Wells Fargo cancels lavish retreat in Las Vegas

By John Rebchook, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 3, 2009 at 1 p.m.

Text size

Photo by Jae C. Hong, Associated Press

The Wynn Las Vegas and its sister hotel, Encore Las Vegas, are seen in Las Vegas today. Wells Fargo & Co., which received $25 billion in taxpayer bailout money, is planning a series of corporate outings to Las Vegas casinos this month.

More Money & Markets

Comments

February 3, 2009

1:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

Yikes. Talk about a horrible idea. Way to tarnish your already damaged image.
February 3, 2009

1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

The_KIMN_Chicken writes:

Oh well good enough then, let's buy them cars too, it's worth it to make them happy.
February 3, 2009

1:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

CWW writes:

Let 'em know they're valued by letting keep their jobs.
February 3, 2009

1:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Beergut writes:

Hope they have better luck then with their housing loans.
Really I get telling your employees they are valued, but if you have steal from the tax payers to make the point perhaps the point shouldn't be made.
February 3, 2009

1:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

JB writes:

un-freaking-believable
February 3, 2009

1:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

timeandagain writes:

Maybe Tom Daschele can be their keynote speaker??
February 3, 2009

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

c4l2a0 writes:

They've gambled our economy into the ground, I guess we shouldn't be surprised when they want to gamble with tax payer funds.
February 3, 2009

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rogue5 writes:

How about some appreciation for the customers and taxpayers who kept you from going under? I feel so much better about paying my mortgage now.
February 3, 2009

1:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Iron writes:

We need Barney Frank to tell us all that the mortgage business is in fine shape. If you don't believe him, well you're just a homophobe then.
February 3, 2009

1:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

global writes:

I can hear it now...

"put the 25 billion on red"
February 3, 2009

1:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

This is what I give .01 cent of every dollar I earn toward this bailout for? What type of BS is that? Terrible. Might as well just put that away in my SSI....If its still around at that time*

I.
February 3, 2009

1:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

juice454 writes:

"honoring the top mortgage lenders." You mean the lenders who gave the loans to the people who they knew could not afford them in a year, the lenders who forced your company to require us to bail you out. Oh Ok I'm good with that have fun!!!
February 3, 2009

1:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

GOT Change? YOUR hard-earned tax-dollars, hard at "work".
February 3, 2009

1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Wells Fargo Vice President of Human Relations:

"How did this story get out? I booked those reservations directly with the hotels in Las Vegas. I thought what happens in Las Vegas, stays in Las Vegas!"
February 3, 2009

1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Buckwheat writes:

You will not see a dime of this as long as they let them get away with this, along with the next 800 or so billion. I think it is called "Business as usual". The Citi Bank jet (which they got called on and had to cancel). Big bonuses to Wall Street execs. Also, I had heard that Wells Fargo sponsored the little Super Bowl Display outside of the stadium at a cost of some 800+ thousand dollars. You didn't REALLY expect these people to be more careful with this money now DID you? Only thing their careful about is seeing that you don't get any..And asking more for themselves.
February 3, 2009

1:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

gs writes:

you Wells Fargo people may want to rethink this trip.
February 3, 2009

1:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Wonderful, as a taxpayer maybe they could use a shoe horn and a lubricant next time they decide to romance me; course I may need a drawstring operation to hold my mud when they finish with this last date.
February 3, 2009

1:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

Iron...how dare you sully the sterling reputation of
Bailout Barney....uh, I mean, Mr....uh, I mean Senator Frank.
Iron, do you happen to have maybe some spare 789 Billion
dollars? I understand Vegas, is jumpin' with YOUR tax-dollars.
February 3, 2009

1:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

cabanaboy writes:

Wells Fargo did not need or want the bailout, it was forced upon them. Note that this junket happens every year. Why shouldn't they continue to do it? Articles like this demonize the financial institutions and further the agenda of those who favor big government.
February 3, 2009

1:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

oceanview78382 writes:

Wells Fargo is horrible. I have a checking account with them and a 798 credit rating, never paid my mortgage one day late in the 11 years I've had it and my assets to liabilities are 11-1. I tried to get a loan and went through hell because their local office has no authority. Finallly I was offered an 8.63% loan with 1 point and every fee they could think of. This was 3 weeks ago when rates were about 4.75. F--k them!
February 3, 2009

1:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Buckwheat writes:

Damn.....This just keeps getting better and better doesn't it???
February 3, 2009

1:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

denverrma writes:

Come on 11!
February 3, 2009

1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Seetheobvious writes:

I think every person who can, ought to go out to Vegas and toss rotten vegtables at all the Wells Fargo employees and their management "team" whenever their stinking faces are in sight. Hit 'em with rotten eggs, spoiled fruit, whatever you can as this just stinks. The employees themselves should be boycotting this event. And they call themselves American? Where's the solidarity?
February 3, 2009

1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Wells Fargo wasn't so much a bailout for it's own collapse, it was receiving money to buy out a collapsed brokerage house.
February 3, 2009

1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

NeilT writes:

Oceanview,

I agree!

