25 Companies That Lost America Nearly $1 Trillion

There are some things to which only America can lay claim. Most of them invoke pride, but every now and then some of them do not. For example, consider the large bonuses bestowed upon our captains of the industry in the midst of one of the greatest financial crises in global economic history.

Contrary to popular belief, the disgust and anger towards this irony is not just a populist reaction. A good friend of mine who is a Stanford University MBA and career CEO shares the sentiment of many of his fellow Americans. For reasons that should be obvious to anyone, his anonymity shall be preserved for the following submission:

_____________________________________________________

Current Worth of U.S. Companies:

* AIG? -Then: $178.8 billion… Now: $5.46 billion. Down 96.95%

* Bank of America (BAC)? -Then: $236.5 billion… Now: $123.4 billion. Down 47.82%

* Citigroup (C)? -Then: $236.7 billion… Now: $76.34 billion. Down 67.75%

* Merrill Lynch? - Then: $63.9 billion… Now: $30.2 billion. Down 52.74%

* Fannie Mae (FNM)? - Then: $64.8 billion… Now: $0.45 billion. Down 99.3%

* Morgan Stanley (MS)? - Then: $73.1 billion… Now: $41.1billion. Down 43.78%

* Wachovia? - Then: $98.3 billion… Now: $19.44 billion. Down 80.22%

* JP Morgan Chase (JPM)? - Then: $161 billion… Now: $130.2 billion. Down 19.13%

* Capital One Financial (COF)? - Then: $29.9 billion… Now: $16.9 billion. Down 43.48%

* Washington Mutual (WM)? - Then: $31.1 billion… Now: $3.64 billion. Down 88.3%

* Lehman Bros. (LEHMQ.PK)? - Then: $34.4 billion… Now: $0.80 billion. Down 97.6%

* Goldman Sachs (GS)? - Then: 97.7 billion… Now: $40.6 billion. Down 58.7%

* Wells Fargo (WFC)? - Then: $124.1 billion… Now: $111.25 billion. Down 10.35%

* National City (NLCPP.PK)? - Then: $16.4 billion… Now: $2.8 billion. Down 83%

* Fifth Third Bancorp (FITB)? - Then: $18.8 billion… Now: $7.9 billion. Down 57.6%

* American Express (AXP)? - Then: $74.8 billion… Now: $37.5 billion. Down 43.78%

* Freddie Mac (FRE)? - Then: $41.5 billion… Now: $0.16 billion. Down 99%

* Suntrust Banks (STI)? - Then: $27 billion… Now: $16.07 billion. Down 58.7%

* BB&T (BBT)? - Then: $23.2 billion… Now: $18.4 billion. Down 20.69%

* Marshall & Ilsley (MI)? - Then: $11.6 billion… Now: $4.48 billion. Down 61.3%

* Keycorp (KEY)? - Then: $13.2 billion… Now: $5.68 billion. Down 56.97%

* Legg Mason (LM)? Then: $11.4 billion…Now: $4.96 billion. Down 56.49%

* Comerica (CMA)? Then: $8.3 billion…Now: $4.74 billion. Down 42.89%

* Countrywide Financial? Then: $11.1 billion…Now: $0.00 billion. Down 100%

* Bear Stearns? Then: $14.8 billion…Now: $ 0.00 billion. Down 100%.

Together these 25 companies have lost investors a total of $992,690,000,000 over the last 12 months… or nearly US $1 trillion…

And, of course, Management congratulated themselves with bonuses of several billions at the expense of shareholders!

_____________________________________________________

Only in America, dear readers…. only in America…

Disclosure: Hillbent.com, Inc. or its affiliates may own positions in the equities mentioned in our reports. We do not receive any compensation from any of the companies covered in our reports.

Comments

[Think:]

You can't say Countrywide is down 100% when they were bought out...

Mar 26 02:59 AM

[holmesnmanny:]

Same with Bear Stearns.

Mar 26 03:16 AM

[turb0kat:]

COF is down dramatically more than 43%...

