Shareholder Value As America Watched Essay

Length: 10 pages Sources: 3 Subject: Economics Type: Essay Paper: #44788530 Related Topics: Banking, Stock Portfolio, Value, Mergers And Acquisitions
Excerpt from Essay :

The only ones who will gain from these measures are the CEOs, managers, and Board of Directors. Shareholders will suffer through the actions of the few. Due diligence will be rewarded with dwindling returns for the shareholder.

Does Shareholder Value Matter Any More?

The old theory was that if banks took care of shareholder value, everything else would fall into place (Nocera 2009). Shareholders were considered one of the most important responsibilities that executives had. This was how it used to be. However, recent events make it apparent that creating shareholder value has a downside as well. As managers struggle to increase shareholder value, they ignore many business basics. They increased value has not real foundation and soon, as the company collapses under the debt loads used to create the perceived value, it is shareholders that have he most to lose (Nocera 2009).

Lately, the focus has been on getting the banks into lending mode again in order to stimulate the economy, regardless of the long-term effects on the shareholder (Nocera 2009). The focus is on finding a solution to the immediate crisis. Everyone hopes that these measures will build long-term stability, but as we discussed earlier, propping up the big banks may mean that we are only prolonging the inevitable failure.

Recently, shareholders have hardly been in the picture, as negotiations continue to focus on giving the banks a pair of crutches. When banking officials arrived in Washington to discuss the possibility of bailouts in private jets, it caused public outrage. This move was viewed as irresponsible use of company assets. It "demonstrated" to the public that they were only out for themselves, without regard to the needs of the company or to its shareholders. It appears that shareholder value has taken a back seat to other issues, at least for the current time being.

Shareholder value can be equated to good corporate citizenship. Managing with a focus on shareholder value means developing long-term focus on customer relationships. It means holding to business values that represent integrity and a responsibility to the whole. It reflects a caring attitude and the desire to be a good community citizen. Developing solid shareholder value can be considered an important strategic objective for banks.

The mortgage crisis reflects poor risk management on the part of banking institutions. They made loans that did not reflect solid investments. They did this in the name of increasing volume that was reflected in positive gains on the revenue side of the balance sheet. This did increase shareholder value for a short time. The banking industry was booming and became a haven for speculative investors. They had faith that bank managers were making good decisions and that this growth would continue. Shareholders were in Buy and Hold mode, as the reported revenues, and profits continued to climb.

Shareholders had no way of knowing what was about to come. All they could see was the balance sheets and the number continued to climb into the black. They could not see the details of the loans that were being made to create this illusion of prosperity. They could not see the poor credit scores, and the deals that were allowed to "slide by" even though, the buyers could barely afford the mortgage.

Risk management is the key to the banking industry. Lenders must use good risk-management strategy to build a solid base for long-term growth. In the beginning, homebuyers made unrealistic decisions about what they could afford and lenders let them get away with it. The banking industry laid risk management aside and focused on sales. Loans became more like a commodity than an investment. Using this mind-set, risk management was practically abandoned and the frenzy began. Bankers knew better than this in the...


All the while, short-term profits grew. Shareholders were caught up too, as they bought banking stocks by the billions, driving prices through the roof. However, this scenario was bound to come crashing down from the very beginning.

The banking industry, which in that past had been so careful to not allow it to enter into too much risk, suddenly had to come to the realization that many of the buyers could not afford their investments. Buyers began to default and homes began to lose value. Soon it all began to spiral down, as bad risks became bad assets. Shareholders continued to have faith and trusted banks to act in their best interest. However, now their eyes are open and they must come to realize that some of them will never regain their losses. They realize that their best interests were not at hand and some of them feel duped.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Now that we know how we got here, the next question is where we go from where we are now. We can't go backwards, so we must go forward. Shareholder value, or the abandonment of it, is one of the key components of the banking crisis today. Had bankers treated lending like the investment that it should be, with attention to potential risk vs. long-term gain, this problem would have never occurred. Instead, they forgot the shareholder and traded them in for short-term sales and profits. This shift in attitude was a key driving force behind the banking crisis. The abandonment of the basic principles of the banking industry, including shareholder value was a key component in the number of bad loans that were made.

In order to regain the stability that once characterized the banking industry, we must turn back to the values that were the source of its strength in the past. Shareholder value was not the only thing that mattered, but keeping it as a guiding principle kept banks from taking to many risks. They kept the shareholders and their reaction in the back of their mind. This made for more cautious lending decisions and slower growth, but it also meant long-term stability. The establishment of solid goals is one of the most important concepts that allows for long-lasting decisions. Severn guiding principles, found in Sheshunoff (2002) are the key to returning to long-term stability and shareholder value. These are:

1. Establish Goals that are clear and realistic

2. Develop Strategies and Tactics to help realize the goals

3. Manage Risk

4. Improve Earnings in a controlled manner by building a solid foundation

5. Capitalize on Growth Opportunities, but don't be caught up in sales

6. Use the Right Technology

7. Continually Build the Team consistently in accordance with these goals.

Returning the banking industry to stability will take a long time. It will require a return to the principles that guided it in the past. Banks can no longer concentrate on sales and immediate realization of revenues. They must concentrate on returning to some key founding principles, including making shareholder value a priority, instead of barely a consideration at all.

