Wells Fargo cuts 26,500 jobs, shutters branches, declares "excess capital" and drops $40.6 billion on stock buybacks


#21

Anybody know how to keep them from buying a mortgage? Asking for a friend…


#22

Only Wells Fargo’s swift and brutal demise.

If it were me, I would take another spin on the refinance roulette wheel and pray for a better result. No whammys!


#23

I must be very unlucky at roulette. This happened to me with two different houses. At this point, my only hope is to downsize into a condo and avoid a mortgage completely.


#24

Try desperately to refinance, but even then, there’s no guarantee your mortgage won’t be bought by someone else equally despicable. My 2 mortgages (original and refi) have each been sold a couple of times to new lenders; the only one that stayed put was the LoC/2nd mortgage we got through a local bank.


#25

That just shouldn’t be legal unless you get to sell your loan to anyone you want, without any approval from the lender.


#26

How many people own enough stock for it to make a big difference?


#27

Oh, I’m sure there’s a lot worse in the mortgage loan fine print. I guess I should feel lucky that the institutions who bought my loan used the correct mailing address. Every year there are horror stories in the news about people who wind up in foreclosure because of processing errors.

First, no one notified them the loan had been sold. Their payments were still accepted by the former lien holder, while the new lender never sent bills or they were misdirected. Finally, they discover there is a problem when the new lender starts the foreclosure process. Here’s just one case:


#28

Unlike the Mafia, these psychos know how to bleed out their host for an impressively long time. Mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money!


#29

stock buybacks – a form of financial engineering that drives up stock prices without improving the company’s underlying financials or business.

Here we go again. It’s just like paying a dividend, another way of giving the company’s money to the shareholders. Which is fair, since the shareholders own the company.

Some of Wells Fargo’s largest individual shareholders are its executives, who’ve effectively just voted to give themselves massive, multi-million-dollar raises.

Not a raise, but a payment. All the shareholders get this payment. It’s the company giving the company’s money to the company’s owners.

Wells Fargo is a shit company but all companies at one time or another give their profits to the owners of that company. If they don’t then they are a charity or non-profit.

Yes, firing workers while distributing huge profits makes them look shitty; they’ve proven they’re a shitty company lately time and time again. But all companies, good or bad, at some point either buy back their stock, or pay dividends, in order to give their owners (the shareholders) a distribution of profit.


#30

It’s artificial though. It boosts the stock price by reducing number of outstanding shares which makes the P/E more attractive. It does nothing to actually improve the business operations, gain efficiencies or expansion. It’s just more short term market thinking.

Dividends attract certain investors who are looking for income vs. growth which is a whole different type of investing style. Stock buybacks are not dividends. For one thing they are not tied to the fundamentals of the business’ performance which is what dividends are all about.

This is all just re-arranging financial deck chairs so that executives and major shareholders get into the life boats first.


#31


#32

I don’t understand why anyone uses banks anymore.

They’re untrustworthy, scheming and lose everyone’s money all the time. In addition to being expensive and tending to offer poor rates.

There’s credit unions everywhere and I’ve never heard of a CU selling off all its stock and folding up in order to give the executives billions of dollars in bonuses for violating the trust of their customers.

Don’t reward bad behavior. Do your finances with a credit union.


#33

THIS!

You can have all the rest of my likes forever! :joy:

ETA: I’m still shaming people into leaving the big six. But being relentless about it since 2008 I’ve single-handedly gotten somewhere over $100M or more in deposits away from them. Talk to your city, talk to your church, talk to your non-profits, talk to your local vendors and customers, it all adds up! They’re still fucking us over, it’s never too late to repay the favor!


#34

This is really their weakness. They can’t help but believe the fairytale that lots of the profits are coming to them.

Because they voted R.


#35

I’ve had that happen but luckily not with anything like a mortgage, just smaller stuff that messed with my credit. I agree that it shouldn’t be legal - a loan/debt is a contract between the parties involved and if either wants to bring in other parties, they should have to renegotiate the contract (with possible exception of bearer bonds although those are mostly history).

I’ve told collection agencies before that I never made a deal with them and unless they can send proof that I did and can send the records, they should just have the original company get in touch with me and send updated invoice/records. They’ve never done either. I suspect because they usually don’t have any records and don’t know where they got my information from anyway.

Traditionally, it was a way to avoid/prevent takeovers. By taking public shares out of circulation, it increased the relative percentage held by insiders. But the last couple of decades have been weird. Tons of mergers, acquisitions, consolidation in multiple industries, yet the buybacks don’t seem related to that. Or worse, as if they’re designed for the opposite. Instead of preserving control of the company, they want it to get bought out, and the buyback is to net them a bigger share when it does. Laying off workers at the same time gives the company lower operating costs, making it more attractive for a buyout maybe?


#36


#37

Refinance with your local credit union. They are generally outside the mortgage swapping industry, at least in my experience.


#38

Y’all got anymore of them

/dave chapelle crackhead meme

excess capital ?


#39

And how are dividends really tied to the fundamentals of business performance? Sure, if you can’t pay the dividend it means you don’t have the cash to do so, and a rising dividend means you have more profit to pay out. But the same thing goes for buybacks. And buybacks arguably do more for the business in the long run. The money paid for a dividend goes out the door, with nothing gained for the company. A buyback is a better investment for the company, while a dividend is a more reliable gain for the shareholder.

This is all just re-arranging financial deck chairs so that executives and major shareholders get into the life boats first.

Everyone benefits the same from a buyback, per share owned. Of course major shareholders have more to gain – they have a lot more to gain from a dividend payment too, since it’s done on a per-share basis.


#40

image