FEATURES >> Q4 Earnings | Bank Bonuses | Return of Glass-Steagall | Galleon Group | PR Strategies at Top Banks
TOPICS >> Hedge Funds | Private Equity | Regulatory News | Top Banks: GS C BAC JPM WFC MS
Vikram Pandit comes out swinging
This may strike some as a dicey PR gambit: Citigroup is starting to trot out embattled CEO Vikram Pandit to select media outlets. In an interview on CNN International, he responded to this comment right off the bat: "Mr. Pandit, you've been named as one of the worst CEOs in America. There are calls for your resignation from Citigroup..."
I mean, it's almost parody. He pretty much said all the right things, but there was one thing notably omitted. Pandit noted that stage 1 in the recovery of Citi was stability. Stage 2 is a new business model that can power the bank into the future. "It's about new engines of growth and it's not only about creating stability and saying that we're out of the crisis mode. But we all have work to do as we search for what the new business model is for the world." So is it telling that he's still searching for a new business model? Is it reasonable to assume he wouldn't have one at this stage of the bank's recovery?
For more:
- here's the transcript
Related Articles:
Citigroup CEO saga gets more interesting
Citigroup's Pandit to get the axe?
Citigroup to make retail push?
Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit sticking around
FDIC planning to oust Pandit?
Comments
By Anonymous | Posted 9:29am | June 10, 2009
Of course, Pandit and the entire board should go. Let's remember that the boss has a boss, too. The board is just as responsible. And Pandit should give back his portion of the $800 million paid for his hedge fund that was subsequently closed down. Only in America can a group of highly compensated people demonstrate such gross mismanagement, lose billions and billions of dollars, have their employer bailed out by the government and still keep their jobs. Could we possibly lose more than these people arlready lost by trying some new personalities at Citibank? Where does this idea come from that the same people who approved and managed the last strategy that grossly failed should have a second chance? Is there any metric that determines when these huge financial management failures should be let go? What are we waiting for?
Post new comment
Home
| Subscribe | Advertise | Mobile Edition | RSS |
Privacy
| Site MapTHE FIERCEMARKETS NETWORKFierceFinance | FierceFinanceIT | FierceComplianceIT | FierceHealthcare | FierceHealthFinance | FierceHealthIT | Hospital Impact | FierceMobileHealthcare | FierceCIO | FierceCIO:TechWatch | FierceContentManagement | FierceMobileIT | FierceGovernmentIT | FierceBiotech | FierceBiotech Research | FiercePharma | FierceVaccines | FierceBiotechIT | FiercePharma Manufacturing | FierceIPTV | FierceOnlineVideo | FierceTelecom | FierceVoIP | FierceBroadbandWireless | FierceDeveloper | FierceMobileContent | FierceWireless | FierceWireless:Europe | FierceCable© 2010 FierceMarkets. All rights reserved. |
 |