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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion