Citibank Could Write Down $24b; Lay Off 20,000 Workers...

[Logan13]

CITIBANK COULD WRITE DOWN $24B; LAY OFF 20,000 WORKERS...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/22639976

Citigroup plans to announce a writedown of as much as $24 billion and layoffs that could total as much as 24,000 due to subprime and credit-related losses, CNBC has learned.

Citigroup plans to announce a $24 billion writedown and layoffs that could total as much as 24,000.

The plans will be unveiled Tuesday by Citigroup's new CEO, Vikram S. Pandit, after the banking giant reports fourth-quarter earnings. At the same time, Citigroup could also announce that it is cutting its dividend payment.

Citigroup is likely to cut between 17,000 and 24,000 positions over the course of the year through a combination of layoffs, attrition and selling off businesses as part of Pandit's cost-cutting plan, sources said. Previously, it was estimated that the layoffs could reach 20,000.

Pandit is looking to avoid taking a charge to earnings that's usually associated with large-scale layoffs, which is one reason he's considering a number of staff-cutting initiatives besides outright firings. It's unclear if he'll announce a specific number of job cuts on Tuesday.

A Citigroup spokesman had no immediate comment.

Citigroup also intends to raise as much as $15 billion from various foreign and domestic entities including Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Citigroup's largest individual shareholder, as America's biggest bank grapples with heavy mortgage market losses.

Alwaleed has owned his Citi stake since the early 1990s and helped engineer a previous rescue plan for the bank more than a dozen years ago. According to a report on the Wall Street Journal's Web site, he is likely to keep his total stake in the bank below 5 percent to avoid regulatory scrutiny.

By raising so much captial, CEO Pandit is hoping layoffs can be kept to a minimum.

Although word of the expected layoffs was having little impact on Citigroup Citigroup IncC
28.84 0.28 +0.98% NYSE

[C 28.84 0.28 (+0.98%) ] shares, the company's options were among the most actively traded Monday. The activity was most concentrated in the January contract, implying investors are positioning for an announcement Tuesday, according to Andrew Wilkinson, a senior market analyst at Interactive Brokers. However, some investors also were taking defensive positions in the February contract with traders entering long positions on a total volume of more than 12,000 lots at the 27.50 strike, he said.


[MER 55.86 1.17 (+2.14%) ] is seeking about $4 billion in a second capital raising. According to Financial Times, the Kuwait Investment Authority is expected to be a significant investor in the deal. A deal could be announced as soon as midweek, the FT reports.

Merrill has already begun laying off people, but layoffs will be minimal. Eight hundred people are expected to leave, with a number of employees already heading for the exits because of diappointment at the size of bonuses. Merrill's writedown is expected to be in the neighborhood of $12 billion to $15 billion as newly appointed CEO John Thain raises funds from around the world. (Merrill Losses Could Hit $15 Billion).

China In Or Out?

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier Saturday that China Development Bank (CDB) is among a few other investors to join Alwaleed for the rescue of Citigroup. But Vice Finance Minister Li Yong, who serves as a nonexecutive director of the China Investment Corp., said on Sunday that he was not aware of such a deal but that the CIC would not intervene in business decisions by the CDB, in which it owns a stake.

In November, Citi accepted $7.5 billion in new capital from the The Abu Dhabi Investment Authority only weeks after its former chief executive officer, Charles Prince, was forced out amid news of the heavy losses related to bad bets on mortgage securities and an ailing housing markets.

[Tock]

What chaps my butt about this is that the US government is gonna give them "Special Rights" (tax breaks) to help them weather this mess. And the executives responsible for the mess get off free . . .
While I, in my humble retail storefront, never got a single penny of tax benefit, no $$$ for starting a new business, no $$$ for nothing. If anything, the IRS and all them have been relentlessly collecting tax $$$ from me.

Geez . . . the gov't takes care of Big Business, and drains the blood out of the guys who make things work.
I know how this sorry state of affairs came to be -- but I sure as Hell didn't vote for it . . .

[damiongage]

I agree that there are major issues with the government....I do not want to see the ramifications of not stepping in to help weather this storm.

[alphaman]

What chaps my butt about this is that the US government is gonna give them "Special Rights" (tax breaks) to help them weather this mess. And the executives responsible for the mess get off free . . .
While I, in my humble retail storefront, never got a single penny of tax benefit, no $$$ for starting a new business, no $$$ for nothing. If anything, the IRS and all them have been relentlessly collecting tax $$$ from me.

Geez . . . the gov't takes care of Big Business, and drains the blood out of the guys who make things work.
I know how this sorry state of affairs came to be -- but I sure as Hell didn't vote for it . . .

