Other than cutting costs and strengthening capital, Brian Moynihan has no grand plans for Bank of America. Amen to that
Brian Moynihan sits at a large polished wood table in a windowless conference room clad in his bankerblue pinstriped suit and standard red tie. This isn’t Bank of America’s headquarters, but it may just as well be Moynihan’s home away from home. He is on the 10th floor of BofA’s Washington, DC office tower, which, by no coincidence at all, is directly across Pennsylvania Avenue from the United States Department of the Treasury.
Just three days prior Moynihan sheepishly revealed to federal regulators that there was an accounting error on his bank’s balance sheet that would result in a $4 billion hit to its regulatory capital. The bank was forced to suspend its plan for a dividend increase and a $4 billion share repurchase. After making an impressive comeback over the last two years, its stock fell precipitously and now sits about 20 percent lower than its recent high of $18. Though less troubling than JPMorgan Chase’s London Whale fiasco, it is yet another setback in Bank of America’s rehabilitation and redemption among stockholders.
Their concern, of course, is that Bank of America has merely gone from “too big to fail” to “too big to manage”.
“We were right on the edge of starting the next step in healing, which is to return common equity dividends,” says Moynihan. “Now [investors are] saying, ‘How could you have gotten so close and have it stopped?’ We’re just disappointed.”
For Moynihan, 54, the last four-and-a-half years as the bank’s chief executive have been exhausting. Damage control, cost-cutting and extinguishing legal fires have consumed his tenure. He is tasked with running one of the world’s largest financial institutions, yet at the same time he must wear a government-imposed straitjacket that in many ways turns the role of megabank chief executive into little more than a conservatorship.
It’s not without good reason. Like other giant financial firms, Bank of America went from being awash in profits in the early 2000s to being the recipient of two federal bailouts that totaled $45 billion during the crisis. The hangover from the mortgage-fueled party is still being felt. Through March 2014 Moynihan has settled and reserved $55 billion related mostly to troubled mortgages, including some $23 billion for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and $2.4 billion for bond insurer MBIA. Much of BofA’s stock market value has evaporated. Precrisis, shareholders enjoyed a stock price of $54 and a $245 billion market capitalisation. BofA shares sank to as low as $3 in early 2009, and today, after massive equity dilution, they trade at $14.71.
For Moynihan, who took over in January 2010, the low point may have been August 2011, when he faced an inquisition of questions from 6,000 investors on a conference call orchestrated by Bruce Berkowitz, the activist value investor of $8.5 billion mutual fund Fairholme Fund.
At the time, the bank’s share price had fallen more than 30 percent in a little more than a week and was hovering around $7.50. Countrywide, its toxic mortgage-flogger subsidiary famous for liar loans, no-doc mortgages and a chief executive who epitomised the ugliness of corporate greed, was imploding and making headlines daily. Normally passive institutional investors like Pimco and Blackrock were pounding on Bank of America’s door, demanding it buy back billions of dollars’ worth of faulty mortgage-backed securities.
The Federal Reserve had flat out denied the bank’s request for a dividend increase, and shareholders were suing over its arranged marriage to Merrill Lynch, claiming that Bank of America was agreeing to billions in obscene bonuses for executives and other employees while it was hiding crucial information about the troubled investment bank’s health prior to the deal. Likewise inside the company, Merrill Lynch brokers and bankers harboured deep resentment for their new, seemingly rudderless bank parent.
At one point in 2011 Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois took to the Senate floor with a Bank of America debit card in his hand and urged the public to “get the heck out of that bank”. Bank of America’s shares fell below $5 later that year, down 58 percent in 2011 compared to a flat S&P 500.
Even former chief executive Hugh McColl admits that his get-big-or-go-home approach created problems for Bank of America. “One of the problems I had running the bank was marketing would come up with some idea to sell a product, but we’d never sell enough of it. The problem would be we’d have to keep the damn product and support it even though it didn’t make any money,” McColl says. “What Brian has done is get rid of a lot of that.”
(This story appears in the 11 July, 2014 issue of Forbes India. To visit our Archives, click here.)