Quote :

"- Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N) will pay Citigroup Inc (C.N) $100 million to settle a legal dispute over the contentious 2008 purchase of Wachovia Corp, closing another chapter of the receding financial crisis, the companies said on Friday. The failed bid was one of the last straws for the then-struggling Citigroup, which soon was forced to accept three U.S. government bailouts in 2008 and 2009. By buying Wachovia, Citigroup would have been able to expand its relatively small U.S. retail branch network to compete with larger rivals Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) and JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N). "

So Citigroup was hoping Wachovia would bring in revenue to help avoid its own collapse or need to take government bailout money...
I don't understand, so why is Wells Fargo liable because they outbid Citigroup for Wachovia?
Citigroup makes shitty investments and fails at a bid to take in a potential profitable investment. Thus it is Wells Fargo's fault they were not able to make money? This does not sound like a very capitalistic concept.

Sounds the attitude of the average entitlement expecting, welfare receiving american individual.

That is like me suing my buddy because he got the job at harris teeter instead of me. Since i did not get the job, I ended up losing my car after not making my loan payment on time....

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AI47120101119

[Edited on November 19, 2010 at 3:36 PM. Reason : aa]

11/19/2010 3:33:21 PM

Quote :

"In July 2009, a federal judge rejected Citigroup's argument that Wachovia lacked the authority to accept Wells Fargo's offer, but Citigroup continued to seek damages."

Citigroup was contesting the purchase for some legal reason, so Wells Fargo settled with them for $100 million.

So no, it's not whatever welfare scenario you are trying to dream up in your head.

11/19/2010 3:39:34 PM