I have two payments remaining on a Wells Auto loan. I can hardly wait! They call me every month, on the day it's due, to remind me. This started ~10 months ago. Now, I've had this loan for 5-years without a single late payment. I have a perfect record with them, but they feel the need to call and remind me every f'n due date.
February 3, 2009

1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

JB writes:

Wells REALLY needs to hire better PR people. What the he** are they thinking? Seriously?
February 3, 2009

1:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

En Masse resignations NOW. First order of business?
Appoint oceanview and neilT as the Head(s) of the finance
commitee....bye, I mean goodbye, Bailout Barney
February 3, 2009

1:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

NeilT writes:

HisPrince,

I accept!

I would take great pleasure in flushing those turds. I realize I'd have to deal with some floaters, but I'm persistent.
February 3, 2009

2:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

TONE writes:

Wellsfargo can do what ever it want. Because they are back by the richest man in the world. Warren Buffet own WellsFargo, so they know they have the finance to backup the company. Hey Mr. Buffet can you buy my company also, PLEASE!!!
February 3, 2009

2:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

adtypeanddesign writes:

I have had accounts with Wells Fargo and its predecessors (Colorado Commercial Bank, United Bank and Norwest) for 40 years this year. Unbelievably, an insert in a recent account statement claimed they were NOT receiving bailout money and that they had never done subprime loans. Just some more PR spin.

I can understand rewarding high-performing employees, but using bailout money is totally the wrong way to do it. Are there ANY banks out there that are safe, are not receiving bailout money and that have a good reputation?
February 3, 2009

2:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

sschow writes:

Wow 27 replies and 1 person pointing out the truth.

Wells Fargo was not insolvent. And even though the article claims them to be among the top writers of subprime mortgages, their $470 billion in mortgage originations in 2003 was comprised of only $16.4 billion in subprime loans. They may have been near the top dollar wise, but only had 3.5% of their mortgage loans tied up in the subprime mess.

Second, Wells Fargo was not "bailed out". The government basically said "we are taking a $25B stake in your company whether you like it or not". They took that for what it was worth and came up with the plan to purchase Wachovia and all of their outstanding debt.

What irresponsible reporting...and I can't believe the knee-jerk reactions to this story with only half of the facts presented.
February 3, 2009

2:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

USACITIZEN writes:

If this isn't a slap in the face of every tax payer, then I don't know what is.
February 3, 2009

2:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

RainbowWarrior writes:

We all kicked back and watched the consolidation of wealth and power take place for the past 30 years. We bought into it with our 401Ks and IRAs... so are any of you really surprised that absolute power corrupts absolutley?

The path away is decentralized non-corporate alternatives that represent true freedom; alternative energy systems that do not require the purchase of fuel and create a revenue flow to the crooks is a great example. Why do the corporate types hate this type of thinking? Oh gee, it might put them out of business, DAH.

As the Baby Boomers start to retire in mass, what if they pooled their resources and created communes? No over paid CEOs, no dividends to pay out, just some nice tax considerations and leave us the f**k alone!

How about we break up Walmart/Sam's Club. K-mart, King Soopers/City Market Krogger & Safeway, Home Depot & Lowes, Sears & Best Buy and create some real economic stimulus by returning these massive business opportunities back to the people... many of whom were put out of business by these creapy corporations!

All this talk about Wall Street vs Main Street is b*ll Sh**, if most Americans weren't a bunch of lazy jerks wanting easy money, we would be kicking some Wall Street *ss right now and rebuilding this country... but nooooo, we all want what they have, a cake walk on the backs of the masses!
February 3, 2009

2:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

market_man writes:

Hey, maybe they will double their $25B playing poker and pay us back.
February 3, 2009

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

NeilT writes:

sschow,

You act as if the government had a gun to their head.

You're correct. Wells didn't need the TARP funds then, but if they didn't take the funds, the "window" would have closed on them. They wouldn't be able to get assistance in the future.

They sold their soul so they wouldn't lose access to free money. So we bought them Wachovia. Wells needs to conserve every dime to see that through. We don't want another BofA/Merrill. Can you guaranty we know the depths of Wachovia's toxic issues?

I don't think anybody in the mortgage business deserves a reward right now. Plus, it's not too much to ask (demand) Wells tighten everything up, since they will benefit from Wachovia's assets down the road.

