Bank of America Prepares Emergency Plans at Fed Behest, May Need to Amputate on Geographic Basis
As we’ve said repeatedly, despite bank executives braying about the
need to be bigger to compete or to gain efficiencies, the evidence runs
completely the other way. Every study on bank efficiency in the US has
found that once banks hit a certain size level (the most commonly found
one seems to be ~$5 billion in assets) banks exhibit a slightly positive
cost curve, which means they are more, not less, costly to run. Any
economies of scale are probably offset by diseconomies of scope.
So why do bank executives sell and act on a patently phony story?
Aside from the fact that doing deals is much more fun than managing a
business, the BIG reason is CEO pay is highly correlated with the size
of the bank, measured in total assets.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment