The buffet article really has me thinking. He more than likely wanted a CEO from tech. Honesty and trust were what used to lure in new customers within the financial services industry. Our marketing seems to be selling that wells is the company that you can trust your small business account with. Anyone notice we are the only institution still selling that?
Meanwhile competitors specifically BAC and Chase sell new smart services which imo is what the modern customer wants. People know the honest trustworthy bank is a sham so what services do you have? What can your app do? If you’re going to do me at least take me to dinner.
Buffet knows that’s what customers want and if you get a tech CEO then you’re going to be plugged in with new advancements and fresh ideas. Yes there are a lot of poor middle managers just collecting checks but the main reason this company is going in the wrong direction is...it just feels old.
29 replies (most recent on top)
Post ID: @4yrm+17tSCL9j
Thank you!
I remember rushing in to work on the day the signs for the upcoming Innovation Lab went up, across the hall from the recently opened new coffee shop with employees milling about relaxing and chatting. More employees were sitting in the hall in newly installed ultra modern chairs and a sofa, visiting with each other. All the time in the world lol. My friend, who I was walking/running in with, said “Time to sell your Wells Fargo stock”, and we both laughed. Turns out, she was right!
Post ID: @1znl+17tSCL9j
Its called the Innovation Lab, had to look it up. Reminded me of the child's waiting room at an upscale auto dealership. Last few months before the pandemic hit there was little activity. I suspect, with no proof, that people were just using it for meetings.
It’s hard to proof that WB was the cause for WF issues now. But like you said, there is no denying that he knew about what was going on and did nothing to stop it. Which makes him as guilty as all the other CEO who were fired and had to pay penalties. What penalty did WB pay? He gets away from it clean like nothing happened while all the employees and shareholders are now suffering for many more years to come. I hope there isn’t good lesson from all this. There defiantly needs to be more strict regulations and responsibly when it comes to majority share holders of a publicly traded FDIC financial Institutions.
To Post ID: @4gxp+17tSCL9j from Post ID: @3yim+17tSCL9j
Strange world we’re living in, but I’m glad we got a chance to talk it out. Sometimes I find there is substance behind someone’s initial post once we expand on our thoughts. We don’t need to agree on all points but I do like to believe in the general good intentions of most people. People don’t always show their best selves online, including me, so I get that too.
We are actually not that far apart on some of our views.
I wanted to let you know there is a good post on Seeking Alpha today:
“Wells Fargo: Warren Buffett Doesn’t Want It - And You Shouldn’t Either“
I don’t think you will necessarily agree with the article but it is the comments afterwards that you might enjoy reading. Lots of opposing viewpoints that are fun to read. One comment kind of mirrors your thoughts in that he says:
“FYI, Buffet owned WFC all through the new accounts scandal and did nothing to influence the CEO to come down hard against this practice when it first hit the news via an article on the subject somewhere around 2013 or 2014.“
Comment is not necessarily saying Warren supported/perpetuated the fraud, but more that he was complicit by not saying anything.
Best wishes.
@3yim+17tSCL9j. I get what you are saying that since he had more shares then anyone else he deserves to influence. But if that’s the case and since he was the majority shareholder who as you said has the right to exert control over the company. Shouldn’t he also take some kind of responsibility to what happened with WF while he was the majority shareholder who exerted much influence(bad or good). WB profited from WF more then anyone else. He had a lot of say of who will be CEO and a lot of influence on the DOB. D–k K, John S and Tim S will never admit that he influenced them to make bad executive decisions and the DOB will never admit to it. But, it would not shock me if In the future it was proven that indeed WB played a huge roll in WF downfall and profited big time.
In regards to WB not wanting another Wall Street CEO. Please tell me who WF should of gotten for CEO. No1 wanted that job. And I could see why. What WB wanted was for the old Guard to be in place. Yes. He wanted Tim Sloan! The same Tim Sloan who was one of the highest executives(CFO, COO, President) in Wells for 2 decades and reported to John S. We do not need to be rocket scientist to figure out the connection.