I guess they can just blow through their cash and if Wachovia has a toxic surprise, Wells can just get more funds from us.
February 3, 2009

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

sschow wrote:
"What irresponsible reporting...and I can't believe the knee-jerk reactions to this story with only half of the facts presented."

And I can't believe your knee-jerk posturing to the posts in this thread. Regardless of the minutiae of WFC & banking bailouts, everyone can agree that this is horrible timing. The Vegas bash could wait. Say they need help down the road. Won't look too good will it? I'm very impressed with all the digits you regurgitated from somewhere else. Kudos.
February 3, 2009

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

SS, perhaps you should direct your suspiciously hostile frustration
towards the Associated Press.
Anyway, when you're there, remember: What happen in Vegas,
stays in Vegas (in this case, tax-payer dollars)!
February 3, 2009

2:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Buckwheat writes:

They still got 25B of my tax dollars, which makes this irresponsible period. Fine, they don't want to be called on this OK, give the money back. Didn't read where they said "Thanks, but no thanks" to american tax dollars. I see what you are saying, but that doesn't mean the American people aren't getting fed up with the wasteful spending that's been going on the last 8 weeks.
February 3, 2009

2:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

sundaychild67 writes:

Time to close my account at Wells Fargo. Credit Union, here I come!
February 3, 2009

2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

EdVMorales writes:

LMAO - global writes:

I can hear it now...

"put the 25 billion on red
February 3, 2009

2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

KW writes:

sschow - Quite true. Same can be said for Citi and BofA. I think Citi received the same $25B and this doesn't even begin to cover the huge amounts (over $100B) they were writing off in mtges long before receiveing any money, yet the tale on the nightly news was "bailout."

Most intervention in these major banks is to help keep them doing what they've been doing (modifying, extending and deferring mtges) because this will go along ways toward helping the economy recover, versus if the banks simply closed their vaults and said no more.

The only difference I see here is Wells Fargo wasn't very bright. Citi cancelled all officer bonuses and even canned department Christmas parties as an effort not to be seen as taking advantage of the fed $$. They cancelled a jet contract (long before the MSM got ahold of the story) and they even have a website detailing how the fed $$ are being used.

Wells Fargo should take a lesson from some of the larger banks.
February 3, 2009

2:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

jro47 writes:

finally some educated discussion of what Wells did. The points are valid that they are not the worst offenders. Wells also saved the marketplace from a lot of extra pain by acquiring Wachovia. If you were the Wells President/CEO responsible to your shareholders -- why would you put yourself at a competitive disadvantage to all the other pigs at the free money trough? Sadly, our country's leaders didn't really think this out very well when raiding all of our wallets.

It is also valid that it doesn't show very much common sense to spend money this way at this time --- but, at least they are putting some of our money back into the economy --- of course, what they should be doing is loosening the lending strings and making loans to people who need them and should have them --- until they and the other banks do some responsible lending we will be in a bad place
February 3, 2009

2:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

sschow writes:

"I'm very impressed with all the digits you regurgitated from somewhere else. Kudos."

Read: "Quit bringing your facts and logic into this emotional argument."

Of course I regurgitated them from elsewhere, I didn't know the numbers off the top of my head, but that doesn't make them any less true. Or does it?

"SS, perhaps you should direct your suspiciously hostile frustration
towards the Associated Press."

And perhaps everybody else should direct their frustration to the government that spent their $700B (and counting) without so much as a "please" or "thank you". I hope more companies blow this money so that government will finally understand that they shouldn't be dealing in the business they have carved out for themselves. Better that the $25B get the message across before we blow another $800-900B/
February 3, 2009

2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

knr writes:

Has anyone mentioned that Wells Fargo declined the bailout dollars since they did not need the money? Sec Paulson refused to let the CEO of Wells Fargo leave the conference room until all twelve CEOs of the nation's largest banks all signed onto the bailout. Wells Fargo remains one of the strongest bank and should be allowed to reward its employees who helped Wells Fargo avoid the travails of Countrywide, Citi, Wachovia, Indy Bank, Merryl, Lehman, et al. As a matter of fact, Wells Fargo should use its relative strength to recruit the top talent from the other failing banks so that Wells Fargo emerges from this stronger than ever. Rewards like this are one of those ways companies have historically rewarded employees. If you have a problem with this, take it up with the heavy handed way the government treated Wells Fargo instead.
February 3, 2009

2:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Watchful_Eye writes:

Even better than all our comments...send this page to all our legislators - the Senators and the Representatives - as well as President Obama. Include comments of your own on those e-mails, too. CEOs using bail-out funds to party has got to stop!
February 3, 2009

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

SS, while your points were valid, this financial crisis is a culmination of the borderline unethical relationship between
the U.S. Banking Industry, and the Federal "Government".
Bottom-line: If you give a man a fish, he might ask for the lake.
February 3, 2009

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention writes:

While this was an easy story to write, that would surely create a PR mess, there is more here than meets the eye.

