Wells Fargo's positive forecast

[byu71]

A result of Obama policies or a result of politicians screaming it was worse than it really was.

I will be interested to see what Meredith Whitney has to say over the weekend.

[SeattleUte]

A result of Obama policies or a result of politicians screaming it was worse than it really was.

I will be interested to see what Meredith Whitney has to say over the weekend.

The CEO of Wells Fargo's Northwest U.S. subsidiary spoke at our firm retreat last year. Wells Fargo was perhaps the only major bank in the world that did not generate or invest in securitization of mortgage loans. They believe in relationships, and so didn't make loans and throw them over the fence. Nor did they buy the securitizations. They opted out of that whole incestuous scene. So Wells is a special case; it is reaping the benefit of foresight and taking a careful, conservative approach while all the sheep were bleating that if you don't do it their way you're stupid.

It would be nice if you would examine the facts instead of trying to turn every news story into a political argument.

[byu71]

The CEO of Wells Fargo's Northwest U.S. subsidiary spoke at our firm retreat last year. Wells Fargo was perhaps the only major bank in the world that did not generate or invest in securitization of mortgage loans. They believe in relationships, and so didn't make loans and throw them over the fence. Nor did they buy the securitizations. They opted out of that whole incestuous scene. So Wells is a special case; it is reaping the benefit of foresight and taking a careful, conservative approach while all the sheep were bleating that if you don't do it their way you're stupid.

It would be nice if you would examine the facts instead of trying to turn every news story into a political argument.

Way to stay current. He spoke a year ago and you are using that to comment. I am impressed you heard him speak. I don't give a shit what he said a year ago , things change.

Why don't you stick to subjects you might have a clue about and not embarass yourself.

[Clark Addison]

The CEO of Wells Fargo's Northwest U.S. subsidiary spoke at our firm retreat last year. Wells Fargo was perhaps the only major bank in the world that did not generate or invest in securitization of mortgage loans. They believe in relationships, and so didn't make loans and throw them over the fence. Nor did they buy the securitizations. They opted out of that whole incestuous scene. So Wells is a special case; it is reaping the benefit of foresight and taking a careful, conservative approach while all the sheep were bleating that if you don't do it their way you're stupid.

It would be nice if you would examine the facts instead of trying to turn every news story into a political argument.

While I don't disagree with your main point, the market seems to think this is not limited to Wells Fargo. Wells is up 32% today. Bank of America is up even more, at 35%. Chase and Citi didn't have quite as good of a day, but both are up at least 12%.

[byu71]

While I don't disagree with your main point, the market seems to think this is not limited to Wells Fargo. Wells is up 32% today. Bank of America is up even more, at 35%. Chase and Citi didn't have quite as good of a day, but both are up at least 12%.

I know. My point is maybe these banks weren't in as bad of shape as everyone claimed or maybe just the simple fact the yield curve steepened really helped them out.

It will be interesting to see if the banks that climbed as much as Wells today also have as outstanding a forcast. It will also be interesting to hear the pundits over the weekend.

[Hallelujah]

A result of Obama policies or a result of politicians screaming it was worse than it really was.

I will be interested to see what Meredith Whitney has to say over the weekend.

Why would they say it was worse than it really was? To accomodate the feds in nationalizing banks?

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Way to stay current. He spoke a year ago and you are using that to comment. I am impressed you heard him speak. I don't give a shit what he said a year ago , things change.

Why don't you stick to subjects you might have a clue about and not embarass yourself.

I don't think SU is totally off base. I was going to mention that Wells was one of the BIG banks not to get too much into the investment banking side of things- unlike Citi and BoA after their Merryl Lynch acquisition. That's why a lot of people say the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act may have been one of the factors that played a role in the mess.

Fact is, BofA's price might be improving but they still needed a helluva lot of money from the government to make it through.

[Guest]

On the banks...I saw this interesting graphic the other day...





I wonder how they account for these homes on their books. They're holding them off the market right now. Are they waiting for the market to rebound? Maybe they want to spread the write downs over several qrts? It will be interesting to see what effect unloading this 'hidden' inventory has on the housing markets in question.

"We believe there are in the neighborhood of 600,000 properties nationwide that banks have repossessed but not put on the market,"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/08/MNL516UG90.DTL

[byu71]

I don't think SU is totally off base. I was going to mention that Wells was one of the BIG banks not to get too much into the investment banking side of things- unlike Citi and BoA after their Merryl Lynch acquisition. That's why a lot of people say the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act may have been one of the factors that played a role in the mess.

Fact is, BofA's price might be improving but they still needed a helluva lot of money from the government to make it through.

