Like Lycanthrophy, the nerd gene can skip a generation...

For a funny read to lighten up your Tuesday, check out Chris Hardwick's recent contribution in Wired--"Self-Help for Nerds". Although it is a pretty insightful look into his life (and its failures), with a lot of tangents that we can all probably relate to, it ends up being an endearing read about self-improvement.

Supercommittee Fail

It certainly seems like the stuff of comic books and super heroes (especially with this ultra-dramatic picture I found from the Washington Post above), but there were no heroes today from either side. $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts will kick in the start of 2013.

Things That Go BRIC in the Night

It's sweeping the nation faster than the Bieber Fever (way to date myself in my antiquated pop culture references, everyone knows that the new hot reference is KKs failed marriage). I've mentioned it as a potentially passing phase before, but I think it's safe to say its never going away. Yup. We're scared of India. It's okay. Embrace that fear. To be clear, we are not afraid of Indians, those guys are our friends! We're scared of India as a country-- as an amalgamation of a heaving, growing beast, slightly unpredictable, widely rumored to be highly corrupt, perhaps untamed and slightly off balance, but barreling full-fledged toward our unknowing consciousness.

I am here to quell your fears though! For once, instead of throwing gasoline and household objects into the burning flames of worry, I am here to say, "Hey, maybe it won't be as scary as you think. Let's just think this through." I think one of the biggest worries that is generated from India is how, with all of its positive momentum, it will usurp America's number one spot. It's scary, I know. We'll get through this together. Just keep reading.

First of all, India will grow and India will most likely be a very successful country in the future. This does not meet our downfall. This means we will have new partners to work with. Also, let's keep in mind this will take time. In recent articles, it doesn't seem that India's path is all roses and kittens. They will need to work through some problems also before they're inevitable conquering can begin (take a breath), which will take time.  An easy comparison is to look at China, Brazil and India (the C, B and I from the BRIC countries--it surprises me how many people use that term but don't know what it stands for. To be completely clear, the R stands for Russia. Don't want to be a jerk, just want to make sure we're all on the same page.). They're growing economies, very intimidating.

Whereas China is growing out of control, it is currently in "copy-cat" mode for a lot of its machinery, and depends on more developed countries for a lot of its innovative hardware and know-how. Because of its size, its having a hard time getting everyone on the same page, trying to reconcile the explosive growth of business cities like Shanghai with its deserted, new and booming factory towns, and its wide stretches of remaining agricultural land. It has made significant moves forward in growth over the past couple of years, but, as we all know, those last couple of miles are the hardest. It's going to struggle with its own issues of balance, particularly as their middle class grows, demand for freer speech continues, the prince-ling generation struggles to reconcile its place in an increasingly lonely generation gap (prince-lings are how we know those that were born during the 1 child policy).

Brazil on the other hand, has a more stable population, with a population of working age that is growing quickly. It is rich in natural resources (like iron ore, timber, oil, etc.) and has a very long growing season thanks to its very favorable location (three harvests a year!). However, many of its problems are intangible. The flood of investments coming in has created a strong currency that hurts exporters outside the resource industries. Internally, they struggle in a mire of bureaucracy where hiring and firing can take years, the tax system is indecipherable, government corruption is commonplace and real interest rates are considered among the highest in the world. Its consumers, although growing and with a large percentage of growing affluence, have not fully embraced a saving mentality, so credit demand still outpaces supply. On a basic level, government entanglement has delayed basic building, like roads, for far too long, resulting in a stall simply because its hard to move stuff around!

India is very much a middle child in this situation. Like China, India has enjoyed a fantastic growth rate, but is poorer than China (bad in short term, means greater opportunity for growth in the future, which is good). Like Brazil, India also needs some infrastructure, and has significant corruption issues that need to be overcome. Additionally, India needs to educate its incoming worker-age population appropriately if they hope to be successful in the world market and internally within its own country. Anecdotally, I've heard that the red tape surrounding both the school and job placement process is mired in mystery and so many levels thick that it requires multiple stakeholders to navigate.

So. I tell these stories not to say that the US is still supreme and will be supreme forever. Already, we know that is not true, and that there are countries that we'll need to work with in order to share the prestige and the responsibility of being part of the developed world. My point here is that emerging countries, however scary, are also facing significant hurdles to define their own space. India is often the poster child because of their exponential growth, large English-speaking population and direct connections with our nervous centers here in the states (which, I think is safe to say, are located in New York, San Francisco/Silicon Valley and other major hubs of commerce) through brain drain (bidirectional) or investments (also bidirectional).

So...instead of worrying about this. Worry about narrowly missing a world where there could be even more procreating Kardashians (zing! Got it in there to prove my knowledge of US Weekly), that there is a new season of Teen Mom (WHY?!?!) and...oh yeah, that Euro Crisis thing. And bed bugs. Be ever vigilant my friends!

MDMs-- Managing Directly with Menace?

