Citi pulls out of Wachovia deal
Citi yesterday gave up on its attempt to take over Wachovia, ceding the ground to rival bidder Wells Fargo.
The bank said it broke off negotiations due to "dramatic differences" with Wells Fargo "in the parties' transaction structures and views of the risks involved". It now plans to launch a lawsuit against both Wachovia and Wells Fargo for breach of contract, but will not attempt to block the merger.
"Our shareholders have been unjustly and illegally deprived of the opportunity the transaction created," Citi said. Citi argues it had an exclusive agreement to take over Wachovia, which was broken when the other bank started negotiating with Wells Fargo.
Unlike the proposed merger with Citi, the $11.7 billion all-share Wachovia-Wells Fargo merger will not require any support from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Wachovia said. The Citi deal would have seen FDIC take $12 billion in stock and warrants in return for guaranteeing all but the first $42 billion of losses on a $312 billion loan pool, the first time FDIC has used its "systemic risk" powers to guarantee bank debt.
See also: Citigroup to acquire Wachovia
Wachovia appoints Phelan as CRO
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FCA presses UK non-banks to put their affairs in order
Greater scrutiny of wind-down plans by regulator could alter capital and liquidity requirements
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
UK investment firms feeling the heat on prudential rules
Signs firms are falling behind FCA’s expectations on wind-down and liquidity risk management
The American way: a stress-test substitute for Basel’s IRRBB?
Bankers divided over new CCAR scenario designed to bridge supervisory gap exposed by SVB failure
Industry warns CFTC against rushing to regulate AI for trading
Vote on workplan pulled amid calls to avoid duplicating rules from other regulatory agencies