First of all, the people attending this trip have worked long hours to get loans approved and closed in an incredibly difficult lending environment. 2008 was easily the most difficult year in mortgage ever, as lending guidelines changed almost daily.

Secondly, Wells Fargo Bank is the only triple A rated bank in the country and it received TARP funds because they were practically forced to buy Wachovia Bank. (So they actually helped all of us by preventing a MAJOR bank failure, that would have been Wachovia's future.)

Third, Wells Fargo is THE market-share leader in mortgage financing. So they are actually rewarding themselves for being leaders and successful...versus the rewarding of companies have done for themselves while being incompentent and failures. Your trusted Denver Business Journal can provide you more details (http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/sto...)

So lets recap. In life and business if you perform well, you get rewarded. Wells Fargo is performing well, (in the most difficult economic and banking market in 50 years) and they are rewarding some of their employees.

Careful to jump on the band wagon...journalists have a responsibility to their advertisers to create traffic on their website.
February 3, 2009

2:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

MGD writes:

Does anyone on this board still wonder why many Republicans and Democrats are trying to tighten control on the so-called stimulus plan?
February 3, 2009

3:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Himay writes:

Using the taxpayers money for stuff like this should be treated as high treason under the US Patriot act. They are deliberately and knowingly causing further harm to the US economy, making our country vulnerable. As far as I am concerned, these poeple should be executed.
February 3, 2009

3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

sschow wrote:
"I'm very impressed with all the digits you regurgitated from somewhere else. Kudos."
Read: "Quit bringing your facts and logic into this emotional argument."

Emotional? Hardly. 'Facts and logic' dictate a more professional position given the current economic situation. Not much of a leap to think this is poor judgment on WFC's part. A little sensitivity and reservation is in order regardless of their standing. It's really not much to ask. Delay Vegas. Don't do Vegas. Probably not the best time to throw a party. That is all.
February 3, 2009

3:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

"more than 1,000 employees" = The elitist brown-nosers.

"Recognition events are still part of our culture," = The culture of greed.

Class War... ON!
February 3, 2009

3:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Iron writes:

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention... Your posts on here cannot be used to pad your resume. Look elsewhere for a potential audience and job interview.
February 3, 2009

3:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

RoyalPayne writes:

Our tax dollars at work. We have a government who has many elected officals who have sold their soul and their country for money, power and votes. These crooks don't even try to hide their greed. Wall St. and the big banks have bought Washinton, BOTH political parties have lied and cheated the people who voted for them. Who says crime don't pay ? I see a tax revolt in our future, it's the only way to stop these madmen ( and women.)
February 3, 2009

3:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

tmcd writes:

IT doesn't matter if Wells Fargo is performing well or not. They took bail out money and despite intentions of paying it back they should consider taking 1 year off from the employee junkets. There are other ways to say thank you to good workers. When the economy is good and money has been paid back to the tax payers, then perhaps they can revisit there expensive habits that probably helped get them into this mess.
February 3, 2009

3:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention writes:

Really...that's all you could come up with? Read the post...challenge what I said. Prove you are smart AND clever...and not just clever....there's a difference.
February 3, 2009

3:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

Journalistsaretrying.....you wrote "....Wells-Fargo is performing well...." First, let's look beyond your condescending "I'm in
the industry" attitude, and maybe digest some of the comments
of REAL people with REAL accounts and VERY REAL concerns
about the company that is "...Performing well...".
Believe: ANY business with a TWENTY-FIVE BILLION dollar
TAX-PAYER cushion would be "...performing well...."
Now, go have an over-priced martini, and drive your over-priced
car to your over-priced house, and justify to your over-priced
friends, YOUR TRIP TO VEGAS. While you're there, remember,
there are EXCELLANT customers who KNOW: Wells-Fargone (oops) IS NOT "...performing well..."
February 3, 2009

3:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Again as I said at 1:46 pm, Wells Fargo isn't as much of a bail out as it received money to buy up another failed entity. Wells is more than solvent. But we shouldn't be doing bail outs period. The taxpayer is taking it raw while big banks, brokers, and corporate conglomerates feed at the government trough. Politicians will add their pork as well. Can't wait for the inflation sure to rear it's head in about 3 years with all this money being printed and tossed out freely. It's going to do nothing to stem the job losses either, it's good taxpayer money being thrown into a bottomless pit. SUNDAYCHILD, you may want to look at a more local bank that's not caught up in the mess like The Bank of Denver. Their balance sheet and areas of investment were much more conservative. There are some sites where banks power ratings are published for you to look at. Just a thought to consider, but I'm no genius. Job losses cause loans to go bad, even credit unions aren't as immuine as what people think.
February 3, 2009

3:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention writes:

Insulting people doesn't win arguements. We can discuss this without being mean.

