you know, what really happened with wachovia is that we were told that the only problems with wachoviaonsumer loans. in fact, we discovered there were big problems with commercial real estate and investment banking. we asked for another 48 to 72 hours so we could address those issues. we were told that we didn't have that time, that it had to be done that night. for some reason that totally escapes me, citi corp. was allowed to bid, and i still believe our bid that night was so there's some very strange things going on at that time and it was actually beneficial that citicorp didn't have those kinds of problems. >> we heard earlier ask mcneil ask about the terms of unlocking value. in mexico, we saw a successful feel. what would be your take on getting this ship righted at citi? should they be ipo'ing? >> i think having minority shareholders when you're trying to run a business, especially when they're outside shareholder. i'm biassed, i think banks could be basic commercial bankers, you should just do regular commercial banking. if you get back to the basics i think citi corp can be s

she didn't like the deal he was cutting with wachovia. to buy wachovia this is before citigroup needed a second bite of the apple, they were going under because i remember the story -- i was working on a sunday. we broke the story on the air on a sunday. what happened was they tried to get the wachovia deal done. could only do it with federal assistance. wells did an end around around vikram pandit and went to wachovia and bought it without their assistance and when that happened the bank run began on citigroup and they needed to go to washington for bailout. [talking over each other] lori: thank you so much. melissa: mitt romney has -- president obama has moved away with three weeks and will the president -- presidential election. should you jump in to coal now? we will talk about that next. lori: stock foldable the nice rally underway with significant movers. here are some s&p winners. murphy oil of 9%. fossil up 7%. first solar an interesting alternative. we are about to talk about cold up almost 8% at the moment. back with more after

they still got the wachovia deal, which was citigroup and they were the ones that got trashed by the regulators, they weren't near as hostile. and they couldn't close the wachovia deal. >> jeff, let me ask you this question, you're talking about regulators, you're talking aboabout the view that wall street had with d.c., when you look at jamie diamondiamond, if you loo the job that they have done over the last couple of years, successfully leading the business, maybe it's time to acknowledge that we looked at them incorrectly in '09 and 2010? >> that's part of the job. ken lewis of bank of america, when asked about imputed interest rates, people got thoroughly confused, he won in congress. jamie dimon steps up to the plate and frames the question for her and answers it and holds jpmorgan up to a mixed score card. you can do the same thing at the auto industry and take a look at rick wagoner. the ceo makes a difference. there's a certain symbolic and it's intertwined. the intel role between the swim bollism and the substance of leader ship. and they can deliver that here. they can try

we took strong hit in 2008 when wachovia and bank of america both got hit pretty strong. that said, it's still finance town. >> ann in aurora, colorado, is our next caller. she's on our line for independents. go ahead, ann. >> hi, thank you. i used to work for one of the large financial firms and interested because north carolina is a large financial center and romney touted as businessman to get the economy going. but he said that he's going to reverse frank dodd and i think he was pandering to tea partiers after that. so i think that was maintained to pandering to the independents. as best i can tell, he and ryan's policy assimilates accounts in britain, which is now in a full-blown recession. so i think no one can tell what romney is truly saying or speaking. he changes frequently. i think he says whatever to close the deal on wall street, and i think also he's saying anything to close the deal to the presidency. >> ann in aaurora, colorado. gideon moore gorks ahead. >> i think mitt rom itny -- romney is pretty straightforward where he will be pointing his presidency t

. >> wachovia for its for slavery? >> they thought there is no way to nationalize because they thought the state would have to decide. illinois 1/2 to make that decision. the dread scott decision said american citizens take their property and to any territory. the court might have said to take the slave property through a state through illinois to someplace else. that was not the case but states have laws they would not allow them to come and. based nine dread scott they said that it is a far cry. i know think it could have been done. but few have ever voted to put slavery into place. >> this is a good example of a failure to compromise for good you have an opinion on the country's ability to compromise that people see as a problem to lincoln's and failure for compromise to save our country? >> historians tend to get questions like that. i have enough trouble understanding the past. [laughter] the future is beyond me. the president is beyond me much less the future. [laughter] >> henry clay o.r. negative no less -- web

or is it when you're absolutely gouging -- >> remember, it goes beyond wachovia as well.member who was really involved with that? golden west. >> there's a bigger argument around golden west that's very complicated about whether they were actually responsible for the loans or actually once golden west was taken over by wachovia whether some of those things happened. there is a debate -- >> what were their names? >> the sandler family. >> are they friends of yours or something? >> no, but i've looked at this extensively. there was a great debate. >> ken lewis was the guy. or ken thompson. and he's supposedly called it a home run and it turned into a horrific out. into a horrific o where, you know -- >> we were talking before the show about the idea that this was a wachovia deal. . >> yeah, by hands that feed. >> citigroup by sheila bair. >> wells did us a favor, didn't they? >> wells helped us. >> right. >> exactly like last week. does that make sense to you? >> i'm not sure how you can be held accountable for behavior for institutions that you really had no regulatory aut