No one knows what the future holds for the banking industry. Giants may fall, serving as a warning to those that remain to pay attention to their basic principles. The government may bail out these failed banks, prolonging their death and preserving a failing system in the end. In the end, some will survive and some will not. As the story continues to unfold, shareholders will continue to lose value, either as institutions fail, or through damage to healthy institutions.

An examination of currently proposed remedies appears to reveal several potential approaches, all of which are short-sighted by the standards of the past. Nationalism may help to save those that are "too big to fail," but it will only represent a short-term measure unless fundamental changes are made in the philosophy of the institutions themselves. They cannot focus on this quarter's profits, or next quarter's profits, but they must focus on the 30-year lifespan of the loans that they make. None of the proposed "fixes" will result in anything more than short-term solutions, unless banks are willing to go back to the foundation upon which they were established.

In the end, one can only hope that banks have learned their lesson and that they will return to the values that made them strong in the past. Those that did learn their lesson will represent an excellent investment opportunity. Those that continue in the reckless manner that they are today, are likely to become institutions of the past. The future of the banking industry depends on a return to the responsibility that comes with placing the shareholder at the top of the priority list.


DeStefano, T. 2009. Whatever…

Sources Used in Documents:


DeStefano, T. 2009. Whatever Happened to Acting in the Best Interest of Shareholders? Seeking Alpha. January 27, 2009.Available at [Accessed 10 March 2009].

Hutchinson, M. 2009. Bank Nationalization and the Total Destruction of Shareholder Investments [online] Mar 01, 2009 Available at [Accessed 10 March 2009].

Kaen, F. 2003. A Blueprint for Corporate Governance. New York, New York: American Management Association.

Mayer-Sommer, a., Sweeney, S., & Walker, D. 2006. Impact of Community Bank Mergers on Acquiring Shareholder Returns.
Journal of Performance Management, Bnet. Available at [Accessed 10 March 2009].
Noera, J. 2009. Is "Shareholder Value" still the only thing that matters? [online] February 6, 2009. New York Times. Available at / [Accessed 10 March 2009].
Sheshunoff, a. 2002. Establishing Goals: The First Step to Maximizing Shareholder Value. Bank Director Magazine. [online] 4th Quarter 2002. Available at [Accessed 10 March 2009].

Cite this Document:

"Shareholder Value As America Watched" (2009, March 12) Retrieved December 9, 2021, from

"Shareholder Value As America Watched" 12 March 2009. Web.9 December. 2021. <>

"Shareholder Value As America Watched", 12 March 2009, Accessed.9 December. 2021,

Related Documents
Shareholder Vs. Stakeholder Theory
Words: 3224 Length: 11 Pages Topic: Business Paper #: 76323348

Introduction Milton Friedman’s quote gets to the heart of the conflict between shareholder theory vs. stakeholder theory. Shareholder theory posits that a corporation’s sole responsibility is to maximize the return on investment (ROI) for shareholders. Stakeholder theory posits, on the other hand, that a company owes a duty to all stakeholders (not just shareholders)—members of the community, workers, consumers; in short, anyone who is part of or who is impacted in

International Management Ethics & Values
Words: 2173 Length: 6 Pages Topic: Education - Computers Paper #: 68935636

As one analyst points out: "it owns neither content nor the delivery mechanism. Though a global business, it has no geographical control anywhere in the world. Since nearly all its consumer services are free, it doesn't have the power to raise prices and has no ability to exclude competitors or somehow block access to competing services. It operates in an environment of healthy competition" (Ulanoff 2009). On the other

Responsibility of Companies Has Historically
Words: 9542 Length: 35 Pages Topic: Business Paper #: 1324596

These claims are virtually all based on the concept that corporations - particularly multinationals -- should be held accountable for their actions within their sphere of operations. "Corporations, for their part, have responded in numerous ways, from denying any duties in the area of human rights to accepting voluntary codes that could constrain their behavior" (Ratner, 2001, p. 436). In fact, this very point is echoed throughout the literature; for

Employment Discrimination at Wal-Mart Foundation of the
Words: 5383 Length: 15 Pages Topic: Careers Paper #: 45363162

Employment Discrimination at Wal-Mart Foundation of the Study This study examines the legislative and judicial climate that enables corporations like Wal-Mart to engage in practices that violate workers' rights. The popular consensus is that Wal-Mart, the largest retail store in the United States, displays an inordinate disregard for the human dignity and morale of its employees and, despite continual litigation, continues to blatantly violate the legal rights of its employees. Wal-Mart faces

Krispy Kreme Donuts 2004 Determine
Words: 1445 Length: 3 Pages Topic: Business Paper #: 80049286

There is abundant opportunity in the western U.S. that KKD has yet to address. Each aspect of the strategy plan is now addressed by functional area: Market Development Over the next three years, KKD needs to first concentrate on competing more effectively in those regional markets where Dunkin' Donuts to this point has dominated the sale of donuts and related food and beverage items. This must begin with a build-out of

Ethical Dilemmas in International Marketing
Words: 5082 Length: 15 Pages Topic: Business - Advertising Paper #: 70698071

Ethical Dilemmas & Marketing Ethical Dilemmas Ethical dilemmas in international marketing Background of Marketing Ethics Ethical Issues in Marketing Modern Debate in Stakeholder Theory Ethical Theories Teleological Theories Virtue Ethics Ethics in Marketing Ethical dilemmas in international marketing Humanity has long struggled with the question of what constitutes ethical behavior. The answer to this question has not always been simple or easy especially in the midst of conflicting interests. Businesses desire and need to sell products to consumers but serious issues