Please do some research. .

Possibly those comments would have been different if the author of this story would have provided a broader understanding of the situation.
February 3, 2009

3:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

JB writes:

Whether or not Wells is stable, which they are, they have $25B in taxpayer money. When you have that much taxpayer money, you need to excersize a little common sense and look at how your actions will be perceived. Like I said, they need better PR people.

Does anyone know the number of businesses that fail within 12 months of a major PR crisis? I don't recall the exact percentage, but it's well over 50%.
February 3, 2009

3:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

FCZ writes:

Bailouts were bad.

Bailouts are bad.

Future Bailouts will be bad.

No more bailouts.

Chapter 11 works best.

The alleged stimulus plan is another massive pork scam.

Politicians need to listen and vote NO.
February 3, 2009

3:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention writes:
"Insulting people doesn't win arguements [sic]. We can discuss this without being mean."

We can also discuss this w/o being condescending. No amount of fact-checking or back story changes how this trip is perceived. Just look at the comments on here as a small sampling. Doesn't matter about WFC's standing - this is being perceived as a bad move by many people just on here alone. Given everything going on, a trip to Vegas is just dumba@#.
February 3, 2009

3:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

mytwosense writes:

KW writes: "The only difference I see here is Wells Fargo wasn't very bright. Citi cancelled all officer bonuses and even canned department Christmas parties as an effort not to be seen as taking advantage of the fed $$. They cancelled a jet contract (long before the MSM got ahold of the story) and they even have a website detailing how the fed $$ are being used."

You must have missed the other blaring news headline today: Citi is going ahead with paying $400 million for the naming rights of the Mets' new stadium, to be called "Citi Field."

Taxpayers essentially funded the building of this stadium, and now they're funding the name for the stadium itself.

Crazy times in America!
February 3, 2009

3:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

NeilT writes:

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttention,

Challenge what you said?

First, define "practically forced to buy Wachovia Bank." I'm curious.

You defend Wells, in part, because of their high rating. I'm sorry, but ratings mean squat. All those toxic pieces of paper clogging the system right now were once triple-A rated.

You must be in the industry, because you just don't get it. This is, in large part, a crisis of confidence. You can thank the rating agencies you hold in such high regard for a lot of this mess.

Partying after receiving taxpayer funds is not a good PR move, whether it's well deserved, or not.

But no matter...

You still don't get it.
February 3, 2009

3:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

JournalistsAreJustTryingToGetYourAttentionIsJustTryingToGetYourAttention
February 3, 2009

4:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Squatch writes:

It is reported and not a damn thing will happen to them. They will continue to run around without a leash.
February 3, 2009

4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

mamott writes:

I work for Wachovia, the bank that just merged with Wells Fargo. I wasn't thrilled about the merger to begin with, I have heard nothing but bad things about their customer service, people are just a number to them. Then they go and blow all this BAIL OUT MONEY on a frivolous, wasteful Vegas trip. We are all worried about having a job in the up coming months, because you know they are going to be closing some branches. Share the wealth if you are going to just waste it this way. Nobody cares about the little people who are the bread and butter of the company. We are the face of the company, we are the people who get the customers to bring and keep their money here. Don't you think that we deserve some reassurance about our futures. The people who keep this company going.
February 3, 2009

4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

Man, you should have seen the elite at US West back in the day. They partied hardy in the early 1990s. America was on a Lee Hazelwood high. They had one of their reward events in CA and booked The Pointer Sisters. I was just a contracted AV tech, but was spoiled to death as well. And I thought THAT was shameful and decadent.
February 3, 2009

4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

CObeez writes:

mamott...it is funny how people on the inside of Wachovia are reporting it..."the bank that just merged with Wells Fargo." If it wasn't for Wells Fargo, you would already be looking a new job cause Wachovia would have folded. You should be thankful that due to Wells you currently have to only worry about having a job in the future.
February 3, 2009

4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

Oops, I think that should be Lee Greenwood. I heard it so much back then, I think I blocked it out.
February 3, 2009

4:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Wells Fargo put aside money for future bad loans. The institution she bought up in where the money is going. The only thing dragging on Wells Fargo is the home equity loans, (she had no real exposure to the sub prime markets), especially in hard hit states. Thus Wells Fargo set aside money to cover anticipated loses in the future. A lot of banks are going to get stuck with bad home equity loans as homes get foreclosed on. Wells Fargo was smart enough to put up a cushion to offset this, yet the bottom of the foreclosure market has yet to be realized to say Wells Fargo has set aside enough. The second shoe has yet to drop as even though the more conservative banks didn't get caught up in the sub-prime mess, the home equity loans that are now going south will affect their ability to remain stable. When home values were high, many people took money out of their homes, now with foreclosures because of employment and economic hardship, some banks that were considered safe are going to be hurt. Wells Fargo had good foresight to anticipate this especially in the California market where they are dominent. It hurts when a bank not only repossesses a home for less value than it once was worth on the original loan, but also gave the owner an equity loan further compounding the loss. Wells Fargo put aside money to cover these future losses. Will it be enough when coupled with the institution they are taking over? Who knows for sure; but it was a smart move to set aside the cash, and use the government to pay for the takeover from Wells Fargo's perspective. The taxpayer is the one taking it raw as he's paying out to help Wells Fargo who may put the loss on the taxpayer if the failed institutional buyout doesn't go off as planned. Then the government will have created an even bigger problem on it's hands if Wells Fargo decides to go south.
February 3, 2009

4:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Buckwheat writes:

OK, which one is it? Their going or their NOT going? Maybe they had second thoughts since every newspaper in the english speaking world picked up this story...
February 3, 2009

4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

KayTee writes:

Dig this...My WF account is in the negative by $8.00 and Wells Fargo was blowing up my phone today (three times) to find out "When I can take care of my balance"....Guess they need my $8.00 to make sure their Vegas trip goes off without a hitch.....Sorry MellonFarmers....(my edited version of MF'ers)
February 3, 2009

4:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

KW writes:

mts - If Citi wrote off over $100B, and the feds gave them $25B, Citi is still giving away over $75B of their own money in loan mods, restructures and deferments without interest.

The reason for the fed injection was not due to Citi being insolvent, but to help them keep on giving in order to help the economy. The news reports all said "bailout" but that money was anything but.

Do you know how big Citi is? Wells Fargo is a dwarf compared to them.
February 3, 2009

4:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

HankReardon - too funny. I know exactly what you mean. I did corporate contract work too (post-production). I miss some of those accounts. Talk about easy money. And - the best gigs were always in Vegas. I won't say who because they no longer with us and the CEO is in jail but one sales year kick-off had Santana, Sen. Orrin Hatch, the Allman Bros., all the Bridges for some reason (Jeff, Beau, Lloyd, etc.), the Hawaiian Tropic Girls for some reason, Hugh Hefner. We did employee appreciation videos for their parties that were not cheap. Just stupid money.
February 3, 2009

4:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

Breaking News: POWER TO MY PEOPLE!
February 3, 2009

5 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

BenchBoss,
Yeah, the money was quite obscene back then. I remember I was a camerman once when, then President, George Bush Sr. spoke at a Continental Airlines events at the old convention center.

I could actually say with clarity that I shot the president. ;)
February 3, 2009

5:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

FCZ writes:

Bailouts were and are stupid.

Chapter 11 is best.

The stimulus bill is 97 percent pork.

Politicians : Vote NO.
February 3, 2009

5:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

glacierdude writes:

We, the public, absolutely MUST remain constant in calling big business and government out when it comes to these types of excesses. Believe me, if you think big business is excessive when it comes to these "retreats" and things......you haven't seen anything yet, Margaret! Government is capable of wasting FAR more of your hard earned tax dollars on outlandishly extravagant junkets like these business people are.

I am glad WF made the right decision, sorry for Vegas, but that's the way it's gotta be for the forseeable future. I am disappointed that WF didn't see the fly in the ointment on their own and had to have the error of their ways pointed out to them.
February 3, 2009

5:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Deepstroke924 writes:

I think as payback for all these greedy banks that we should all withdraw our money from them and lets see them finance their extravagant trips then....
February 3, 2009

6:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

BillK writes:

One more time for anyone who doesn't want to bother to do the research:

Wells Fargo took government funds to buy other failing banks that would have otherwise become a Government burden. Not to pay for parties, and not to pad their bottom line.
February 3, 2009

6:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

What BillK said.
February 3, 2009

6:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Mr_Hyde writes:

um....OK, BillK. They took TAXPAYER funds to buy those banks because they couldn't buy them themselves. If I as a taxpayer am lending them $25Billion dollars of my money and they are throwing a party with it, there's a problem. Period! If they bought the banks with their own money instead of ours, then more power to them but this is being irresponsible with our money.
February 3, 2009

7:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Mr_Hyde writes:

By the way, to say that "it received TARP funds because they were practically forced to buy Wachovia Bank." is inaccurate. Did you forget that they bought Wachovia while Citibank already had an offer on the table for them? Citibank still has a pending lawsuit over the deal. Originally Wells Fargo said that they intended to use the money to help customers avoid forclosure. As a result of this, the bank posted a 2.6 billion dollar 4th quarter loss in FY '08.

