Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue
Wachovia was doomed regardless of this. I don't know why people insist on trying to suggest Wachovia (or Charlotte) would have been in better shape if the bank had tried to remain independant. Instead of laying off thousands of future Charlotte Wells employees, they would simply be laying off thousands of local Wachovia ones.
|
You're right, had it stood alone it would currently be run by the feds and we'd see the stock price probably around $.10 (look at WaMu) with a very very very grim 2009 and beyond.
However it's interesting to ponder the timing of the bailout, had the Feds not pushed Wachovia to merge "or else", had they been able to hold on and make a plea for Paulson to cut a check, could they have restructured spun out securities. Who knows.
I do believe the shareholders law suit was valid. They have a valid right to feel disenfranchised. However as the judge said, they theoretically could still block the deal but won't be able to get that much unification.
The big thing is this will be a California run bank, no matter how you want to look at it- east coast office or however you dress it up.
It's the best of a very bad situation. However not bad for the execs who divy up $100 million in bonuses
. Got to love it.
Thank You to every tax payer in the US for setting aside $2000 of your hard earned tax money that Paulson can write checks against!
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
