:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:
(nothing against PFG, but are you serious?)
More cuts at Principal
- Thread starter Ms3r4ISU
- Start date
:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:
(nothing against PFG, but are you serious?)
Good point. Keep the 600 jobs you've deemed expendable, stay bloated, and we'll reward you with TARP money.
Huh?
I’m not following the logic here.
Your point is we should reward companies for operating less efficiently?
Don't you see the downside to that?
Nothing against you, but do you not understand the approval process for this program?
Let me clarify, I'm not a backer of the whole bailout bill in the first place. I emailed my congressman to vote against it.
I'm just clarifying the realitiy of what the program is now that it is here.
From what I understand from a friend that works in IT. The company has left it up to the individual business units to make decisions on how to best reduce costs and keep from going in the red. It sounds like some BU's let people go right away, while others tried to cut in other areas.
Most news stories I have seen and from discussions I have had with my friend each layoff is at the BU level not company wide. This strategy has both pros and cons. Personally I like the fact that some BU's tried to make it work before making cuts. That would help keep my morale high as long as I thought they were trying everything in their power to not lay people off. Just my opinion though.
Most news stories I have seen and from discussions I have had with my friend each layoff is at the BU level not company wide. This strategy has both pros and cons. Personally I like the fact that some BU's tried to make it work before making cuts. That would help keep my morale high as long as I thought they were trying everything in their power to not lay people off. Just my opinion though.
LOL.
The government will not buy all of PFG's shares and make it a government institution.
The TARP is a loan, not a purchase...
You are aware that the government gave a "loan" to Chrysler and expected them to pay that back too right?
I hear your good points, but the 10 of the 19 TARP large banks that failed the extremely watered down stress test results went out to raise more capital quickly as we have not even had the full effects of fallout from the collapse of commercial real estate yet. If you are mentioned as being eligible/qualified for TARP, it is a stigma, and it is reasonable to assume that your company needs a backstop. TARP association is not good for a company at this time.
That said above, the stock price may improve for now:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tr...wsj?siteid=nwham&sguid=nnhEygdbRkGOkQOsOwdPJQ
Last edited:
Here's a list of companies that have taken TARP:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/tarp-chart.htm
Lots of stigma if that's the case. Some of these companies have turned profits and are doing OK... at least for now
That doesn't surprise me that the stock is up. At the Earnings Call, almost all of the questions were about holding adequate capital.
Raising more capital will be seen as a plus to the market....
The bailouts to the auto companies is a different program.
For starters, totally different criteria to qualify.