WB wanted the next CEO to work out of California? Why is that a deal breaker of where he works out of? That’s 19th century thinking. Most of the work can be done from anywhere in the world. He does not need to physically sit at a desk that is located in California, that’s absurd. Oh and how Covid, so.... Anyways, good point made by you and I personally do not think CS was the best choice but Wells has no Choice. And I do not think that CEO or board members should be cozy with the largest shareholders. That’s just feels wrong to me and conflict of interest. Hopefully there will be rules in the future where that will be illegal.
Post ID: @3qfo+17tSCL9j
Thank you for coming back. I didn’t want to waste my time arguing with you if you were a troll.
Regarding “He is not supposed to have any influence on the board or CEO” in your initial post: This is incorrect. Shareholders can have considerable influence in a business because they own it. A shareholder who owns a majority stake can exert control over the the company. It happens all the time.
So my first response was that someone who doesn’t understand the very basics of shareholders having part ownership and rights in the companies in which they own shares probably should not be taking potshots at Warren Buffet, a man with 60 years of investment experience worth and worth $80 billion. Versus your experience which is ...??? And then calling him an Old Fart just shows general disrespect which makes your viewpoint even less credible.
Having said that, I was disturbed that Warren defended Wells Fargo after their fraudulent activity in 2016. That was a big letdown. So though your facts are wrong, I can see a little bit more of where you might be coming from after reading your second post.
If you have something valid to say, you would be more persuasive if you can show that you know what you are talking about. What is the point behind posting anything if you aren’t interested in being persuasive? Unless you are just looking to be inflammatory.
It’s not that Warren didn’t want or bless Charlie. It’s that he advised the Board to not bring in another Wall Street executive. Back in April 2019, he specifically advised the Board to NOT bring in an exec from JP Morgan or GSCO because it would draw too much scrutiny and anger from Congress. “More of the same“ would not be a smart move because it would make it that much harder to get the asset cap removed. And, with the benefit of hindsight, it is starting to look like that was good advice. Wells is not going to be able to grow as long as we are under the asset cap. And he thought it was outrageous that Charlie be allowed to run a troubled California bank from New York.
So, as the biggest shareholder in Wells Fargo, he has the right to sell if he thinks the Board is not making responsible decisions. And I don’t know anyone who could responsibly draw a line between his selling his stake now and suggesting he was somehow complicit in the fraudulent activities at Wells Fargo.
And Charlie not attempting to maintain a relationship with the bank’s largest shareholder could prove to be yet another pompous misstep on his part. If Warren exits his position in its entirety, it is widely thought that will be a big negative for Wells Fargo.
You are out of your mind if you think a regular person can proof that WB was the influence behind what has transpired in WF for the last 25 years. It’s called speculations, I never said I have evidence. That’s why I said that DOJ needs to open up an investigation and determine if WB had any kind of influence on WF DOB/past CEO’s. You don’t have to be a genius to put the 2 and 2 together. It started with D–k K, followed by John S, Tim S. All of the previous WF CEO’s hires were blessed by WB. Most likely And IMO the DOB and the past CEO’s took instructions from WB. Yes, Again, I have no evidence of that but I believe it will be beneficial for DOJ to open up an investigation. The only CEO that he didn’t bless was CS! Because he most likely knew that CS will not be influenced by him. So, he sold most of his stock and probably all of his stock when CS got hired. Just follow the money!
The famed investor's conglomerate originally spent about $290 million between 1989 and 1990 to acquire a 9.7% stake in the bank. It grew that ownership position as high as 13.3% in 1994, and held as many as 500 million Wells Fargo shares in 2015 and 2016.Sep 8, 2020
Norwest, 1986–1989, vice chairman and head of banking group; 1986–1993, chief operations officer; 1989–1993, president; 1993–1998, chief executive officer; 1995–1998, chairman; Wells Fargo & Company, 1998–2001, president; 1998–, chief executive officer; 2001–,
■ As of 2004 Richard M. Kovacevich was leading a $334 billion diversified financial services company that offered banking, insurance, investments, mortgages, and consumer finance services from its storefronts, on the Internet, and through other distribution channels. Although the headquarters were in San Francisco, Kovacevich's approach was decentralization, each local store acting as a center for customers' financial service needs. Wells Fargo was the leading mortgage originator in the United States and the second largest domestic service provider, having almost $400 billion in assets in 2004. In 2003 Wells Fargo was the fifth largest U.S. bank in assets. Forbes highlighted Wells Fargo as the 12th largest U.S. corporation in a composite ranking of revenue, profit, assets, and market value; among the top 50 in revenue among all companies in all industries; and among the 10 largest charitable givers in corporate America. Kovacevich wrote for the company Web site: "We learn from each other. That's one of the advantages of being big." In 2004 Wells Fargo assets reached $397 billion with a $96 billion market value of stock. The company ranked number one in the industry in the areas of retail banking,
Yah- I get that. My husband woke me up with his snoring.
