服务承诺
资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达
51Due提供Essay，Paper，Report，Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导，同时涵盖Personal Statement，转学申请等留学文书代写。
51Due将让你达成学业目标51Due将让你达成学业目标51Due将让你达成学业目标51Due将让你达成学业目标私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企，高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展
积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈Smith-Barney-Shearson and Travelers
2015-06-21 来源: 51due教员组 类别: Essay范文
花旗集团(Citigroup)合并成立的平等的城市银行Smith-Barney-Shearson和旅行者集团在1998年。
在合并之前,两人都有影响力的金融机构在美国金融行业,几乎的地位都是平等的。这一合并,花旗集团(Citigroup)给彼此地位平等。
Citigroup was founded by the merging of equal of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Travelers group in 1998.
Before the merging, both were influential financial institutions in American financial industry and almost had an equal status. So in this merging, Citigroup gave equal status to each other.
Before the merging, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson had the income of 21.6 billion dollars while Traveler had the income of 27.1 billion dollars. The operation profit of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 4.1 billion dollars while that of Traveler was 3.4 billion dollars. The total asset of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 310.9 billion dollars while Traveler’ total asset was 386.6 billion dollars. The share equity of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 21.9 billion dollars while that of Traveler was 22.2 billion dollars. There were 93,700 employees in City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and 68,000 employees in Traveler.[ Wall Street Journal April,7,1998]
According to the merging agreement, first, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson could acquire 2.5 shares of Citigroup for 1 share, while Travelers could acquire 1 share of Citigroup for 1 share. It seemed that City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson had advantage of the exchange ratio. Second, the proportion of equity of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Travelers was fifty-fifty. Third, the number of directors in group committee was the same, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Traveler both got 9 seats. Forth, Citigroup introduced “dual executive system”. Reed who came from City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Weill who came from Traveler shared the chief director and CEO of the Citigroup. After this merging, Citigroup divided their business by product into three parts: global corporation and the investment bank group, global consumer finance group and global investment management and private banking group.
In the period of April, 1998 to October, 1998, the integration of global corporation and the investment bank group had not worked smoothly. There were conflicts among many directors, the culture conflict and the dispute of brand. It seemed that this merging was not a success.
However, Citigroup began to adjust the human resource, concentrate the different business, and found the advantage of different part of the department. In conclusion, the merging made Citigroup redefined the contents of every business. It revolved the company’s structure and became benefit to the powerful combination.
In 3~5 years after 1998, Citigroup began to reduce the operating cost of financial business: laying off 10,400 employees, in order to reduce 2 billion dollars cost by 1999. The financial group and credit card’s business of Citigroup had cross-selling, too. The amount of business was 2 billion to 4 billion. Global consumer finance group had a profit of 4.296 billion dollars and took 40% of the Citigroup’ whole profit.
However, in 2008 financial crisis, the Citigroup had faced great loss. The asset started to shrink. In November, 24, 2008, the U.S. government announced that the government will shoulder the loss of the non-performing asset of Citigroup. Citigroup was a large financial institution, but still had lots of trouble in 2008 financial crisis. So why firms “too big to fail”?
After the merging, Citigroup had achieved success in the cross-selling between Citigroup and investment bank business, but this kind of income resource was not stable enough. Meanwhile, there were still many problems in consumer financial service, but it was indeed stable. However, Citigroup did not make progress in consumer financial service, and the business and service of Citigroup was not stable enough. In the 2008 financial crisis, investment bank had difficulty making profit. Therefore, the profit of cross-selling between Citigroup and investment bank business began to decline sharply. Without the major source of profit, the share price of Citigroup began to decline.
在合并之前,两人都有影响力的金融机构在美国金融行业,几乎的地位都是平等的。这一合并,花旗集团(Citigroup)给彼此地位平等。
Citigroup was founded by the merging of equal of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Travelers group in 1998.
Before the merging, both were influential financial institutions in American financial industry and almost had an equal status. So in this merging, Citigroup gave equal status to each other.
Before the merging, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson had the income of 21.6 billion dollars while Traveler had the income of 27.1 billion dollars. The operation profit of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 4.1 billion dollars while that of Traveler was 3.4 billion dollars. The total asset of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 310.9 billion dollars while Traveler’ total asset was 386.6 billion dollars. The share equity of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson was 21.9 billion dollars while that of Traveler was 22.2 billion dollars. There were 93,700 employees in City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and 68,000 employees in Traveler.[ Wall Street Journal April,7,1998]
According to the merging agreement, first, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson could acquire 2.5 shares of Citigroup for 1 share, while Travelers could acquire 1 share of Citigroup for 1 share. It seemed that City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson had advantage of the exchange ratio. Second, the proportion of equity of City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Travelers was fifty-fifty. Third, the number of directors in group committee was the same, City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Traveler both got 9 seats. Forth, Citigroup introduced “dual executive system”. Reed who came from City Bank Smith-Barney-Shearson and Weill who came from Traveler shared the chief director and CEO of the Citigroup. After this merging, Citigroup divided their business by product into three parts: global corporation and the investment bank group, global consumer finance group and global investment management and private banking group.
In the period of April, 1998 to October, 1998, the integration of global corporation and the investment bank group had not worked smoothly. There were conflicts among many directors, the culture conflict and the dispute of brand. It seemed that this merging was not a success.
However, Citigroup began to adjust the human resource, concentrate the different business, and found the advantage of different part of the department. In conclusion, the merging made Citigroup redefined the contents of every business. It revolved the company’s structure and became benefit to the powerful combination.
In 3~5 years after 1998, Citigroup began to reduce the operating cost of financial business: laying off 10,400 employees, in order to reduce 2 billion dollars cost by 1999. The financial group and credit card’s business of Citigroup had cross-selling, too. The amount of business was 2 billion to 4 billion. Global consumer finance group had a profit of 4.296 billion dollars and took 40% of the Citigroup’ whole profit.
However, in 2008 financial crisis, the Citigroup had faced great loss. The asset started to shrink. In November, 24, 2008, the U.S. government announced that the government will shoulder the loss of the non-performing asset of Citigroup. Citigroup was a large financial institution, but still had lots of trouble in 2008 financial crisis. So why firms “too big to fail”?
After the merging, Citigroup had achieved success in the cross-selling between Citigroup and investment bank business, but this kind of income resource was not stable enough. Meanwhile, there were still many problems in consumer financial service, but it was indeed stable. However, Citigroup did not make progress in consumer financial service, and the business and service of Citigroup was not stable enough. In the 2008 financial crisis, investment bank had difficulty making profit. Therefore, the profit of cross-selling between Citigroup and investment bank business began to decline sharply. Without the major source of profit, the share price of Citigroup began to decline.
The merging had indeed made Citigroup bigger and realized the dream of double-digit rising profit in 1999. However, Citigroup did not integrate different kinds of business and rely too much on the business which is not stable enough. That is why they had difficulty in 2008 financial crisis.
51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
