Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing Â
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
â–ª
Cranbury School
â–ª
Cranbury Township
â–ª
Cranbury Library
â–ª
Cranbury.org
â–ª
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="Guest"][quote="Guest"]I think the Feds are really trying to save CITI with this deal, not Wachovia - by the feds merging a strong bank with Citi, it is saving Citi also. Remember a year about abu dhabi invested almost $8bil into Citi. http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/27/markets/sovereign_funds/ http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2752968520071127[/quote] So they get to throw Wachovia investors and employees and taxpayers under a bus to save Citi? That's nice.[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
<table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1" width="100%" class="forumline"> <tr> <th class="thCornerL" width="22%" height="26">Author</th> <th class="thCornerR">Message</th> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Mon, Oct 6 2008, 5:51 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: What's up with the Wachovia deal?</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody"></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Guest wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">I think the Feds are really trying to save CITI with this deal, not Wachovia - by the feds merging a strong bank with Citi, it is saving Citi also. Remember a year about abu dhabi invested almost $8bil into Citi. <br /> <br /><a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/27/markets/sovereign_funds/" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/27/markets/sovereign_funds/</a> <br /><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2752968520071127" target="_blank">http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2752968520071127</a></td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />So they get to throw Wachovia investors and employees and taxpayers under a bus to save Citi? That's nice.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Mon, Oct 6 2008, 4:51 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: What's up with the Wachovia deal?</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">I think the Feds are really trying to save CITI with this deal, not Wachovia - by the feds merging a strong bank with Citi, it is saving Citi also. Remember a year about abu dhabi invested almost $8bil into Citi. <br /> <br /><a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/27/markets/sovereign_funds/" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/27/markets/sovereign_funds/</a> <br /><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2752968520071127" target="_blank">http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN2752968520071127</a></span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Mon, Oct 6 2008, 1:17 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: What's up with the Wachovia deal?</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">I agree, this is why the Feds intervening is usually a bad idea. The Feds preemptively decided Wachovia was next on the list and worked out a deal with Citibank before they even informed Wachovia. Wachovia didn’t ask them to do it and the Feds basically threatened Wachovia to take it “or else.” The Feds appear not to have shopped the deal and of course Citi played hard to get and got another one of those amazing deals with physical assets upside greater than their cost and virtually no downside. The Feds even allowed Citi to insist on a no competition clause in the deal, even though Wachovia had never even been allowed to discuss it with anyone else first. The Feds basically screwed the taxpayers, the investors and the employees of Wachovia, while giving Citi a freebie and our expense. <br /> <br />Citi knows it was taking the Feds. They tried to go to court to block Wells Fargo citing the exclusivity provision they got. Ironically the legislation that just passed Friday includes a provision which renders such exclusivity clauses invalid. Now suddenly Citi is willing to negotiate and drop the Fed assistance and pay much more, proof they would have anyway if the Feds hadn’t made it so easy for them by sucking all the leverage out of Wachovia. <br /> <br />Even now the Feds don’t want to lose face. The initially supported Citi with the judge who originally blocked the Well Fargo deal. This judge, by the way, is personal friends with Citi’s lawyers and they worked out the injunction from his personal house without Wachovia counsel present or even notified until the end. The moment toe Feds realized their huge mistake, that they almost cost taxpayers a bundle and forces the sale of the company for 10% of its fair market value as defined by Wells’ offer, they should have backed out and let the free market work. But no, they have to look like they are in control. Pathetic. As it currently stands, Wells and Citi are trying to hash out a compromise to divide the company, and Wachovia isn’t even allowed to be part of the discussion. Ridiculous.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Mon, Oct 6 2008, 10:52 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: What's up with the Wachovia deal?</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Why on Earth would the Feds support a $2B sweetheart deal to give Wachovia to Citibank while putting taxpayers on the hook for the lbillions of osses over a $15B offer from Wells Fargo to do it without any taxpayer money commitment? <br /> <br />That seems insane. It seems to prove just how screwed up the idea of Federal intervention is. They are supposedly free market and only minimally intervening, but when given an opportunity to let the free market work in a deal that is a win for taxpayers, investors of Wachovia and for customers of Wachovia, would rather help a well-connnected NY bank get a firesale at tax payer expense? Is this not proof that we can't trust the Feds with any money or authority to fix this thing? <br /> <br />What possible logic is there for the Feds supporting the Citi deal over the Wells Fargo deal? They have publically stated they do and submitted a brief to the courts to that effect. But they have provided no justification.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> </table>
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in