institutions was playing the role of the bank but they didn't have the advantages of bank of america or wachovia. >> absolutely. they were not actually a bank if you will. it's important to point held under their charter of the threat, wamu had to make a percentage of mortgages. it wasn't that just one day they decided to make mortgages. they were always making mortgages because they had to they just went down a different road than they had been previously. >> he needed to things with a passion, mortgage lending and investment bankers. take that for what it's worth. things started to change. he changed a very tight-knit management group started to grow apart. maybe you want to walk us through that. >> two things started to happen at once. this is a really crucial time frame for wamu. kerry killinger began to really believe that wamu should be in east coast institution and became obsessed with the notion of having the bank compete with these chongging and banks on the east coast and at the same time he began to change personally. he left his wife of 30 years and she had been credited with keeping

sheila scuttled the merger between citi and wachovia. i think vikram would be a hero today had that merger happened. it would have created a lot of great benefits for wells fargo. the deal was done. citi stood behind it. sheila snatched it away. >> rob, you also spoke on the phone just as maria did with vikram pandit today. what's your read? he essentially told you the very same thing he told maria. it was his idea. it was time to go. he accomplished all he was after. do you believe him, and why wha -- what do you think is going on? >> i think this is not all that exciting. in one sense, it's certainly a disorderly departure, but it doesn't feel to me like there's something we're going to find out, some sort of cockroach that's going to come out of the woodpile. feels more like these two guys basically didn't see eye to eye. from michael o'neil's perspective, it's great to turn over a new leaf as you're going back to another discussion with the regulators. so in a sense, they just had a spoiled relationship. don't forget, earlier this ye

they suffered losses bette wachovia was acquired wamu was acquired there was no great crisis they wererisis that their side is to not cause it. i am an agreement with the fact if the bank is considered too big to fail in has financial advantages. but those could be addressed at would be entailed to break them up. the analogy would have been earlier to standard oil that was great it had no competitors that was the problem banks have plenty of competitors and not only in the united states but abroad. herein is no analogy and with the causing huge problems for ourselves and our economy unless someone to show me the real benefits. >> i think the presidential candidates could take a cue not to talk over one another. but now there is. would you like to get us started? >> we should raise requirements who fights against them? the organization has argued strenuously on behalf of the biggest banks if we increase capital requirements they will do real the economy. there is no question the largest banks are powerful politically they mostly resisted even with basel iii -- can i talk? >> at this poi

. >> wachovia. >>ed w ed whwho'd they have? securities business was a combination of a large number of retail brokers who, that had been purchased over a number of years. >> ag edwards. >> some of the regional places, yes. >> the last and largest would have been ag edwards. the almost everen securities, the former kamper securities. >> kiter and proulx and payne weber. who is the biggest, bank of america or morgan stanley? >> that depends on whether you look by the number of brokers or revenues, but i'd say that really the three that dominate the business today are bank of america, merrill lynch, morgan stanley, smith barney, and wells fargo. >> oh, really. you would think there's leverage there, because one of these days the market's going to go up over time and you figure, i always want to go back to 1982 and get those 20 years back. i don't know if we ever will. david, appreciate it. >> my pleasure. >> good to talk to you. >>> when we come back we'll talk about the real cost of college. some figures show some of the youngest

wells ended up with wachovia. there was a lot of tension. what i thought was so significant it was over. now goldman, it was over. they got through the crises. citi had put -- >> listen, we'll hear lots of spec and i'll start speculating. there's been talk, libor investigation. i've been getting a lot of questions about that. it's a fair point at least. have no idea whether there's anything. my sense is probably not. you don't know. again, to come back to the big things. usually you leave at the end. year if you would do it. you have some sort of transition. no doubt this was forced in some way. they failed the stress test. had the vote against this com. and morgan smith stanley barney wasn't a great deal. >> in order to get rid of us -- >> where is the government now? i'm confused on that. you guys are -- >> think the government is playing role. >> t.a.r.p. is out. >> bottom line on the share performance basis, since he took office december 11 of 2007, split adjusted, stock is down 89%. his tenure has not been kind. >> what's the comparison

