ADVERTISEMENT
返回
  • 浏览过的版块

1
ADVERTISEMENT
Huaren
等级三等兵
威望--
贴子195
魅力622
注册时间2004-03-12

mimiyian

只看楼主

who got a better deal? CITI vs. JPM on Wachovia/WAMU?

1253

9

2008-09-29 13:02:00

citi buying Wachovia vs. JPM buying WAMU.
Citi seems to be offering in citi stocks for Wachovia's banking businesses.
JPM is offering cash for buying WAMU?

Who got a better deal? Or does it mean Citi is short of liquidity?


Huaren
等级中士
威望1
贴子1134
魅力6455
注册时间2008-06-01

baizhanji

只看他

2008-09-29 13:04:00

Why Huaren always highlights "WAMU"?  Is it a sponsor?
Huaren
等级大校
威望15
贴子11329
魅力17676
注册时间2007-01-28

baileys

只看他

2008-09-29 13:15:00

以下是引用mimiyian在2008-9-29 13:02:00的发言:
citi buying Wachovia vs. JPM buying WAMU.
Citi seems to be offering in citi stocks for Wachovia's banking businesses.
JPM is offering cash for buying WAMU?

Who got a better deal? Or does it mean Citi is short of liquidity?



1

 


 


hmm, interesting. my understanding: cash offer sends a good signal -- they are a cash cow, and stock may be undervalued.


 


remember the BAC and MER, the all-stock deal? both stock prices down upon the annoucement. but who knows.


 


S&P may downgrade Citi due to further writedowns

Huaren
等级少校
威望4
贴子3251
魅力4393
注册时间2005-07-05

hello_kitty

只看他

2008-09-29 13:24:00

以下是引用baizhanji在2008-9-29 13:04:00的发言:
Why Huaren always highlights "WAMU"?  Is it a sponsor?
2

i have the same question. hehe.

Huaren
等级贵宾大校
威望134
贴子27564
魅力33382
注册时间2005-11-18

azureling

只看他

2008-09-29 14:42:00

转到理财讨论了


 


多谢

Huaren
等级等待验证会员
威望--
贴子24
魅力84
注册时间2007-01-06

ws

只看他

2008-09-29 20:51:00

JPM got a much better deal. Cash offer can stop the WM equity owner from any future stock price appreciation.  As some other poster pointer out, cash buying usually indicate an business is buying an undervalued asset.  Plus, WM was near bankruptcy when JPM took over...meaning as soon as FDIC took over, it wiped out the equity owner and bondholder, JPM didn't have to assume any WM's debt.  Jamie looked like genius.  Such practice will, I think, be followed by other banking merger/purchase in the future....wait until the bank die first. 
Huaren
等级三等兵
威望--
贴子195
魅力622
注册时间2004-03-12

mimiyian

只看楼主

2008-09-29 23:37:00

why doesn't citi wait until last minute then? They should not have to wait much longer?
Huaren
等级等待验证会员
威望--
贴子24
魅力84
注册时间2007-01-06

ws

只看他

2008-09-30 16:56:00

Because Wachovia's CEO (Robert Steal) is a Goldman Sachs alumnia.  Hank Paulson will take care of his troops.
Huaren
等级贵宾大校
威望42
贴子33909
魅力47122
注册时间2004-02-24

Caffeine

只看他

2008-09-30 21:23:00

both are excellent deal for each firm. Citi needed it more. Citi was shaky before the deal. Now, by issuing shares to FDIC, it bundled itself with the government. Even better, FDIC capped Citi's future losses should the Wachovia assets end up costing them more.
ADVERTISEMENT
Huaren
等级等待验证会员
威望--
贴子24
魅力84
注册时间2007-01-06

ws

只看他

2008-09-30 21:39:00

^Good point.
初始化编辑器...

到底了