Mar 26 04:35 AM

[TaurusTrader:]

Some were fairly punished, and some others were unfairly .... For instance, with WFC, JPM, GS and MS - it's way overdone!

TaurusTrader
www.taurustrader.wordp...

Mar 26 09:25 AM

[tatsumaki4ryu:]

This list is really unfair. To lump BB&T with AIG, Citi, and co is a ridiculous comparison. Also, while BSC and CFC investors lost a lot, they didn't lose 100%. It's a good thing you kept his identity anonymous, because if someone who wrote this was CEO of my company, I would lose a great deal of confidence just from reading this.

Mar 26 09:37 AM

[edfarthing:]

AMEN!!!


On Mar 26 09:37 AM tatsumaki4ryu wrote:

> This list is really unfair. To lump BB&T with AIG, Citi, and
> co is a ridiculous comparison. Also, while BSC and CFC investors
> lost a lot, they didn't lose 100%. It's a good thing you kept his
> identity anonymous, because if someone who wrote this was CEO of
> my company, I would lose a great deal of confidence just from reading
> this.

Mar 26 10:43 AM

[I weep for ...:]

People we own AIG! Why are we trying to destroy it? It should be unamerican to bash the good people at AIG who are now working there knowing how bad they are perceived and yet staying loyal to the company. Keeping good employees who see some future in their current roles in the only way we will see any of that money that Congress decided to give to Goldman and France. Remember the people who caused the crisis left! And most of AIG is made up of good, solid insurance units that up until now were making money. But this grandstanding is now hurting that part of the business that had nothing to do with Financial Products whatsoever and which hold the key to taxpayers recouping what the Fed gave to the counterparties!

Mar 26 11:33 AM

[Bob Belsito:]

What do his $ valuations represent in his article?
Help I am confused!

Mar 26 12:07 PM

[J Clinton Hill:]

Gentle Readers,

The purpose of this post is not to single out any specific companies. The original title at my website reads: Incentivized Management for Success or Failure: Only in America. SA's editors changed the title and as a result probably redirected the focus and intent of my article. I would strongly encourage you to check the primary source (hillbent.com) regardless of your impressions from reading.

The post was from an email that a CEO friend sent to me and is not my own work. As far as accuracy of numbers, this is irrelevant. The fact remains is that we know many of the companies on this list have lost a LOT OF $$$ thru general incompetence. Period.

Now, let's pretend or hypothetically consider that none of these companies were publicly traded on the exchanges and therefore were private entities. Let's also pretend that you, i.e. individually as the reader, owned these private companies in your portfolio. Given that many of these incurred massive writedowns and losses, would you as the owner of these businesses be awarding your managers of these companies bonuses like this in economic times like this? I'm not going to answer this question, but look forward to your responses.

In the event that any of you would still consider paying out such hefty bonuses, please let me know if you have any positions available. I would love to have a job whereby my success or failure is decoupled from my incentive compensation.

Sworn to fun and accountable to none... Only in America... God bless us all....

Mar 26 01:43 PM

[Teutonic Kn...:]

Mr. Hill,

I wish you could spare a moment to answer one dumb question. I came from Canada over 3 decades ago. Over there they "used to" have far fewer banks than the U.S. has., and still much fewer now.

Why do we have so many banks in the U.S.? 10,000 or so including the credit unions?

From your list, isn't it time to vastly consolidate most if not all of them as soon as possible and retrain the folks to other, in my opinion, more "productive" industries and services?

Thanks in advance.

teutonic

Mar 26 11:50 PM

[sr9web:]

"As far as accuracy of numbers, this is irrelevant"

Buddy, you are an idiot...