A high priced party like this would anger me not only as a taxpayer who provided a chunk of the TARP funds, but it would infuriate me as a shareholder of a company that just posted a loss like that. Again, its irresponsible spending any way you look at it.
February 3, 2009

7:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

LoneTreeLady75 writes:

Anyone down for a revolt?
February 3, 2009

7:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Now_You_Know writes:

All the rich bankers are republicans! I wonder Why?
February 3, 2009

8:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Darwin writes:

And the President and Congress wants to give away a trillion + more of our hard earned money to crooks under the guise of a "stimulus" bill?
February 3, 2009

8:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

HollyGoLightly writes:

I'm with Rogue on this one. Nothing like reading this just after paying out your mortgage payment. I'll get a warm fuzzy every month now when I write my check to Wells Fargo.
February 3, 2009

8:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

F1RST writes:

Get I go, If indirectly I help pay for this?

Can I bring a guest? or two?
February 3, 2009

8:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

the_ripper writes:

Bout time for another REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 3, 2009

8:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

>Wells Fargo is performing well, (in the most difficult economic and banking market in 50 years) and they are rewarding some of their employees.

It is "performing well" as a result of an influx of taxpayer money.
As for rewarding its employees, most of us are "rewarded" by being allowed to keep our jobs.
February 4, 2009

12:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

ifyem writes:

"Leaving Las Vegas!!" Best headline ever!
February 4, 2009

1:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

BillORights writes:

this is the bank that called me up at home repeatedly, to falsely offer to aid my debt but instead did a bait and switch and tried to get me to sign a deal that would have more than DOUBLED my interest rate on my mortgage. their lavish junket would have been on my dime and others like myself if i had done business with that deceptive longmont mortgage bank.
February 4, 2009

7:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

toddmccalla writes:

They canceled Las Vegas because they found a more posh resort in Hawaii!!!!!!!!!

Todd
Creative Director
http://www.vailco.com/
February 4, 2009

8:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

WhadUsay writes:

cabanaboy - what a crock of garbage. If they didn't need it they didn't have to take it - Ford didn't. Whoever is feeding you this "information" is feeding you a bunch of C#@p. They took the money and now they want to take the mortgage people - who wrote the sub-prime mortgages in the first place on a spree to Las Vegas - this is the height of irresponsibility.

To the person that said that they've already paid an interest payment so this is their money - it is not. Unless and until they pay back the entire loan any money they have is not their money. They need to do what they promised to do (credit lending) and stop all this.

All these bailout recipients are just laughing at how stupid we all are - they whine that the economy will be ruined unless they get more money - we give them more money and the economy is still ruined. I'm pretty sure we (the American people) have once again been taken to the cleaners by big business and big government (and I'm a liberal).
February 4, 2009

8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

irisman writes:

It seems that the Wall Street Moguls are having trouble adapting to the new austere economy. The only way to get them to back off is to shame them publicly. Where are the stocks, pillory, and dunking stool when you need them?
February 4, 2009

8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

LockNLoad writes:

Having worked for several large companies, I can attest to the eetravegancee with these type of boondoglles. The question here is should they continue this lavish spending if they are getting bailouts form the government? Obviously, the answer is "No". If they ran their business into the ground, and then expected the government to bail them out, they should beecome good stewards of our tax money.

The root of the problem is that the government bailed them out in the first place. Now, we have a bunch of corrupt politicians making decision about how a company should be run. This is fundamentally wrong in a capitalistic society. These idiots can't even manage the government's budget let alone a business.
February 4, 2009

8:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

tunaman65 writes:

I wonder how many people will lose their jobs in Vegas because they are not going?
February 4, 2009

9:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

the_ripper writes:

Now_You_Know writes:

'...All the rich bankers are republicans! I wonder Why?...'

...and all the tax cheats are Dems....OUCH!!!!

