Posts Tagged ‘Financial Services’

My Citi Was Gone

citigroupI have a lot of thoughts about the quasi-nationalization of Citigroup, because I am a Citibank shareholder. Some of those shares were acquired in the traditional capitalist manner; my husband placed an order through his online brokerage account. (We thought we were so smart, buying shares at $5 and change!) Some of the Citi exposure came through socialist means: I’m a U.S. citizen, so Timothy Geithner doubled down on my stake.

What happened? Subprime mortgages and global financial collapse aside, Citigroup may have become too big to manage. It is definitely too big for another bank to take over; Chase was willing to take over Washington Mutual accounts, but it could not handle the account volume of Citi, too.

Citibank has long pushed the financial supermarket idea. By offering banking, brokerage, and insurance services under one umbrella, Citi hoped to make it easy for customers to deal with them. It also hoped to squeeze more profits out of each person who walked through the door. But it was always a tough sell. Savvy investors don’t want any one institution to know everything about them; they’d rather play a few different companies off of each other. They’ll shop around for an extra 0.50% on a CD, work with a few brokers to get the best stock ideas, and move their insurance business whenever they find a better premium.

Also, diversifying among several firms reduces the risk of problems – from the Madoff risk at one extreme to the simple headache of limited access when something goes wrong. If you lose one credit card on an overseas trip and need to get home, it’s nice to have another card with a different bank. If a teller is mean to you and you decide to move all of your business in a huff, it’s easier if there isn’t that much to move.

The underlying problem with the financial supermarket is management. How can anyone be on top of everything from how nice and knowledgeable the tellers are to the risk levels of complex derivatives trades? The President of the United States has an easier job, because the president isn’t expected to post a profit. Also, he can print money and drop nuclear bombs to get things done. Vikram Pandit, the CEO of Citigroup, doesn’t have those nifty tools. He couldn’t even split the company up into more manageable pieces, because that would have taken away critical assets needed to prop up the banking business. (more…)

Pop Politico: “Trust”

The “hit the ground running” strategy the Obama Administration has adhered to since the inauguration has an unfortunate side effect:  It’s making people impatient for positive change in the economy, the war in Iraq, and the general sense of malaise that has permeated not only the U.S. but most of the world as well.

Managing expectations is a tough thing to do when, for example, Obama’s presidential campaign was premised on the keywords of “Change” and “Hope.” People are expecting rapid change; a wave of a magic wand and things will be “back to normal.”  But whatever “normal” was, we’re not going back — hell, I don’t think we even want to go back.  Clearly, we’re at the proverbial turning point where the current economic problems that plague the world  aren’t going to go away in a few months. And if there were ever an image that sums up the shock, frustration, and collective inability of the world’s leadership to manage this crisis, it would be Desmond Tutu’s excessive emoting at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

tutu

As the political culture in Washington D.C. frets over the likes of Tom Daschle and certain provisions in the economic stimulus plan, there’s very little talk about the nature of the global economic mess we’re in. Perhaps it’s just easier to concentrate on taxes owed, pork barrel spending, what constitutes lobbying, but it seems whatever heavy lifting that is done by our friends in the mainstream media to enlighten us plebs on the details of this economic crisis, is undercut by a plethora of “sexy news stories” designed for easy consumption.  Fortunately, the information is out there, and while it’s not really that sexy to read, it does illuminate the enormity of the crisis and how we got to where we are.

To wit: The Economist has a wonkish, but ultimately helpful feature in the January 24th-30th edition that was broken up into a series of articles examining the current financial crisis from a number of perspectives.  Now, I’m not an economist, but after reading through the articles, I have a good sense of why the economic leaders who convened in Switzerland haven’t a clue what is to be done.  Ideology and downright confusion over the mechanisms that brought us to this current state have a great deal to do with it.  Not all who attended the conference were die hard capitalist, but many were and it seems the “way out” of this mess involves a partnership with an entity capitalists tend to dread: the State.  Like it or not, the State is the only entity with the wherewithal to instill an important “soft factor” in the economy: optimism.  Optimism bolsters trust, and our capitalist economies thrive when these, admittedly, difficult to quantify variables are strong. (more…)