@1fnh+173llQKS it was a "merger" in name only so that they could keep the WF name, but it was a 100% takeover by Norwest. WF's management all retired or left within a few years.
8 replies (most recent on top)
@1fnh Interesting reading you would be the board's report on the fake account scandal. You may not recognize all the names, but it's a fascinating read. I think you'll find it wasn't the merger that was bad per se – plus it was really a purchase and most of execs on the buyer side (Norwest) were part of the deal. They hung on to their toxic culture and creepy sales practices – and the rest is history. Interestingly, D–k K didn't factor much as I recall.
Interesting question and informative answers. as someone relatively new to the bank I had no idea about the culture or when things started to unravel.
Sad story but probably a good case study of how not to merge...
Norwest and Koveceich. He came over from Citibank. But Citi to their credit was a true white shoe commercial bank back in those days, pre Sandy Weill.
It was already going on when I joined the bank under Kovacevich. He seems to have skated by the whole thing.
Kovacevich and Norwest.
Remember, they (Norwest) grew from zero to #1 bank in the USA in no time, then they gobled up ton of branches/banks and WFB as well. If you look at our stock price today, it inherits NorWest's price history prior to '98.
Norwest.
I joined WF online customer service in 1999 and they were already pushing 8 is great, and refer to a sales banker any chance you had. Everyone said it was the Norwest way.
It all occurred under Norwest management.
See this: @qyq+173Frzw7