Am serious regarding Post ID: @2wck+17tSCL9j taking some responsibility for their post. I think it is from a troll, but I’m willing to give them the chance to substantiate their statements.
Not everyone lives on the board, give someone time to reply. LOL @ expecting a response in the middle of the night
Post ID: @2wck+17tSCL9j
Crickets? Your silence proves my point.
Post ID: @2wck+17tSCL9j
How about posting some facts and data to support your claims?
Most responsible contributors, unless they are just spewing worthless nonsense, use relevant well-explained facts to substantiate their statements.
In the long run it’s better that WB is out of WF hair. For all you know, he might of played a big influence on all the past CEO’s and their decision makings. He is not supposed to have any influence on the board or CEO. I think DOJ should open up an investigation on WB and see if he played any role at what happened there in the last 20 years. CS is right not to kiss his ring. Good riddance the old Fa*rt is out.
I doubt Buffett wanted a tech CEO. He certainly would want one that would be forward-thinking in tech, but tech CEOs aren't familiar with running organizations as large and regulated as WF, and if they are they're not leaving their current job for this downgrade.
Buffett probably wanted a solid non-Wall St. CEO since Wall St. is only going to worry about what Charlie is worried about, while a non-Wall St. CEO would be able to think more dynamically. Buffet leaving WF is worrisome to say the least.
Just bring back Scott Dillion to lead the transformation and replaform of hogan!
Yes you are 100 percent right! At this point they need to differentiate themselves but i dont see anything even close.
They hire old banking people from another old bank so they will have the same results.
They need someone up and coming with new ideas and ability to lead a huge tractor trailer like this and turn it into a tesla. Now they are just going from one tractor trailer to another one.
Guess board may need to be replaced too, even Warren BUffet knows these old ways of thinking and doing things no longer work!
Hey I went from WFA to the bank side in another city a couple years back.
Is that collaboration playpen still running? I can’t remember the name of it.
It was a good concept, in theory, but it never played right. The guy running it was a little haughty. But that was when the firm was trying new things, attempting to engage their employees, and think in new ways, move forward. I miss those days.
I give Wells a 50/50 chance of surviving. And that’s me, in a good mood, trying to be positive. Catch me on a different day, where I’m not trying to be objective, 25%.
While the world is rapidly moving forward, trying to keep pace with customers’ ever-changing needs, we are stuck trying to fix yesterday’s mistakes. Can not grow, in fact we must shrink. Can not invest in technology and innovation, because we are in cost-cutting mode. Everyone says to give it a year to two years’s to get the asset cap lifted. The world isn’t stopping for us while we take that time out. We will fall yet further behind our competitors. And that’s if we can even get our act together enough to get the cap lifted. I think this is potentially a last ditch effort to save the bank. Warren sees it.
Any answers on cost-cutting and the asset cap are vague, and are being pushed off in to the future. Charlie and John know that is not going to play well. Could that be for a positive reason? I don’t think so. Either they are hiding something, or they truly don’t know the answers. That’s not comforting. I’ve been down that road with two other firms, and the outcome was bad in both cases. One firm, where our leaders were giving fuzzy answers, sold us. The other firm went out of business. (Unfortunately the first firm sold to the second firm.)
Wells is trying to remain viable in a world where yesterday’s news is irrelevant. If you’re not moving forward, you’re falling back. I don’t think the forecast is as rosy as some of the faithful want to believe.
Post ID: @tih+17tSCL9j. and. Post ID: @vlr+17tSCL9j
It is good, that you as front end users, are having a positive experience.