someone mentioned wachovia. not so much. i want to make one slightly on a related point. we somewhat mischaracterized the study. it is sort of an ivory tower view. the industry comes back and says the opposite, the world will end. it is somewhere in the metal. -- in the middle. that is appropriate and expected. >> i have this sense of deja vu all over again. starting at about 1981, i was part of the treasury group that argued that we could separate banking activities, that is those that are insured deposit taking from other kinds of transactions such as securit ies, and we proposed such a thing in 1981. it was adopted in 1999. 18 years later. now people are dissatisfied with that. but in fact, what the purpose was a bear, was to separate from deposit taking, other kinds of activities that are important in our financial system. it turns out that since 1981, and this was an idea of donna who was the secretary at the time, the securities industry has swamped the industry. they have produced about 1.5 trillion dollars in actual lending to the real economy. i am not talking ab

they were trying -- sheila bair killed the merger trying to buy wachovia and they basically had a dealls fargo was able to snatch it from under vikram pandit's nose thanks to sheila bair, putting it with citigroup was not the right move. this guy has led a very controversial few years. in some respects like is a very stern critic but he has got good background on this thing. the question was not if, it was when they would do it. the timing is typical city grew. you would think they would wait for the end of the year and pull the plug on the guy a day after earnings. that is typical of citigroup. i will say this. another reason i am holding stock. dennis: sounds like somebody quit. thanks very much for your report. we will hear more all they i am sure. continuing with coverage of vikram pandit's exit, james lee been vault joins us. you own shares of the company. is it time for break above citigroup? >> i think so. i will not throw vikram pandit under the bus. there is a question about the board's culpability and everything for the last four years. vikram pandit came in as things were go

look, wachovia went away, there was a big tussle. >> this was much bigger and interconnected. >> it couldn'tthat vikram said we'd get this to be an international bank, check, we did that. we'll get it so get it so net i margins are better and can fund much better. he did that. this was finally when i thought they had put it together. now maybe he's one of those guys that say listen i got the promised land i'll hand it over. that quarter yesterday was so strong. i really felt this was upgraded today by raymond james. i went back over the quarter last night. citi down to 9%. >> listen, the morgan stanley-smith barney transaction, we had the big writedown as a result of that. that's not fireable offense i wouldn't imagine in any way plus you've known about that for quite some time. >> he wanted the bank to be 75% international. he envisioned the bank one day that it would have its annual meeting in mexico city or singapore. it wouldn't be constrained by the four walls of america. >> the guy we need to hear from is the chairman. >> everyone has an opinion. >> hey guys, everybody has an opinion b

what did quote doing their job due for the shareholder value of washington mutual, wachovia?let alone anyone of the very biggest banks which are trading at very small fractions of their book value. every one of the boards of directors of every one of those big banks and everyone of the ceos, including some incumbents were not doing their jobs, nor were there regulators. >> nor were the boards. >> i agree. and i read in sheila bair's book that she felt in october 2008, the stock price was down 92% during mr. candon's tenure in the job. where were. weber board of directors? where are the board of directors today at the best way is break up the banks. compare price-to-book for the megabanks compared to many inside banks. again, this is what they are saying. by them and make them more efficient and get a better shareholder return. who is opposed to that? >> there has to be some long-term economic plan of how we'll manage the debt over the next 10 years but if we don't convey that to the market, we are setting ourselves up again. >> i will conclude by saying, someone was talking a

wachovia? any of the biggest banks which are trading at a very small fractions of their book value?every one of the board directors and every one of the ceos including some incumbents were not doing their jobs nor were their regulators. >> the stepped down two years ago and the crisis she fell in october of 2008 it is down 92% during the tenure in the job where was the board of directors today. they are going to compare the price of the books and again this is what was lost for example. >> they will make them more efficient. >> pilat fiduciary responsibility of a larger scale in this town there has to be a long term economic plan on how we are brand manager over the next ten years if we don't convey that for the market we are setting ourselves up again. >> i will conclude by saying that someone was talking about the issue of why the u.s. dollar was the strongest currency and by the treasury was the most sought after global currency, and an expert said you have to realize that the u.s. may simply be the most attractive horse in the glue factory. we should try a levesque to get out of

wachovia let alone the biggest banks trading at very small fractions of their book value? every one of the board of directors of those banks in devotee of the ceos including some incumbents were not doing their jobs nor were the regulators. >> the stepped down two years ago and i read in sheila bair's books that she felt that in october of 2008 the stock price is down 92%. where was the board of directors, where are the board of directors today? break up the banks and look at the mega banks compared to the medium-sized banks. >> by then, make them more efficient. >> if you want response of a larger scale in this count the have to be long-term economic plan of how they will manage the debt over the next ten years. if we don't convey that to the market we are setting ourselves up again. >> i will conclude by saying someone was talking about the issue of why the u.s. dollar was the strongest currency in a way that treasury is the most sought after global currency and an expert said you have to realize the u.s. may simply be the most attractive bourse in the glue factory. plea