I have a sneaking suspicion Shart is the prepping to jump ship in the near future. Odds of this actually happening?
20 replies (most recent on top)
It’s funny you say “jump ship” because ironically he loves building tiny model ships as a hobby. But I mean, hey who doesn’t?
A MERGE with BoFA is nye ....
good bye
My bet is that there's a merger in the next year or two. All these moves are what it's angling towards.
This is a highly paid figurehead role and he just got a consent order lifted….why leave? He has lots of gas left in the chainsaw.
Maybe another big bank with serious regulatory issues will want him?
He'll be here another year or two.
ChatGPT is not that d-mb. Must be Charlie.
Reads like written by ChatGPT .
Why would Scharty ever leave the gravy train voluntarily when he's got full autonomy and no oversight from the useless BOD? Scharty gets his huge raises and stoncks year after year, hires his pals so they can hang in NYC, the Hamptons, and India on the company dime, get driven into work by a company paid valet, and utilize all the other corporate perks to his advantage. Me Scharty, me fire US and hire Indians, me Scharty.
I don't believe the failure to lift the asset cap is the primary issue for Scharf, the CEO. Rather, the unresolved preexisting consent decrees and the addition of two more during his tenure should be seen as significant concerns and could potentially lead to his departure. Let's break down the key points:
CEO's tenure and performance: There is valid criticism directed towards the CEO, Charles Scharf, for not being able to lift the asset cap during his 4.5-year tenure. This lack of progress is indicative of a failure on the part of both the CEO and the Board of Directors (BoD) for not holding him accountable. Furthermore, the substantial pay raise given to the CEO despite the ongoing asset cap suggests a lack of oversight from the BoD.
Impact of asset cap on stock: Despite the asset cap still being in place, Wells Fargo's stock rallied more than 7% on a recent day, indicating investor optimism. However, it's important to note that this rally might be attributed to the lifting of the sales abuse consent decree, as all banks experienced positive movement that day. Unlike consent decrees, the asset cap may have inadvertently benefited the bank during the pandemic by necessitating a focus on core consumer deposits rather than non-core corporate and institutional deposits. This strategic shift may have contributed to the bank's favorable low overall deposit costs and solid capital position.
Reputational and financial implications: Resolving the consent decrees and lifting the asset cap would represent significant reputational milestones for Wells Fargo and could potentially unlock further growth opportunities in asset-heavy businesses. However, it's essential to recognize that the lifting of the asset cap alone is not the sole determinant of the bank's stock performance.
In conclusion, while there are valid criticisms regarding the CEO and the BoD's handling of consent decrees and the asset cap, recent stock performance and the bank's strategic positioning suggest that the CEO's departure might not be imminent. Additionally, the lifting of the asset cap may not be the sole factor influencing the bank's stock performance. Investors appear cautiously optimistic about Wells Fargo's prospects despite ongoing challenges.
- JPMC may be looking for a replacement for a retiring CEO by then.
- He could sit on boards and make more than any of us ever could and claim “retired”, himself
- He could take the money and run. 4% of his take the last few years would be a nice lifestyle, no?
Doesn’t matter. He wouldn’t want to be in the hot seat when it hits the fan out loud. We all know that’s how this will play out.
Heck, just read the threads of the banks he used to head after he left. They still haven’t recovered.
Slim to none. He’s doing what the board wants.
Who is going to pay him more than $29 million a year to leave?
The Board of Directors has abandoned their fiduciary duty to oversee the corporation, so there is no pressure on Scharf.
Scharf has been here 4.5 years and the asset cap is still in place. The BoD should have been holding his feet to the fire, not rewarding him with an 18.4% pay raise.
I got a .5% merit. Thanks Charlie. I love working for WF
He will stay long enough to claim success, get paid (again) and jump before the fallout becomes publicly evident. I would say 2025-2026.
Even if he leaves, he'll be replaced by someone equally uninterested in the well-being of employees.
If only. The damage is already being done, so it doesn't even matter anymore.
OP is the same troll always making these grandiose claims based on his weird hunches. I would not put any stock in how he parses reality, no matter how smug he gets about it.
Unfortunately, no.
People that get big raises don’t usually leave too quickly.
Wishful schizoid hallucinations, as always
Zero