Automated teller machines (ATMs) and, more recently, online banking, were thought to provide such a valuable service alternative that customers would need far fewer personal banking services with human tellers in traditional bank branches. In short, these new technologies were supposed to reduce drastically the number of bank tellers and branches. But things did not work out that way. Between 1995 and 2005 the number of bank branches grew from 50,000 to 70,000, an increase of 40 percent. The number of tellers to staff the branches also increased in roughly the same proportion during this decade. This happened despite the fact that the number of banking firms actually decreased dramatically from 10,000 to less than 8,000 during that same period. What do you think is going on here? Why do you think so many consumers still demand “old-fashioned” bank branches and tellers in spite of new technological alternatives? Discuss.