Live data from Hacker News

How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

asktrim.com

11–20 of 159 posts

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#11
In the same vein, Sheila Bair is an amazing human being. She was chair of the FDIC during the TARP funding and bank bailouts. She wrote a captivating book on the battle against the corruption of banks and the difficulties in policing issues with government funding.

Book link: https://www.amazon.com/Bull-Horns-Fighting-Street-Itself/dp/...

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#12

I absolutely love Senator Warren. That being said, the notion that the stock price of Wells Fargo could be significantly impacted by this scheme (which is central to Ms. Warren's argument) is not well founded. Wells Fargo makes 86 billion in revenue per year. Even if 10 million accounts were made and each made a thousand dollars -- (incredibly generous) ... over the course of 5 years this accounts for 1 billion in re…

If you can call "meet the goals or get fired" incentive setting. Forcing employees to carry out some cack-headed upper management initiative on pain of losing their jobs isn't that.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#13
post #9

I appreciate that Warren didn't let Stumpf talk his way out of taking any responsibility for the actions of his employees and made a clear argument as to why he should be held accountable. Unfortunately, it seems the primary reason he resigned was because the public outrage was loud enough. It seems that until CEOs are personally held accountable via fines or prison (as Warren suggests) we won't see a very big change…

Carrie Tolstedt is also retiring at the end of the year with $125M.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#14

I absolutely love Senator Warren. That being said, the notion that the stock price of Wells Fargo could be significantly impacted by this scheme (which is central to Ms. Warren's argument) is not well founded. Wells Fargo makes 86 billion in revenue per year. Even if 10 million accounts were made and each made a thousand dollars -- (incredibly generous) ... over the course of 5 years this accounts for 1 billion in re…

If the CEO shouldn't be held liable for the fraud then why shouldn't the ones who signed off on all the fake accounts? Didn't they directly benefit from inflating the numbers?

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#15
post #4

This is good. Articles like this however always seem to recall the subprime mortgage crisis, when "too big to fail" sheltered CEOs and banks from much fallout. I would like to express to Sen Warren, and others, that a more fragmented & transparent financial system is important-- but much less than the broadband & tech sector. Google has 1.6B[0] users of a total of 3.8[1] internet users. too big to fail is 42% of the…

The difference in your comparison though is the internet still works if Google goes under. If a TBTF bank goes under [1] the financial system can halt/implode. Which is the main argument to break up the banks to a level where there isn't total-system fragility.

[1] due to their own reckless behavior / Capitalism on the upside, Socialism on the downside.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#16

I absolutely love Senator Warren. That being said, the notion that the stock price of Wells Fargo could be significantly impacted by this scheme (which is central to Ms. Warren's argument) is not well founded. Wells Fargo makes 86 billion in revenue per year. Even if 10 million accounts were made and each made a thousand dollars -- (incredibly generous) ... over the course of 5 years this accounts for 1 billion in re…

You make a good point about how hard it is to properly incentivize a large group of people. Stumpf and leadership made a best estimate for what goals and incentives were necessary to reach performance. However, the key is that when employees began voicing concerns over what was being done they were ignored and in some cases intimidated and blacklisted from working in banking. That is why they should be held accountable. It's because of their lack of positive action when the negative outcomes from their incentive program began appearing.

http://fortune.com/2016/10/09/wells-fargo-work-culture/

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#17
post #9

I appreciate that Warren didn't let Stumpf talk his way out of taking any responsibility for the actions of his employees and made a clear argument as to why he should be held accountable. Unfortunately, it seems the primary reason he resigned was because the public outrage was loud enough. It seems that until CEOs are personally held accountable via fines or prison (as Warren suggests) we won't see a very big change…

Bullshit he resinged!

at 63, he's the oldest ceo of all the top 5 banks. Stumpf did't resign, he retired!

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#18
post #9

I appreciate that Warren didn't let Stumpf talk his way out of taking any responsibility for the actions of his employees and made a clear argument as to why he should be held accountable. Unfortunately, it seems the primary reason he resigned was because the public outrage was loud enough. It seems that until CEOs are personally held accountable via fines or prison (as Warren suggests) we won't see a very big change…

Bullshit he resinged! at 63, he's the oldest ceo of all the top 5 banks. Stumpf did't resign, he retired!

haha, fair point. He is probably going to go into consulting and make some extra money for those green fees.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#19
post #9

I appreciate that Warren didn't let Stumpf talk his way out of taking any responsibility for the actions of his employees and made a clear argument as to why he should be held accountable. Unfortunately, it seems the primary reason he resigned was because the public outrage was loud enough. It seems that until CEOs are personally held accountable via fines or prison (as Warren suggests) we won't see a very big change…

Anyone who has worked in a company of any size knows it'd be down near impossible to know the inner working at all levels of the organization. So, yes, the guy is accountable and needs to lose his job. But the idea that he should go to prison for something like this is ludicrous.
Post reply on HN