyday account do you still need to open a whole new Savings Maximiser account?
- alamodey on 09/02/2023 - 22:07
  
  +1
  
  yep, i just did it in the app took 2 mins
- Igaf on 10/02/2023 - 13:16
  
  +1
  
  Yes, simple job as alamodey wrote. And you need to follow the conditions to get the max interest. You can easily transfer money between the two accounts manually or automatically (eg set up a monthly transfer into your Everyday account for bill payments…..)
Mdjz76 on 09/02/2023 - 22:06

+1

any tips on removing money above $100K that you've gained in interest? without sacrificing a months interest because your amount will be lower than the previous month?
- KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:20
  
  maybe include deposits of $5 into the savings maximiser every month…not sure if that works but i dont see why not?
- ski100 on 10/02/2023 - 09:08
  
  +2
  
  Open up another savings maximiser account within online banking. Nominate the new account to earn bonus interest (this will take effect in the following month). Transfer $97k on 1st day of the next month.
  
  When interest earned pushes account balance above $100k again (approx 7-8months with current interest rates) repeat above process. Although no need to open a new savings maximiser, you can just nominate your original one.
alamodey on 09/02/2023 - 22:07

after you hit 100K do you still have to deposit 1K a month to get that rate? what's the rate if you don't satisfy all the conditions such as 5 transactions a month?
- nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 22:34
  
  +1
  
  after you hit 100K do you still have to deposit 1K a month to get that rate? - Yes (along with the other conditions)
  what's the rate if you don't satisfy all the conditions such as 5 transactions a month? - Standard base rate 0.55%
  - DoctorCalculon on 09/02/2023 - 23:21
    
    Once you hit 100K, you no longer need to grow you SM balance, correct?
    
    As you earn interest every month on the 100K balance, it will continue to grow. So, can you siphon all funds other than the $100K from your SM account to either your OE account or an external account without affecting your eligibility for bonus interest?
    - nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 23:35
      
      +1
      
      I don't think so. The eligibility for bonus is pretty clear. You have to meet the conditions to get the bonus rate. The max limit of 100K is on top of that not excluding that.
      - Yola on 10/02/2023 - 13:38
        
        +1
        
        @nokia3660: You are correct. Nothing changes except you will only get 0.55% on any deposit over 100k.
- KnifeEnthusiastBoi on 09/02/2023 - 22:46
  
  Yes but it doesnt have to go into your savings maximiser account. It can go into your orange everyday, and you can siphon it out.
  
  e.g. you can have your salary come into your orange everyday, scheduled transfer to HSBC for that 2% cashback, schedule transfer to uBank if you have more than 100k in savings max already.
- browser on 09/02/2023 - 23:34
  
  If I understand it correctly, you can deposit $1,000 to meet the requirement, then withdraw $999, the account would still grow by $1.
  
  But I'm not quite sure about the interest part. Say you have $90,000 in the high interest account, it will earn $360 interest monthly, can you withdraw it? Or you need $90,361 to qualify as growing?
  
  The 5 transactions are easy, just use self check out to split payments: $1, $2, $3, $4, balance. Use different amount each time to avoid mistaken as duplicate payments.
  - nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 23:39
    
    +2
    
    yes, if you haven't moved out the interest
    
    $90360.01
    
    All 5 tran can be of the same amount, I hadn't had any duplicate tran issue so far from a self checkout
    - browser on 10/02/2023 - 13:01
      
      Growth beyond interest is a bit harder. Savers want to get close to $100,000 to maximise interest but without going over too much to miss out on bonus interest. For every $1,000 over $100,000 is $3.50 bonus not earned.
      
      $95,000 is probably a good starting point. It will take about 1 year to reach $100,000. Then transfer the entire amount to another high interest account.
      
      With a high balance, every month a saver misses the bonus is $350 worst off, so really need to make sure the account balance is growing.
      - nokia3660 on 12/02/2023 - 22:33
        
        @browser: or, if you don't mind the hassle, put in 100k at the start of the month, on the last day of the month move out say 5 or 7k. This way you earn interest for 100k to almost most of the month but still have room to grow the balance for more than a year.
- nokia3660 on 09/02/2023 - 23:42
  
  +4
  
  While we're proud to be a branchless bank, we know you sometimes want to do your banking face-to-face. So we've partnered with Australia Post to give you access to 3,300 of their Bank@Post outlets.
  
  Here, you can provide proof of identity (required to open some accounts) and make cheque or cash deposits into your Orange Everyday.
freestyle18 on 10/02/2023 - 06:01

+5

I wish I had a problem with the 100k limit
- BadGiraffe on 11/02/2023 - 20:02
  
  I KNOW RIGHT??!?!
  
  WTF am I doing wrong that I don't have $100K in the bank?

This was posted 1 year 3 months 5 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Savings Maximiser 4.80% p.a. Interest on Balance up to $100,000 (Monthly Deposit, Balance & Spend Requirements) @ ING

Referral Links

Related Stores

closed Comments

Top Deals

New Deals