Wachovia: A Split May Boost the Banking Industry - BusinessWeek
The legalized conflict between Citi and Wells Fargo over Wachovia at least shows there are assets worth fighting over, without federal succor
Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images
by Dean Foust
For Washington policymakers, the prospect of a grinding, slow-motion legal fight betwixt Citigroup (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC) in the place of the spoils of troubled Wachovia (WB) is clearly unnerving. In a period when the markets assume to come more unhinged with both excessively day, regulators apprehension that a protracted battle in the courts could case an acceleration in public bank runs. That explains the news reports on Monday, Oct. 6, that officials from the Federal Reserve were brokering a compromise that would extreme point through Citigroup and Wells Fargo carving up Wachovia’s assets.
If there’s any silver lining in the battle betwixt Citigroup and Wells Fargo—and silver linings are hard to come by these days—it is this: The skirmish could better convince the markets that the current panic surrounding banks has gone too far and that even troubled banks like Wachovia have a strong franchise that’s worth bidding for. Plus, if Wachovia is split, taxpayers won’t have to foot the billions in federal assistance that the original Citigroup deal included.
"Wells Fargo transactions has performed a positive service to the banking industry," Nancy Bush, an independent bank analyst in New Jersey, wrote in a note to clients on Monday morning. "This will mark a turnery point for the industry and for the stocks."
If Bush is right, that could mean the era of regulators forcing troubled banks into shotgun marriages—with no recovery for investors in banks such as Wachovia or investment firms approve Bear Stearns—could subsist coming to a close. And the Wells Fargo act, which Wachovia’s board embraced on Oct. 3, prompting Citigroup to demand, could convince investors that in quest of all the bad loans and soured investments these firms are sitting in succession, acquirers are getting a steal.
Some Old-Fashioned LoansAs Wachovia CEO Robert Steel has argued to Wall Street, only one-quarter of the bank’s lend portfolio consists of the troubled mortgages made in its Golden West subsidiary. Excluding those mortgages—admittedly, no small feat—and a smaller portfolio of troubled construction loans, and the majority of Wachovia’s portfolio consists of old-fashioned consumer loans to customers with whom the the usurer’s has generally had a slow relationship.
Consider that Wells Fargo’s bid for Wachovia (BusinessWeek.com, 10/3/08)—$15 billion, with not one government assistance—is roughly seven times what Citigroup agreed to pay (BusinessWeek.com, 9/29/08) for Charlotte-based Wachovia’session banking operations the weekend before. And Citigroup’sitting bidding included some government assistance. Analysts note that Citigroup’sitting response—a lawsuit, rather than a higher pray—suggests the New York institution isn’t determination to bid more, and the litigation could simply have being a legal maneuver to try to extract a "breakup" absolute title from Wells Fargo.
But the Solomon-like compromise offered by the agency of regulators—a split-up by geography, with Citigroup taking Wachovia’s Northeast branches and Wells Fargo getting everything else—could be plenty to appease Citigroup. The institution would get billions in low-cost deposits that provide it through a relatively steadfast source of funds.
If analysts are reform that the Wells Fargo-Citigroup battle marks the high-water mark in the current banking crisis, that doesn’face to face mean that the remaining banks can rest easy. In her alert to clients, Bush notes that she’s trial from "multitude in the industry" that regulators have started to observe beyond the current crisis and are assessing the prospects for other surviving banks—including many regional and local banks that engorged themselves attached real estate loans—and don’t like what they see.
Bush believes that if and when the present storm passes, regulators are lull going to use their powers of persuasion to force more shotgun marriages between surviving banks. The goal: to flow weak management teams through of the assiduity and put more of the industry’sitting assets into the hands of managers who have proven themselves most genius at intriguing risk. That means that even if Wells Fargo’s $15 billion gambit does serve to stabilize the market, the mergers could continue for years to come.
Original text: {news-link}
