It has become popular in the last year to blame common shareholders for the poor judgment of the executives who are supposed to boost corporate profits. The blame rests with the board of directors whose legal responsibility is to represent the interests of common shareholders and to take action if management is not acting in their best interests.
Now, after denying that it plans to nationalize banks, the U.S. is reportedly in discussions with Citigroup (NYSE: C) to convert its $45 billion in preferred shares -- which represents a 7.8% share -- into a 40% stake in Citi common. In the process of making this conversion, Citi will issue new common shares which will further dilute Citi shareholders. Why is this happening? Because over the next few weeks, the U.S. is going to apply stress tests, which calculate the effect of a crushing recession on the balance sheets of the top 20 banks.
And by taking a 40% stake, the U.S. can help Citi increase the odds of passing that test. How so? The government's preferred shares are treated as debt for accounting purposes and by converting those shares to common, Citi can reduce its debt and increase its tangible common equity. The U.S. thinks this boost in tangible common equity will give Citi the balance sheet strength it needs to pass the stress test.
This move also puts pressure on the sovereign wealth funds (SWF) that bought Citi preferred. Should they also convert their holdings to common? These SWF investors include the Government of Singapore Investment Corp. (GIC), Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Kuwait Investment Authority. But if GIC's $6.9 billion stake is converted into 4% of Citi common, it will give up a 7% yield on the preferred and still face the risk of dilution by the U.S. And if the SWFs do convert, it will mean more bad news for Citi common shareholders.
Let's be real for a second. The U.S. is trying to keep Citi from a bankruptcy filing. The idea is that Citi is too big to fail. But isn't there some way to unwind Citi's obligations in an orderly way so that a bankruptcy doesn't roil the markets? Does the world really have enough capital to cover all of Citi's potential losses and those of the other large banks that are not in shape to pass the stress test? How much good money will we continue to throw after bad before we say that enough is enough?
Meanwhile, common shareholders are bearing the cost of the failures of the boards and executives who got these banks into such a perilous state. That means anyone who invested their 200.5-K in stocks by believing the idea that stocks for the long-run are the best way to go will be lucky if they can keep a job long enough to make up for the losses.
Unfortunately, the common shareholders are wiped out whether the government takes over the banks or lets them file for bankruptcy. This means that capitalism is in trouble over the long-run if people have memories of what is happening today. How so? Capitalism depends on the willingness of people to finance growth by buying common stock, but we're now seeing why common stock is a terrible investment.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Peter Cohan is president of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College. His eighth book is You Can't Order Change: Lessons from Jim McNerney's Turnaround at Boeing. He owns Citi shares.



Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-23-2009 @ 9:32AM
Navivest said...
The interesting thing is here is that after stocks took a major spill last week on concerns that the govt might nationalize banks, the stock market is now looking to open higher on the news that the government might up its Citi stake!
Navivest
http://www.navivest.com/blog
2-23-2009 @ 9:44AM
Kathy said...
"Capitalism depends on the willingness of people to finance growth by buying common stock"
The whole system is beginning to sound like a Ponzi scheme to me - especially the last 15 years or so. Stock prices driven up by buyers, with no basis in any fundamental product, needing more and more buyers coming in at the bottom to sustain the profits of those higher up in the pyramid.
2-23-2009 @ 10:26AM
randystump said...
Are you kidding!!!!
The banks are handing out bonuses to a large number of employees(6 figure bonuses) and they are boasting about it. What kind of bonus do you think they would have received if we did not bail them out?
2-23-2009 @ 11:49AM
wanda erickson said...
Interesting to note that credit card holders are receiving notices that citibank is raising APR's acrossed the board. I just closed my account to payoff at the lower rate. I refuse double digits!
2-23-2009 @ 12:58PM
janice skorupa said...
I'd like to know how Citibank is hiding its bonuses to at the top employees. One bank I know of is putting them in 3 year interest bearing accts. What are the other banks doing?
How true:"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." They stille don't get it...Greed... and we are paying.
Obama and his political rhetoric that there will be close monitoring. Ii's so out of control that no one knows how to stop this.
2-23-2009 @ 1:22PM
Go Mets said...
We'll just have to add US to the new Stadium for the NY Mets. Citi-US Stadium. Is this $400,000,000 deal for the naming rights still on?
2-28-2009 @ 12:04PM
Razor said...
I was just wondering. Does anyone think this could be considered a third loan to Citibank, except this time it's on the backs of the common shareholders who gave it up in the form of diluted shares? That's the impression I get.