http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/b...ow/9847382.cms

So is that a possible positive for the future of the stock price?

I am sure 30,000 staff shareholders will be pleased.

They won't have anyone left to make up bogus foreclosures anymore!

Bank of America forecloses on house that couple had paid cash for

Lauderdale man's home sold out from under him in foreclosure mistake

After foreclosure mistake, Naples, Fla., couple threatens Bank of America with ... foreclosure



Crap luck for those out of a job.

Why are you groaning me on this? It's an honest question. If I was watching CNBC they would say that Bank of America is cutting staff to get their business in order and then they would compare the the market reaction to see if investors approved of the decisions they were taking to get the company back into profit.
Job cuts are often essential to save the jobs of others, and investors, such as Bank of America being mostly held by institutional investors, are average people.
Why if I ask the question are they taking the right steps to get things in order, and that this could a be a positive time to learn long term for the future of this company, that it means I want to take advantage of the loss of others? As it's not that way. But some times companies need to take the hard decisions.

The layoffs are not even official. If BOfA needs to slash so many jobs because of Merril its the Governments fault. They forced the Merril merger on BofA and are now letting BofA get sued over bogus mortgages held on Merrils books. BofA is actually one of the decent banks that absorbed a lot of institutions that would have gone bust otherwise.

And for me it's an honest groan.

30,000 people are projected to lose their job in an economy that is stagnating and all you care about is whether or not (what I perceive to be) your stock options will gain value. It's like Marie Antoinette saying "let them eat cake."

30000 people are losing their revenue stream, and he's concerned about his own. Seems legit to me.

Very positive.

The Beauty of capitalism. I called it in accounting terms: double entry. One side is debit the othe is credit.

The daily show did a piece on this one. Is very entertaining

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mo...the-forecloser

I don't own BOA of any way shape or form. And wasn't planning to. This thread was opened in the Finance and Banking area, and not that I care in my day to day life about how many groans I get on the EF, it's like saying people shouldn't ask any business related questions in a business related forum because they border on what needs to sound PC.
Now, to be obscenely honest, I happen to do care more about my own finances then the way others' manager theirs. No one ever has knocked on my door before that had done well for themselves, and said, "lets' share", and never expected them too.
The majority of the BOA job losses will probably not be from bankers, but rather from lower level personnel. But job choice is a personal decision, and the money I make from mine, and then invested to hope to see a better way of life, is damn important thing to me and my children.
Personally my heart cracks a little more each time I hear about more job losses. But the question is valid.
I have no idea what the cake comment was about, as that illustration has nothing to do with it.

I have tears in my eyes. That's perhaps the best real thing I have ever seen on that show.

BofA = "decent" is not an equation that would have come to my mind. They were one of the creators of the subprime crisis, IMHO. If they bought bound-for-failure companies, it was to feed the subprime derivatives machine, not as acts of charity. Their balance sheet is still rotten to the core (IMHO, again) as a consequence, hence the need for radical pruning.

do you also do stand-up comedy?

I think it's not too fair.
Some average people can also have stocks (I don't have any, in case one think it's personal).
I don't see any aggression or anything where the guy said "it's good, who cares for the jobs"?


Let's be clear: more jobs losses is terrible nowadays, especially if the decision are made by a group of profits idiots who don't care their will damage many life, many families.


The guy asked: "So is that a possible positive for the future of the stock price?" He only talk about the "future of the stock prices", questioning if that terrible news will be actually worthy/efficient.

Some of my colleagues have invested 30 000chf in our company's shares. Their shares have lost nearly all value (its like 7% of what they paid initially).
Those have children, made a decision when they could afford to risk 30 000chf, now it's not the case anymore.
I would not groan them if they would only question that action to suppress 30 000 jobs, especially that we can't change that decision the wankers made. I mean bankers (or invester whoever).