I hear ya tock, but your storefront's stability has little to do with the stability of the overall GLOBAL economy. We're talking about the largest bank in the world, here.

Heck, I saw something last week that said they could lay off up to 327,000 employees!!

[Logan13]

What chaps my butt about this is that the US government is gonna give them "Special Rights" (tax breaks) to help them weather this mess. And the executives responsible for the mess get off free . . .
While I, in my humble retail storefront, never got a single penny of tax benefit, no $$$ for starting a new business, no $$$ for nothing. If anything, the IRS and all them have been relentlessly collecting tax $$$ from me.

Geez . . . the gov't takes care of Big Business, and drains the blood out of the guys who make things work.
I know how this sorry state of affairs came to be -- but I sure as Hell didn't vote for it . . .

I agree. But don't forget that the greenlight housing financing was the brain child of Congress. They did push the lending institutes into allowing loans that they would not have normally OK'd.

[damiongage]

I agree. But don't forget that the greenlight housing financing was the brain child of Congress. They did push the lending institutes into allowing loans that they would not have normally OK'd.

Which diverted a recesion....

[Logan13]

Which diverted a recesion....

not diverted, merely postponed.........

[alphaman]

Which diverted a recesion....

uh... you mean "stalled the coming of a recession".

[alphaman]

not diverted, merely postponed.........

jinx!!

[Logan13]

jinx!!

yes, concerned. Just think what 2009 could be like if a Democrat gets in office and actually tries to push their socialist agendas.........That shit is scary!

[damiongage]

not diverted, merely postponed.........

1-2 years in a postponement....nearly 7yrs is a diversion. Now, I agree there are now new problems stemming from actions taken to avoid the recession at that time. People are quick to blame the government for what it did back in the early 2000's to divert, or postpone if you so choose, a recession at that time. But back then everybody thought it was the best thing ever.


I believe that IF there is a recession...and that is a big IF. That it has to do with many sectors...not just the housing crunch.

[thegodfather]

yes, concerned. Just think what 2009 could be like if a Democrat gets in office and actually tries to push their socialist agendas.........That shit is scary!

Lol, isn't it funny that the United States would have the same initials as Russia did... The United States Socialist Republic... Hillary and Obama, Comrades for life...

[Logan13]

1-2 years in a postponement....nearly 7yrs is a diversion. Now, I agree there are now new problems stemming from actions taken to avoid the recession at that time. People are quick to blame the government for what it did back in the early 2000's to divert, or postpone if you so choose, a recession at that time. But back then everybody thought it was the best thing ever.


I believe that IF there is a recession...and that is a big IF. That it has to do with many sectors...not just the housing crunch.

My true concern in regards to our economy has to do with who gets into the White House in 2008. If taxes are raised, we WILL fall into a recession. Taxes would be raised so that a certain group gets healthcare, paid for by you and I. This way, they do not have to stop buying cell phones, 22" rims, and satelite TV as we will be flipping the bill for them..............

[damiongage]

My true concern in regards to our economy has to do with who gets into the White House in 2008. If taxes are raised, we WILL fall into a recession. Taxes would be raised so that a certain group gets healthcare, paid for by you and I. This way, they do not have to stop buying cell phones, 22" rims, and satelite TV as we will be flipping the bill for them..............

Hey...I got 22" rims, a cell phone, and satellite TV.......

But I also have a 780 credit score, own a mortgage company(see the bias in my opinion now), and pay $40k in taxes a yr....

I understand those concerns...they are mine as well. I would love to see All Government aid ended....except in extreme cases of non-self inflicted disablement. Someone who has paid taxes and worked their whole life...and then gets MS or something similar....help those people....We are do for a major government reform...The major area's that are causing issues are Oil, Natural Gas, Electricity....The things that the Government monopolizes.....weird huh.

[suprman09]

I guess I will not be taking the offer I got from Citi now.

[damiongage]

I guess I will not be taking the offer I got from Citi now.

They wouldn't hire you to lay you off. They could be filling othere areas....just becasuse GM lays off auto builders...doesn't mean they are not hiring sales people.....

[***xxx***]

the us is on very thin ice now. and I don t say this because I think Europe is better or anything - I m just very worried. if the US has a recession we all will feel the effects.

1.) your saving ratio is -1% this is a ridicoulous low number. in a recession private consumption can help overcome it. but no chance here, cause you're broke already.

2) hank paulson has still some room to move with 3% budget deficit and 60% national debt BUT because of your not existent saving ratio u have to lend money from outside. and where is the money coming from? China, Saudi Arabia and co. - nice to ow a shitload of money to those countries, isn t it? and because of the weak $ it s getting harder and harder for paulson to borrow money. the US is already using 60% of the available global capital in the world!

