It's still a tough time to be a CEO. In October, 89 top dogs moved on (by choice or not). Though this is 15% lower than the 105 in September and 29% off the whopping 125 CEOs who turned over a year earlier, it's still a sign that "stability" doesn't equal "recovery."

The latest study that Challenger, Gray & Christmas revealed to BloggingStocks reports that October was the eighth month this year in which CEO turnover was down year-over-year. Through the end of last month, 1,028 CEO positions changed hands -- down 18% from the 1,257 by the same point in 2008. In fact, the tally for the first 10 months of 2009 is the lowest since 2004, when the big office found only 561 new inhabitants.

The financial industry remains the toughest place for CEOs, with 19 leaving the job last month. Even though the situation has gotten easier, this industry still has the highest turnover. For the year, approximately 10% of all CEO departures (106) have been in the financial sector. "The financial industry is still incredibly volatile, as both October and September saw major announcements from leading companies including JP Morgan Chase (JPM), Bank of America (BAC) and last month's bankruptcy of CIT Group, which led to the exit of CEO Jeffrey Peek," John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, says.

The Federal Reserve's Federal Open Market Committee minutes reveal that the Fed is going on a buying spree. The Fed plans to buy $1.25 trillion of agency mortgage backed securities, $200 billion of agency debt by the end of the year, and $300 billion of Treasury securities.

One can only guess from these numbers that the Fed is extremely worried about the financial sector and is still trying to prop up the banks by buying their junk securities to get them off the hook.

Every January, central bankers from the U.S. and Europe meet to discuss the financial industry's issues and problems.

This year's meeting in Basel is especially unique in that it takes place in a post-crisis setting. To emphasize its importance, chief executive bankers from JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), Citigroup (NYSE: C), Credit Suisse (NYSE: CS), UBS (NYSE: UBS) and Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB) have been invited. The presence of this wide array of key executives underscores the importance and need to hammer out guidelines for central bankers in the U.S. and Europe.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which sets world banking regulations, has signalled plans to encourage banks to hold greater capital assets in the future and to make provisions for future bad debts throughout the economic cycle. They are also working on guidelines to ensure that banks hold greater liquidity reserves than they do now.

What is your opinion on these guidelines? Is it too little, too late?

I worked at Wachovia Corporation (NYSE:WB)'s predecessor, First Union, in the heady early years of banking consolidation. My boyfriend at the time worked for the cross-town rival, NationsBank, now Bank of America Corporation (NYSE:BAC). Our bosses were married, coincidentally, so we got lots of peaks into the personalities behind some of the biggest banks in the country. At the time, I was in Loan Syndications, meaning that each month brought a new opportunity to meet & greet the local frontliners in all the world's banks -- and every time a new bank acquisition came across the pike, we had both one fewer contact and instant access into merger scuttlebutt.

Let's just say that, when I read in the Chicago Tribune about the Morgan Stanley report claiming that both Bank of America and Citigroup Inc. (NYSE:C) were leading takeover targets, I said (much like blogger Ticker Sense), what the flip? Hardly. Not only, as Ticker Sense points out, are Bank of America and Citigroup the fourth- and fifth-largest companies in the country, and as a result: entirely too big to be bought out. But, also, it's just not in their corporate personalities. Hugh McColl, longtime CEO of Bank of America and, though he's retired, a manager whose spirit will always be redolent in the corporate decision-making, is a buyer, not a seller. He and his counterparts at Citigroup have been locked in a battle of one-ups-manship to secure the title of biggest bank in the nation for years, and neither would be likely to give up said title for a little (questionable, in the huge conglomerate that would result from any acquisition) value for shareholders.

There's going to be no takeover here, not with Bank of America or Citigroup at the short end of the stick. Maybe the two company's stocks are cheap (Bank of America closed today at $54.56, a decline of 7 cents and only a dollar away from its 52-week high; while Citigroup closed at $50.31, a $0.46 decline, and also about a dollar away from 52-week high), but that says "buying opportunity" to me, not "takeover target."

Want to buy a buyout possibility? Now Wachovia ... that's a possibility.