BTW, I'm registered independent.
February 4, 2009

10:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

LoneLady, Ripper.....BELIEVE, The Revolution, began 5.24.09,
and within the 120 days that IMMEDIATELY followed?
Mysterious Salmonella outbreak, RECORD-number wildfires,
the Banking Industry began to collapse, Hurricanes Ike and
Rita, Air-traffic control shutdowns, and a LITERAL Economic
collapse. More recently? The Auto Industry Collapse, RECORD-low temperatures, historic flooding, MAJOR power-outages, and
ANOTHER Salmonella outbreak....Yet, The Battle, has just BEGUN: GOD, is GREATER!
http://www.all4webs.com/q/f/love4yahweh
Pharaoh, SURRENDER.
February 4, 2009

10:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

And we are going to hand more $ - billions to banks and wall street big dogs????
While families loose their homes and neighborhoods decline and housing prices continue to fall. Helping the families avoid foreclosures will help the banks and the housing market and the economy better and quicker than billions to bankers!
Sure try and weed out those who made bad loans in bad faith but even if we cannot do that 100%, I'd rather see the more of the bailout monies go to families and home owners.
Plus keeping homes occupied and families as owners - not renters will have benefits that cannot be added up on a spread sheet!
February 4, 2009

10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

HisPrinceMichael writes:

Diff, excellant observation. Ponder:
On Sept. 30th 2008, the Dow Jones PLUMMETED
777 points (Wow. 7th child, born 7th month, with a 7-letter name,
what a, uh, uh, uh, coincidence *wink*) and has STEADILY fallen.
YET, the ABSURD lack of accountabilty of bailout money, and
the IMPLAUSIBLE and MYSTERIOUS stock market gains?
Can you say: Play the stock market with TAX-PAYER money?
KNEW you COULDN'T.
http://www.all4webs.com/q/f/love4yahweh
February 4, 2009

10:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Wells Fargo was just trying to duplicate what the Democrat party does....

Looks like the Democrats owe some explanations to taxpayers.

Obama represents change? The only thing Obama has delivered is MORE wasted money that taxpayers have to cover.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/5...
February 4, 2009

11:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

jd writes:

They have the money for these lavish parties but they don't have enough money to hire enough customer service people.
February 4, 2009

11:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

jd writes:

And how many jobs did they send over seas to save money?
February 4, 2009

12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

kalonblake writes:

I guess it doesn't matter that this puts people in the hospitality industry out of work. All (repeat, all) of the money spent on this would have gone into the paychecks of workers in the hospitality industry, and into the economy as a whole. Isn't that the point of the Economic Stimulus? Now, the cancellation fees just go into the accounts of the big resorts.

How are housekeepers, janitors, servers, bartenders, cooks, caterers, event organizers, car rental agents, and a host of assiciated small businesses supposed to make a living if large functions like this are cancelled?
February 4, 2009

1:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

robert29b writes:

The majority of workers in this country work very hard everyday and don't get private concerts, expensive food, and trips around the world. What do we get? We get to keep our jobs and accept a very small merit increase (if any at all). If I work hard and my company profits from it, shouldn't all employees get the perks? It's the tellers and customer service reps at Wells Fargo that keep people coming in, not the loan officers. The loan officers get customers in, but it's the low level workers who keep them coming back.....
February 4, 2009

2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

wyhammertime writes:

I read somewhere thayt people were closing their accounts right and left when they found out about this . I don't know if it is true could you just imagine if EVERYONE did this I bet the banks and ol bag barney would listen and help would be on the way PRONTO ya think ?? Revolition "09"
February 4, 2009

2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

jersey writes:

Now you see what happens when the graduating class's shenanigans are frowned upon? It ruins it for the Frosh, Soph and Jr. classes to follow!
February 5, 2009

8:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

voiceofreason43 writes:

The truly sad thing about this story is the failure of most people in understanding the facts and economics of everything:

1) Wells did not ask or need the money. They were given the money from the Feds to help out the rest of the banking industry which they did by taking over a failing and troubled competitor.
2) Wells has been praised by many for not following the practices of other predatory lenders and by not mortgaging its own future on the sub-prime market.
3) What the economy needs is spending not saving. This is especially true when it comes to services where the money stays here instead of being absorbed into the profits of foreign owned companies.
4) If the story had read "Wells Fargo cancels lavish trip to Denver" people around here might take a differing view when it was Colorado and our local economy that lost out on everything.
5) For those upset about the spending of the tax payer money on perceived frivolous events, please research the total cost to taxpayers of the presidential inauguration. I think that you will find that the total cost to taxpayers of that was a bit more than what Wells trip to Vegas would have entailed.

Please everyone and for the sake of the future of this nation, learn the facts and understand the economics before jumping to conclusions.

Home › Business › Money & Markets

Wells Fargo cancels lavish retreat in Las Vegas

By John Rebchook, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 3, 2009 at 1 p.m.

Related Links

More Money & Markets

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs