Talk:Citigroup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Portal:Business and Economics
 Business and Economics Portal
This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject.
B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
High rated as high-importance on the assessment scale
News This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2005 press source article for details.

The citation is in: Chuck Slothower. "No tact in the Citi", Oregon Daily Emerald, April 22, 2005.

Peer review Citigroup has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Please do not change the primerica thing, it is a very good description of what it is.


Contents

[edit] Question: Where is the Y ?

The Bank was originally the "National City Bank of New York", as seen in the articly. This can be neatly shortened to "Citybank". But it was shortened to "Citibank". Does anyone have an explanaition for that ? I'm puzzled. This is what they have to say:

"1976 - The First National City Corporation holding company changes its name to Citicorp to better suit its global businesses."
Source: Citigroup Website

I suppose they refer to the shortening of the name and dropping of "national" as better suiting, as i can not conceive how the y>i-change should make any change in citicorps global businesses. I would greatly appreciate an answer. Thank you in advance.--83.189.43.162 23:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

also interested.-- ExpImptalkcon 12:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The Y is at www.citybank.com a bank founded in 1974 two years before Citcorp renamed it's bank.

[edit] Talk about a negative tone

"Illegal merger"? "During a two-to-five-year grace period allowed by law, Citigroup can conduct business in its merged form" ([1]). - Jerryseinfeld 22:45, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Also: "Citigroup has a culture of corruption and has been involved with many scandals."???? "Culture of corruption" seems pretty opinionated to me. --Perlman10s 07:08, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Biased One "Citigroup has a culture of corruption and has been involved with many scandals." This lines is extremely biased one and clearly doubts neuatrality of the whole article --Ninad 18:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] citicorp

citicorp written on the first paragraph is linking to the article itself. Dionisiofranca 12:24, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The flow is a mess. The article dosn't make any sense from 'History' through to 'Post-merger history'. There is some semblance of a story about Weill, but then this is side-tracked by a discussion about mergers. This then eventually goes on about laws about mergers? I don't know anything about Citigroup but this article did not teach me anything.

"The merger took place in 1998. ..." The merger between who? What is Citicorp? Why is it introduced? What has it got to do with Primerica?

Then: "In order to convince Citicorp to merge, [with Primerica?] ..."

Also topics not arranged logically. 'Merger' and 'Post-merger history' are sub-sections of 'History' right? But they get their own big heading.

Most of the rest of the article looks good. The 'Scandals' bit is really nice. Well organised and clear.

This article just does not help in explaining what Citigroup is. 202.6.241.62 1 July 2005 02:05 (UTC)

[edit] Language

"Weill was then convinced however to buy the company because he would get to use the companies private G-4 jet."? Is this a joke?--Jerryseinfeld 03:45, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, as described in "Tearing Down the Walls" a biography of Weill by a Wall St. Journal writer, Weill was disgusted with the Golden Parachutes, which were tricky and only found out about at the last minute. Robert Greenhill I believe, the investment banker on the deal, knew that Weill had long desired a corporate jet from his days at AMEX, but that the commercial credit board wouldn't go for one. They sent him a package with the picture of the jet in it and a note saying "this can be yours".

What I like about the "history" section is how it completely lacks years and numbers. It's perfect for the little ones who's just about to go to school.--Jerryseinfeld 05:11, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Look at the company family tree, this guy began building this company in 1960. He's put together companies from all over the market. It had 1 customer 1960, and 200 million today. Put some facts and figures in there, something that you will enjoy and learn something from. How do you choose your acquisitions? Would you have done anything differently? Put something of value in there, how did he evaluate the deals? How did he finance the deals? What kind of leverage did he use? What was the capital structure? What did he do with the management in the acquired company? What kind of restructurings did he make? How did he re-energize a neglected business? What were the visions he rallied the people around? How did he evaluate character? How did he differentiate? How did they work with the "human equation"? How did they remove somebody? How did they promote somebody? How did they build a winning team?--Jerryseinfeld 05:29, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Can someone with a login name create and upload pictures for this article?

Here are some pictures to add to this article:

  • 399 Park Ave. building
  • maybe some pictures of executives
I'd love to if you tell me where the copyright-free pics are located! - Adrian Pingstone 16:42, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Well I was hoping someone in new york with a digital cam could just go on park avenue and take the pictures and upload them.

Also note that Sandy, up until the final celebratory dinner to celebrate the deal, bitterly objected to the golden parachutes- he actually burst out and yelled at Tsai right in front of everyone. And Tsai wasn't the type of guy you yell at.

[edit] Removals

Someone is removing stuff. Ask first.--Jerryseinfeld 04:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC).

Removing what stuff??
Somebody removed the Forbes and Fortune categories for some reason.--Jerryseinfeld 05:39, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What we should remove

We should remove the analysts section. Why is that important? We should also remove the diversity section, thats just from some bot who wants to promote the = diversity group. And we should remove the indexes section and simply mention that in the article. I say we should do this because those are the wikipedia guidelines on how many sections there should be in an article. What do you guys think?


[edit] Please cleanup this biased article

The article is extremely biased and written with anti-citigroup mind. At wiki, we should always support neutral, factually correct articles. There is very strong emphasis towards anti-citigroup matters, scandals rather than providing factual information about the franchise. What you all think ? --Ninad 14:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree! who wants to hear rumors or accusations? I want to hear the truth. I want to hear known facts. I want to hear proven facts. I do not want to hear what so and so said, or what so and so thinks. written by, Turkybuttyoyo

[edit] From Peer Review

The following comments c/p-ed from Peer Review:

A few comments:

  • Is somebody going to discuss the pornography scandal? please?
  • Too many three-sentence paragraphs, resulting in less smooth reading.
  • Related to that, too many (sub)sections, making the article look fragmented and uninviting. Try to join some subsections.
  • Stock: currently this section only lists some links to stock-related Wikipedia article. I don't know anything about shares, but a featured article on Citigroup would certainly have to say something about the stock rates over the past years etc.
  • Why put the scandals first and only after that the divisions, activities, and other basic information? I would do it the other way around.

— mark ✎ 14:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Improvement Drive

The article Grameen Bank is currently nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Support this article with your vote.--Fenice 17:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge the BOD lists

Looks like we have two copies of the Board of Directors section. We need to merge those. Chadlupkes 20:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


Thanks a lot for highlighting. Have done the same also fixed up broken links in the BOD list --Ninad 09:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citigroup named stadiums, art centers, etc.

How about a new section listing all the stadiums and art centers named for CitiGroup.

1) CitiField - the new Mets Baseball Team stadium to be located in New York, New York and open in 2009. 2) CitiCenter for the Performing Arts - the former Wang Center for Performing Arts located in Boston, Massachusetts.

[edit] Merger Travelers Group

A merger from Travelers Group has been proposed.
  • Merge. The Travelers Group article is very short and unless expanded, stand to be deleted. The Citigroup article already includes the same content, so a "redirect-merged" tag should be the only thing we need to do. -- Emana 23:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
    • So, I was watching TV last night, and saw a commercial for Travelers. Travelers is coming back full swing? May be we shouldn't merge because a major expansion of Travelers Group may be impending. -- Emana 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I think the Travelers Group page should be merged with the Travelers Companies page instead, since the latter is the intuitively the "successor" to the former, even if that's not technically the case. -- Jlin 05:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
    • If I don't hear any objections, I'm going to redirect Travelers Group to Travelers Companies. -- Jlin 07:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Done. -- Jlin 00:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/i/t/Talk%7ECitigroup_d75f.html"