All I was doing was raising a reasonable question.

Is the government using the "crisis" to spend a lot more money and get more control.
Are the things the government is doing what helped Wells Fargo and the other banks.

Maybe they really thought it was that bad and it wasn't.

Maybe it really is still bad and this is a blip or just WElls Fargo and a couple of others are doing well.

These seem like reasonable discussion questions.


To quote something a bank executive said a year ago and then go from there to question whether I have no facts and it is just a politicalization of the news on my part deserved the resonse I gave to SU.

[PaloAltoCougar]

All I was doing was raising a reasonable question.

Is the government using the "crisis" to spend a lot more money and get more control. Are the things the government is doing what helped Wells Fargo and the other banks.

Maybe they really thought it was that bad and it wasn't.

I think they're reasonable questions that will probably be debated many years from now. The cynic in me believes the administration wanted to overstate the seriousness of the problem in order to (i) make them seem like heroes when we recover, and (ii) increase everyone's appetites for more control and spending.

But I don't think it's that simple. Many people whom I regard highly for their intellect and wisdom have said the problems are extremely serious, and that there is risk (albeit much smaller now than in the October-January timeframe) of a total collapse of the global capital and financial markets. Years from now the economic historians will pass judgment on whether the threat was as real as many currently fear, but given the risks, I don't blame Obama et al. for taking extraordinary measures; in fact, at least at the moment, I'm grateful.

[byu71]

I think they're reasonable questions that will probably be debated many years from now. The cynic in me believes the administration wanted to overstate the seriousness of the problem in order to (i) make them seem like heroes when we recover, and (ii) increase everyone's appetites for more control and spending.

But I don't think it's that simple. Many people whom I regard highly for their intellect and wisdom have said the problems are extremely serious, and that there is risk (albeit much smaller now than in the October-January timeframe) of a total collapse of the global capital and financial markets. Years from now the economic historians will pass judgment on whether the threat was as real as many currently fear, but given the risks, I don't blame Obama et al. for taking extraordinary measures; in fact, at least at the moment, I'm grateful.

It is kind of questionning the coach who calls a run play and it fails. He should have passed. Well we don't know what would have happened if he passed.

I too am happy how things seem to be working better and I am holding my breath.

If my choices are the economy does well and Obama gets credit whether he deserves it or not or the economy does poorly and he gets blamed whether he deserves it or not, I will take the economy doing well everytime.

[beelzebabette]

I wonder how they account for these homes on their books. They're holding them off the market right now. Are they waiting for the market to rebound? Maybe they want to spread the write downs over several qrts? It will be interesting to see what effect unloading this 'hidden' inventory has on the housing markets in question.

They have to account for anticipated losses with reserves. Ideally, they estimate correctly up front and there are no additional losses when the homes actually sell; the point is they can't stall recognition of a loss by simply waiting to sell.

[SeattleUte]

Way to stay current. He spoke a year ago and you are using that to comment. I am impressed you heard him speak. I don't give a shit what he said a year ago , things change.

Why don't you stick to subjects you might have a clue about and not embarass yourself.

LOL. It was late last year he spoke; the quarter previous to this one that just ended. He also said he's opposed to any bail outs and would have preferred not to receive bail out money.

You would have liked him. I said at the time that if John McCain would have said the things this WF officer said instead of running to Washington and joining himself at hip with Bush he'd be the next president.

You are current? All you can do is speculate that WF's earnings report means Obama was gilding the lilly. You don't know anything. Clearly Wells Fargo is in a special category and you can't draw any conclusions over the overall health of the economy or the sector from this. That's my point.

[byu71]

LOL. It was late last year he spoke; the quarter previous to this one that just ended. He also said he's opposed to any bail outs and would have preferred not to receive bail out money.

You would have liked him. I said at the time that if John McCain would have said the things this WF officer said instead of running to Washington and joining himself at hip with Bush he'd be the next president.

You are current? All you can do is speculate that WF's earnings report means Obama was gilding the lilly. You don't know anything. Clearly Wells Fargo is in a special category and you can't draw any conclusions over the overall health of the economy or the sector from this. That's my point.

Since WF's announcement, go look at how the other Bank Stocks have reacted and are continuing to react. You actually might be right and it is WF specific. However, your criticism of me seems to be taking the line that you (meaning me) "don't" allow for the fact it isn't WF specific. You will forgive me if I didn't consider you knowledgeable enough to know that for a fact and didn't sell my other bank stocks that day.

[Clark Addison]

Fact is, BofA's price might be improving but they still needed a helluva lot of money from the government to make it through.

Is this based on anything, or just your opinion? Just curious.