3) ok, you could still lower your prime rate and make money cheaper. but the problem is that after the real estate crisis banks don t give out money easily andthis will stay for some time like this and secondly your inflation is going up. so no chance here either.

4) iraq. 486 b $ until now -and much more will follow. u could have had universal healthcare and great education for everybody with this kind of money... but rant on the immigrants and the democrats

so there has to happen much more than just a new president - tho your old one really sucks.

[suprman09]

the us is on very thin ice now. and I don t say this because I think Europe is better or anything - I m just very worried. if the US has a recession we all will feel the effects.

1.) your saving ratio is -1% this is a ridicoulous low number. in a recession private consumption can help overcome it. but no chance here, cause you're broke already.

2) hank paulson has still some room to move with 3% budget deficit and 60% national debt BUT because of your not existent saving ratio u have to lend money from outside. and where is the money coming from? China, Saudi Arabia and co. - nice to ow a shitload of money to those countries, isn t it? and because of the weak $ it s getting harder and harder for paulson to borrow money. the US is already using 60% of the available global capital in the world!

3) ok, you could still lower your prime rate and make money cheaper. but the problem is that after the real estate crisis banks don t give out money easily andthis will stay for some time like this and secondly your inflation is going up. so no chance here either.

4) iraq. 486 b $ until now -and much more will follow. u could have had universal healthcare and great education for everybody with this kind of money... but rant on the immigrants and the democrats

so there has to happen much more than just a new president - tho your old one really sucks.

smart man

[thegodfather]

the us is on very thin ice now. and I don t say this because I think Europe is better or anything - I m just very worried. if the US has a recession we all will feel the effects.

1.) your saving ratio is -1% this is a ridicoulous low number. in a recession private consumption can help overcome it. but no chance here, cause you're broke already.

2) hank paulson has still some room to move with 3% budget deficit and 60% national debt BUT because of your not existent saving ratio u have to lend money from outside. and where is the money coming from? China, Saudi Arabia and co. - nice to ow a shitload of money to those countries, isn t it? and because of the weak $ it s getting harder and harder for paulson to borrow money. the US is already using 60% of the available global capital in the world!

3) ok, you could still lower your prime rate and make money cheaper. but the problem is that after the real estate crisis banks don t give out money easily andthis will stay for some time like this and secondly your inflation is going up. so no chance here either.

4) iraq. 486 b $ until now -and much more will follow. u could have had universal healthcare and great education for everybody with this kind of money... but rant on the immigrants and the democrats

so there has to happen much more than just a new president - tho your old one really sucks.

Agree with every point in this post other then the universal healthcare. I dont care if there was a surplus 90 Trillion dollars I still would not be in favor of universal healthcare, I.E.- Socialist policies.

[Logan13]

the us is on very thin ice now. and I don t say this because I think Europe is better or anything - I m just very worried. if the US has a recession we all will feel the effects.

1.) your saving ratio is -1% this is a ridicoulous low number. in a recession private consumption can help overcome it. but no chance here, cause you're broke already.

2) hank paulson has still some room to move with 3% budget deficit and 60% national debt BUT because of your not existent saving ratio u have to lend money from outside. and where is the money coming from? China, Saudi Arabia and co. - nice to ow a shitload of money to those countries, isn t it? and because of the weak $ it s getting harder and harder for paulson to borrow money. the US is already using 60% of the available global capital in the world!

3) ok, you could still lower your prime rate and make money cheaper. but the problem is that after the real estate crisis banks don t give out money easily andthis will stay for some time like this and secondly your inflation is going up. so no chance here either.

4) iraq. 486 b $ until now -and much more will follow. u could have had universal healthcare and great education for everybody with this kind of money... but rant on the immigrants and the democrats
This is a very narrow minded statement. This would pay for such programs for one year only...........
so there has to happen much more than just a new president - tho your old one really sucks.

..........

[damiongage]

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

If that.....once it is free...it would be abused worse than all the other welfare type programs available now....

[***xxx***]

well, if u like universal healthcare or not: your system is worse. the system in germany is far from perfect, but we have a much better overall quality in our system. and we don t have ppl dying in er rooms, waiting for treatment lol.

and you spend: total health expenditures $2.1 trillion in 2006, we spent 210 billion $ in 2006. we are 80 million citizens and you are 300 million. do the math your system is shitty. do the math (especially logan). and no, I m no michael moore fan, nor have I seen the movie. I working in the health care area and I have been visiting a lot of health care providers in the us lately. there are a lot of people in the Us who also think the system is just expensive, ineefective and completely rot.

