Too-big-to-fail advertisement of the day

By Felix Salmon
December 13, 2009
any point at which BofA would consider itself to be too big? Judging by this ad, it seems the answer is no.

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

Here’s a full-page ad I just found in the WSJ; it seems that Bank of America considers $760 billion in lending to be “a good start”. Me, I consider it to be “too big to fail” and a clear sign that BofA needs to get smaller, not bigger. I do wonder: is there any point at which BofA would consider itself to be too big? Judging by this ad, it seems the answer is no.


More From Felix Salmon
Post Felix
The Piketty pessimist
The most expensive lottery ticket in the world
The problems of HFT, Joe Stiglitz edition
Private equity math, Nuveen edition
Five explanations for Greece’s bond yield
3 comments so far

Or maybe it’s to be read like the punchline to “What do you call a thousand dead lawyers at the bottom of the sea?”

Posted by secretivek | Report as abusive

Even if $760 billion does not represent too much consolidated private power in terms of the viability of the market, consider its power vis a vis the US Government. See, for example, the loopholes in the House Fin Reform bill:  /depending-on-the-bankers-to-write-regu lations-a-conflict-of-interest-involving -complexity-and-expertise/
Also, don’t forget Goldman Sachs…workin it:  /goldman-sachs-and-aig/

Posted by euandus | Report as abusive

To a bank, a loan is an asset, and companies that have lots of assets are good. Of course, only time will tell if this is like a company in 1900 bragging that it had invested millions of dollars to build state-of-the-art facilities in 20 states and three foreign countries – for the manufacture of buggy whips.

Posted by KenInIL | Report as abusive
Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see