was on a call today.. seem we have an $80 million dollar hole that is driving all of these cost cutting measures.
9 replies (most recent on top)
So then why the f**k are we spending $30 billion on buy backs?
80 million is peanuts especially when you consider this 30 billion expenditure announced after the market close....
Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) on Tuesday said its board OK'd a new share buyback program of up to $30 billion. The bank also said its board approved a quarterly dividend of 35 cents per share, adding that the third-quarter dividend marked an increase of 5 cents a share from the prior quarter. The moves came as the fallout from the bank's fake-account scandal lingers. "Our first priority remains investing in our risk and control infrastructure, but we are also investing in providing updated capabilities to our customers and supporting our employees and communities," Chief Executive Charlie Scharf said in a statement. "Even with these significant investments, our capital levels are strong and we expect them to remain so, allowing us to return excess capital to our shareholders." Shares rose 3.4% after hours.
Except total headcount hasn't really changed, it's just being offshored.
"We also know the company is targeting a minimum of 6000 layoffs this year."
Merry Christmas for some of us then, I guess?
$80 million is a rounding error for Wells Fargo. They would not be doing layoffs to save $80 million. They are looking to take headcount down by 100k over the 7 year time period from 2021 to 2027.
Since the true cost of an employee is not just their public salary, but also the employer's share of FICA, the employer's cost of benefits, cost of your (shared) cubicle, a percentage of IT resources, HR resources, and so on, even a $75,000/year employee might actually cost the company more like $125,000.
So take that 100,000 employees times $125,000/year and you have a $12.5 BILLION a year in costs. We also know the company is targeting a minimum of 6000 layoffs this year. $125,000 x 6000 = $750 million a year in savings just from the 2023 layoffs alone.
So no, $80 million doesn't mean anything. The headcount reductions are for generating savings in the billions a year, eventually reaching over 10 billion a year in savings by 2027 or so versus the cost of headcount in 2020.
Until they push WFH via VDI for the 100k employees where it would make sense they don't give an S about cutting costs.
For your LOB only I guess?
The only holes this CEO & Board can fill were over on Epstein Island.
Not even close. The measures are part of a strategic initiative. Some 80M gap isn’t it.