Friday, October 02, 2009
Morgan Housel :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Biggest Bank Deals That Never Happened
by Morgan Housel
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 

For all the hysteria of last fall's banking meltdown, it could have turned out much, much more chaotically. 

I've been wondering where The New York Timeshas been hiding financial columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin for the past few months. Turns out he's writing a book on the financial crisis. (Because no one'sdoing that these days. Have you been to a bookstore lately? Holy moley.)

Vanity Fairrecently gave a sneak peek into Sorkin's book, which comes outlater this month. Sorkin writes that last fall, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) was all lined up and ready to buy Wachovia. Soon after, a brief melee left Wachovia with Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC), which outbid Citigroup (NYSE: C) -- and thankfully so.

The Goldman-Wachovia deal was purportedly nixed because of a three-way incestuous relationship between dealmakers:

Turns out that papa bear Warren Buffett called out the conflict, after Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) was asked to help out with the deal. Not that this kind of stuff is uncommon: JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) CEO Jamie Dimon sitson the board at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York -- the same agency that brokered and backstopped JPMorgan's deal to buy Bear Stearns. And former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin was a director at Citigroup while his former employer, the U.S. Treasury, shoveled money down the bank's throat.

After the Goldman-Wachovia deal blew apart, regulators gunned for Goldman to merge with Citigroup. They also "demanded" that Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) sell itself to JPMorgan Chase, apparently telling Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack that he "should be willing to sell his firm to J.P. Morgan for $1 a share." 

Sound extreme? Remember, this was a time when the investment-banking model was completely comatose. Goldman and Morgan Stanley desperately needed the stability of a commercial bank's deposits, lest they both turn into the next Lehman Brothers.

Obviously, none of this ever happened. Both deals were eventually ditched, presumably because becoming bank-holding companiesgave Goldman and Morgan Stanley full access to the Federal Reserve's lending window, commuting their death sentences before things hit the fan.

Moving on
It's still worth asking: What would the financial world look like today had these deals gone down? What if Goldman bought Wachovia? Or Citigroup? What if JPMorgan bought Morgan Stanley?

Two things would have changed: "Too big to fail" would have been supercharged, but the odds of failure (without a government backstop) would have been reduced.

Possible Combination

Total Assets of Combined Companies

Goldman Sachs-Wachovia

$1.6 trillion

Goldman Sachs-Citigroup

$3 trillion

Morgan Stanley-JPMorgan Chase Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Morgan Housel is a Motley Fool contributor.

Be the first to read Morgan Housel's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
The very best in financial advice from Dave Ramsey, Larry Kudlow, Motely Fool and many more plus Dilbert!