I will try my best to answer.
I can only speak to Wells Fargo Advisors, which would also include online trading. We are running on a vendor’s system that is severely out- of - date. That system is from the 80s, if I’m being generous. I would describe it as a VCR. We have more than 3000 requests for updates/fixes/enhancements in the queue, many going back 15 years or more. So all processes are hampered by a myriad of required manual work-arounds by the employees, to keep it all functioning half-way on the front end. You wouldn’t believe it is you saw it. Wells Fargo could reduce their staff by 1/3 tomorrow if our systems were adequate. Additionally, since that system is so out-of-date, it takes even more work and manual work-arounds to tack on more modern programs. Imagine trying to watch Netflix on your VCR. Many necessary improvements simply can not and never will be done.
Literally every process is tied to this dinosaur of a system. I could go into more detail, but while Wells Fargo has been saving money putting bandaids on the aging system, which we don’t even own, other banks and brokerage firms have been investing in their own technology. And then they are in control of how it is updated and when.
The weird thing regarding modernizing tech is there’s no centralized direction. No, ok, we’re a Java shop or .NET or Node/React, no shared library repo across the bank, it just seems completely random from division to division and team to team. I figure this is going to change, but even compared to our financial competitors it seems really cobbled together from a random patchwork of tech.
I'm a tech guy in St Louis and yea the website is quality gotta give em that but I remember couple years back Wells got very concerned with competitors like Ameritrade and their slick apps that kids like because of the control provided. So Wells spent of lot of money to create this collaboration playpen center on the St Louis campus for the purpose of developing tech modernization ideas, new apps and the like. But like most Wells initiatives it seemed ill planned, poorly executed and after its overblown startup with lots of activity it quietly wound down with no tangible results. In my humble opinion the Wells back-end physical and logical data infrastructure inefficiency, reliance on 60 year old batch technology and partnering with Thompson/refinitiv are all major impediments to modernizing tech.
BofA was never a Hogan customer, the core platform was homegrown and replatformed in 2016.
WF core platform has never been replatformed
You don’t seem to know very much about bank technology
Customers care when online banking goes down
Customers care when it takes too long to credit a refund or paycheck to their account
Customers care when their account is charged fees by mistake
Customers care when fraudulent accounts are opened in their name
Customers care whether or not the phone banker they call with a problem knows the answer and can fix it
Those things are all infrastructure and all of them happen in part due to aging, the UI does none of the actual work
So chase and BofA have somehow migrated off Hogan already? I agree the backend is old. Let’s be clear I’m talking about what customers care about and that’s what they use. They don’t care of the patchwork behind
A UI is nice, but the core banking platform is Hogan, presently running on COBOL. The patchwork infrastructure and core platform takes forever to update, has security holes and is highly dependent on batch and manual processes. Testing is a complete nightmare of spreadsheets and confusion. The API gateway is an interesting topic, very political discussions trying to get updates made there.
Ok so HOW is wells behind on tech? Be specific. I see the poster providing comments on the app and online being good. I tend to agree.
"WF is severely behind basically all of our competitors in tech."
Ugh, you think? We are, based on my estimates, at least 8 YEARS behind.
I see comments time to time like @keo saying WFC is far behind tech. If we purely look at the consumer mobile and online experience, WFC is way better than JPM, BAC and C. I understand behind the scenes the infrastructure is frail and old and needs refreshing. In pure UI experience as I sit here today a user of all major banks apps, WFC is best in class. What do they have WFC does not? And I understand on the wholesale side CEO is also best in class as is the API gateway. So not sure how WFC is behind ....
WF is severely behind basically all of our competitors in tech. They need a major revamp. The problem is, tech isn’t our focus with all of the regulatory issues (and it can’t be). The hope is that we can get out from under the regulatory challenges before chasing everyone away while they revamp their interfaces and technological capabilities.
We are so far behind and continue to lose ground everyday.
WF marketing has a tough job. And ML, well, he’s not exactly a cutting edge mind. If Wells was serious about marketing they would tap into the N.Y. talent pool for a new CMO and ad agency, but marketing is obviously not a priority now, considering they seem to be sticking with what’s not working.