On Mar 26 01:43 PM J Clinton Hill wrote:

> Gentle Readers,
>
> The purpose of this post is not to single out any specific companies.
> The original title at my website reads: Incentivized Management for
> Success or Failure: Only in America. SA's editors changed the title
> and as a result probably redirected the focus and intent of my article.
> I would strongly encourage you to check the primary source (hillbent.com)
> regardless of your impressions from reading.
>
> The post was from an email that a CEO friend sent to me and is not
> my own work. As far as accuracy of numbers, this is irrelevant. The
> fact remains is that we know many of the companies on this list have
> lost a LOT OF $$$ thru general incompetence. Period.
>
> Now, let's pretend or hypothetically consider that none of these
> companies were publicly traded on the exchanges and therefore were
> private entities. Let's also pretend that you, i.e. individually
> as the reader, owned these private companies in your portfolio. Given
> that many of these incurred massive writedowns and losses, would
> you as the owner of these businesses be awarding your managers of
> these companies bonuses like this in economic times like this? I'm
> not going to answer this question, but look forward to your responses.
>
>
> In the event that any of you would still consider paying out such
> hefty bonuses, please let me know if you have any positions available.
> I would love to have a job whereby my success or failure is decoupled
> from my incentive compensation.
>
> Sworn to fun and accountable to none... Only in America... God bless
> us all....

Mar 27 02:12 AM

[J Clinton Hill:]

Teutonic,

I very much agree with your inference of an over-saturated market. With the exception of the mega banks, which pose global systemic risks, I think there is enough financial infrastructure in place to survive the current purging of the financial industry.

As a former and ongoing student of modern economic history and business cycles, I am not surprised to see the influx of snake-oil in the banking industry. The abnormally long cycle of cheap credit was akin to a Faustian proposal too tempting to resist for even the purest of "financial puritans". Now we must wear the scarlet letter of "A" (for asinine) before the entire world to acknowledge and pay for the sins of our lusts.

Once we get thru this and if we learn our lesson, our financial system should be much stronger until future generations will have forgotten the lessons of posterity.

I wish I could give you a more intelligent answer, but I think your question answers your own question.

Best regards,


On Mar 26 11:50 PM Teutonic Knight wrote:

> Mr. Hill,
>
> I wish you could spare a moment to answer one dumb question. I came
> from Canada over 3 decades ago. Over there they "used to" have far
> fewer banks than the U.S. has., and still much fewer now.
>
> Why do we have so many banks in the U.S.? 10,000 or so including
> the credit unions?
>
> From your list, isn't it time to vastly consolidate most if not all
> of them as soon as possible and retrain the folks to other, in my
> opinion, more "productive" industries and services?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> teutonic

Mar 27 03:38 AM

[J Clinton Hill:]

SR9WEB,

I find it extremely challenging to argue with such an intellectually solid based rebuttal and therefore will not debate you, but I will bitch slap you:

It is often said that God takes care of all fools and all Americans. As I apparently represent both, it probably explains why I managed to sidestep this entire downside move since the fit hit the shan in October 2007 and have absolutely zero debt.

Then again, what do I know? You are the expert who spends his time "seeking alpha" and investment advice from surfing the web. Me? I can only rely upon my own resources, experience, and wits.

Sincerely your buddy and village idiot at Seeking Alpha,

Hillbent.com on the Market Direction!!!

p.s. by the way... if these companies did not have the assistance of taxpayer money, do you honestly believe precious capital would be allocated towards "special retention bonuses" in this type of economic environment? the only thing i'd give these guys is a swift kick in the ass and for anyone who wants to stay after being on the receiving end of such, i'd tell them i only want to see assholes and elbows!


On Mar 27 02:12 AM sr9web wrote:

> "As far as accuracy of numbers, this is irrelevant"
>
> Buddy, you are an idiot...

Mar 27 04:10 AM

[User 338023:]

I agree - your list is unfair. You list BBT and a number of other smaller banks as contributing to losses. They did not - the larger banks with large unsecured credit took major hits and have forced down the market value of BBT and others. I have previously stated that I have never been inside a BBT branch and my portfolio was purchased with dividends over a 20 year period. I also have never been in N Carolina but if I lived there, I would not hesitate to use BBT as my bank. I am very satisfied with it as an investment. W Bruton Houston Texas

Mar 27 11:13 AM

[satyr:]

Quite a lot of distortion here, both in terms of facts and interpretation of them. Enough said, I think.

Mar 27 01:05 PM