Thursday, October 06, 2016

Banking For Dummies...


... "DUMMIES"?




[... if they stay!!!]




Keith Leggett said...


It is not smart to call people that you want as potential customers "Dummies."

Jim Blaine said...

The ones that leave aren't... only the ones who stay!

Jim Blaine said...

Doc Leggett,

You've been awfully quiet about Wells Fargo's abusive relationship with its customers... so has the ABA!

Not to put you on the spot or anything, but.... do you support "the culture" at WF?

A couple of instances of fraud and misconduct is a "that's part of life" personnel problem - dismiss the employees; 5300 employees committing fraud over a 5 year period is an institutional/leadership problem... yet WF's Board and Executive management fail to act until called on the carpet before Congress.

Something stinks don't you think? Or was this all the result of the credit union "tax exemption"?

Keith Leggett said...


I don't know how anyone can defend what took place at WF.

Clearly the incentive compensation model was poorly designed.

It looks like WF had weak internal controls. The problems should have been flagged much earlier.

I suspect you will see a stronger clawback provision in the new incentive compensation rule to address such problems.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Leggett danced skillfully around the question you proposed to him but then again he is a banker. His words were about as strong as a day old puppy as he didn't condemn the actions, didn't call for sanctions or prosecution, didn't say the WF CEO should be tarred and feathered but basically said maybe they could have done better and they will try to improve. Come on Keith, get a pair and for once tell it like it is.

Jim Blaine said...

Actually thought that Dr. Leggett gave a very frank analysis and was pretty clear with the statement: "I don't know how anyone can defend what took place at WF."

The problem for all of us (most bankers included) is that these major, "undefendable" activities keep arising time and time again at the largest banks in the Country - yet management and Boards remain in place. We need a mandatory "step down or we will prosecute" rule or if that is not acceptable a "step down and we will prosecute" rule - management and Board.

And, it is also clear that the folks at the OCC - with 80 examiners permanently on site at WF - also were clueless and ineffective. Does this not give clear evidence that the regulatory system is simply a charade, which works well for no one? We need the "step down or we will prosecute" rule here also.

Anonymous said...

Familiarity is the problem The 80 examiners have gotten fat on free doughnuts and lunch thus impairing their vision but not their hearing. They listened to and believed everything they were told. Sorta like the ones that sat at US Central and WesCorp. They all became part of the family and forgot what they were sent to do.

Anonymous said...

Frank analysis? Pretty clear? Really? Let's analyze that sentence you believe to be so frank.

"I don't know". We have heard that one from the CEO of WF all the way to Hillary Clinton. Bankers and politicians never know and never admit they are wrong.

"how anyone can defend". But that is exactly what Dr. Leggett and all his banker buddies are doing by not calling for resignations, investigations, terminations and return of pay and bonuses.

"what took place at WF". Does Dr. Leggett or anyone know what took place other than theft, cover-up and the termination of people who only did what heir bosses told them to do? A lot more was going on that any banker will admit.

You forgot the beans with the frank he sold you.