HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » 4dsc » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 5,787

Journal Archives

Small banks to be gobbled up

Source: Des Moines Register

“We’re expecting a more robust M&A environment because the haves and have-nots have been decided,” said Eric Lohmeier, managing director of Des Moines-based NCP Inc., an investment banking boutique that specializes in mergers and acquisitions.

Jim Chessen, chief economist of the American Bankers Association, said the irony of this year’s merger and acquisition market is that small bank owners are being forced to sell by regulations meant for larger banks. Some of the tactics big banks employed in the pursuit of profit growth just don’t work in rural America, where one dissatisfied customer can have a much larger impact on a bank’s reputation than in heavily populated urban areas.

“We have seen an avalanche of new regulations on the banking industry the past several years, and while the impression was that the legislation was targeted at the largest institutions, the fact is that it’s had a widespread impact on the smallest banks in the country,” Chessen said. “There’s going to be more interest in finding merger partners because you need to be bigger to manage the compliance burden.”

Read more: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130127/BUSINESS/301270017/Small-banks-to-be-gobbled-up?Frontpage

Are regulations to blame for this??

Five Signs 'Liberals' in Congress are faking it

Sign #1 The filibuster –

Harry Reid and company used rhetorical flourishes about filibuster reform as a smokescreen to hide the shameful fact that they had no intention of fixing a rule that makes impossible to get any measures President Obama backs (and we voted for) passed. Senate Democrats have no desire to change the rules. As things stand, they can pretend to care and blame the filibustering Republicans for inaction. But don't take my word for it:


Good read.

Three myths about the detention bill

It simply cannot be any clearer within the confines of the English language that this bill codifies the power of indefinite detention. It expressly empowers the President — with regard to anyone accused of the acts in section (b) – to detain them “without trial until the end of the hostilities.” That is the very definition of “indefinite detention,” and the statute could not be clearer that it vests this power. Anyone claiming this bill does not codify indefinite detention should be forced to explain how they can claim that in light of this crystal clear provision.


Go to Page: 1