[Logan13]

well, if u like universal healthcare or not: your system is worse. the system in germany is far from perfect, but we have a much better overall quality in our system. and we don t have ppl dying in er rooms, waiting for treatment lol.

and you spend: total health expenditures $2.1 trillion in 2006, we spent 210 billion $ in 2006. we are 80 million citizens and you are 300 million. do the math your system is shitty. do the math (especially logan). and no, I m no michael moore fan, nor have I seen the movie. I working in the health care area and I have been visiting a lot of health care providers in the us lately. there are a lot of people in the Us who also think the system is just expensive, ineefective and completely rot.

I am glad that you are happy with your healthcare system. I am happy with my overall quality of life here in the US.

[SMCengineer]

I still would not be in favor of universal healthcare, I.E.- Socialist policies.

Agreed. Most people who support universal care don't seem to understand this. We are not a Socialist government and I would never want America to turn to Socialism, although we're damn close.

[damiongage]

well, if u like universal healthcare or not: your system is worse. the system in germany is far from perfect, but we have a much better overall quality in our system. and we don t have ppl dying in er rooms, waiting for treatment lol.

and you spend: total health expenditures $2.1 trillion in 2006, we spent 210 billion $ in 2006. we are 80 million citizens and you are 300 million. do the math your system is shitty. do the math (especially logan). and no, I m no michael moore fan, nor have I seen the movie. I working in the health care area and I have been visiting a lot of health care providers in the us lately. there are a lot of people in the Us who also think the system is just expensive, ineefective and completely rot.

The only people who want free health care are people who do not want to work for it....and want even more for free.

[***xxx***]

I am glad that you are happy with your healthcare system. I am happy with my overall quality of life here in the US.

it s not about beeing happy about any system: it s what value u r getting for ur money. and even u should understand that the value u r getting for ur money is shitty. and no it s not unpatriotic to think that. the us has the most inefficient healthcare system in the world. personally, I don t give a damn wut kind of healthcare u have in the us. u wanna pay much for low value, go ahead.

The only people who want free health care are people who do not want to work for it....and want even more for free.

this is really a stupid comment. healthcare in germany is not for free - also not in france. it is cheaper for low income households or diabled ppl etc., thats all. pls don t comment if u have no clue wut u r talking about.

[Logan13]

it s not about beeing happy about any system: it s what value u r getting for ur money. and even u should understand that the value u r getting for ur money is shitty. and no it s not unpatriotic to think that. the us has the most inefficient healthcare system in the world. personally, I don t give a damn wut kind of healthcare u have in the us. u wanna pay much for low value, go ahead.



this is really a stupid comment. healthcare in germany is not for free - also not in france. it is cheaper for low income households or diabled ppl etc., thats all. pls don t comment if u have no clue wut u r talking about.

Hitler brought gov't run healthcare to Germany, amongst other "progressive" ideals.

[***xxx***]

Hitler brought gov't run healthcare to Germany, amongst other "progressive" ideals.

you are a complete moron.

it was bismarck who brought that idea to germany 60 years before hitler.

you wanna start a pissing contest? with the background of the us wars and foreign policy in the last 50 years that killed millions...?!

[Logan13]

you are a complete moron.

it was bismarck who brought that idea to germany 60 years before hitler.

you wanna start a pissing contest? with the background of the us wars and foreign policy in the last 50 years that killed millions...?!

hitler put it in place. Sure i'll get into a pissing contest....open your mouth. As for the moron comment, you are the one that has not yet backed up a single bullshit statement that you have made. If you don't like getting called on it, back it up. If you can't back it up, be quiet.........

[***xxx***]

it was the health insucrance bill from 1883 introduced by bismarck, u complete moron - I m sure u were on a public school...:

Health Insurance Bill of 1883

The first bill that had success was the Health Insurance bill,
which was passed in 1883. The program was considered the least
important from Bismarck’s point of view, and the least politically
troublesome. The program was established to provide health care for
the largest segment of the German workers. The health service was
established on a local basis, with the cost divided between
employers and the employed. The employers contributed 1/3rd, while
the workers contributed 2/3rds . The minimum payments for medical
treatment and Sick Pay for up to 13 weeks were legally fixed. The
individual local health bureaus were administered by a committee
elected by the members of each bureau, and this move had the
unintended effect of establishing a majority representation for the
workers on account of their large financial contribution. This
worked to the advantage of the Social Democrats who - through heavy
Worker membership - achieved their first small foothold in public
administration. [1]

[Information]

Logan13 and ***xxx***. Knock it off or you're suspended.