Movie-going Dwarves with Machinery? Mangled Dimes Manifesto? MDM actually stands for Mobile Device Management, but I wanted to see what other MDM acronyms I could make up. (It's surprisingly hard- not a lot of very fun M or D words were coming to mind. I'll blame it on my stomach virus.)

MDMs are the new "It" thing in town on the mobile scene. InformationWeek just released an article about how the changing mobility space is ushering on a whole new set of data risks beyond just encryption. And they're right. As mobility becomes more commonplace, people need to worry more about the various terrible things that can happen to their information beyond just the transmission part (getting from point A to point B).

BlackBerry was initially the poster child for security (and had a great headstart in the enterprise game, winning over many companies as the mobile device of choice for a long while) because it had its BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES), which not only made it easier for companies to integrate their mail systems onto employee devices, but also made company leadership feel a little bit comforted from a security standpoint. Then, iPhone and all these Android devices launched onto the scene.

They had a bit of a harder time because, although they were a hit with the consumers, they were a bit of a dud when it came to security (esp. Android with its open development stance...Apple at least could point to its very strict, "walled garden" approach). Then Good arrived. All hail Good! Good (aptly named) freed countless workers from the pain of carrying two phones for the sake of being chained to the BlackBerry (I know there are some of you out there that carry two any way for "privacy purposes", but I promise the company doesn't care about your booty call texting and you probably shouldn't be doing drug deals on your phones any way. Especially during business hours. I mean c'mon.).

Now we're in a brand new world. A Brave New World even. But mostly new. Let's just go with new, the other connotations are a bit creepy. Now Google has partnered with Motorola, thereby sharing its 3LM (three laws of mobility) service, which claims to have set a standard of security within the Android service itself. Exciting stuff. So why do people care about this so much right now? Because MDMs help control and protect. How? Well, Good is really mostly known for its email capabilities. Newer MDMs, like 3LM offer a suite of services including (but not limited to):

1. remote wipe
2. device tracking
3. app blocking/pushing
4. peripheral blocking/control
5. emergency lock

It'll be interesting to see how these trends in security evolve. It's really focused on functionality right now, I imagine in the future it will evolve to control data usage/content.

Miseducation and Misinformation

Your education has failed you. Commence panic immediately.

Especially now, when we're in the throes of Occupy Wall Street-ers (and their attempted and mostly botched dismantling-s), the question in our society has become intensely focused--What makes me different than the guy next to me? And who can blame us? We have college grads, experienced workers and leaders of industries with more acronyms after their names to count-- all still in the unemployment line. (See "The Miseducation of American Dreamers" for an interesting point of view on higher education.) According to the Occupy-ers, there are 1%-ers and 99%-ers. If you're part of the conservative middle, there's also 53%-ers. If you have a job, it's just the fact that you have a job while unemployment is still ripping apart traditional fantasies of American plenty (esp. in the rust belt). If you're well-traveled, well-read, experienced in your industry than those all count too. Whatever way you choose, one factor that keeps showing up in the mainstream consciousness is education. My question is why? Is it because of the inherent inequality there? The problems in our educational system? Just a widespread watching of Waiting for Superman?

Whether you say "I went to Famous College Prep (they don't call them high schools anymore--it's not as prestigious to do so). Then I went to Ivy League College." or "I went to Community College and then State University" the youth of America know that they're in a competitive market. A market where, one of the few options that you have to differentiate yourself from the guy next to you (and hopefully land a job post-shoveling money over to your alma mater) is to go to a good school. It's interesting to see though that "a good school" is now no longer defined as just university any longer though...in fact, there are very profitable businesses that specialize in preparing your pre-schooler for acceptance into some of the magnet schools that are so desired in metro areas like Chicago, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, etc. But what's wrong with our public system?

The Economist recently boiled down the public school crux to "three great excuses" for bad schools:

1. Skimpy government spending
2. Disparity between social classes
3. Culture

Unfortunately, the first two are not particularly compelling. Yes, the government has made significant cuts to educational spending over the past years, but the U.S. is still one of the the countries that has the highest spending in education, but still lags behind other countries on overall outcomes in secondary education. Additionally, in a study of countries between 1970-1994 found that countries that doubled or tripled their educational spending often stagnated or went backwards in terms of the quality of their educational performance. So. Social disparity?

Originally coined by the education trade unionist Martin Johnson, he pointed to the "inequality between classes, which is among the largest in the wealthiest nations" (he was referring to Britain at the time) as the reason why its pupils under-perform.This is partially true. Students who come from a hard background will struggle academically because a lot of their mental will is directed toward outside variables that are more directly related to their survival. However, we find that the link changes-- Australia, for example, has a large discrepancy in income, but still falls ninth in the most recent PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment). (PS- The U.S. is 14th, after countries like South Korea, Canada, Estonia and Poland.)

So, culture then. It is true that many cultures, particularly Asian cultures place a lot of emphasis on the importance of education (the top 5 in the PISA are Shanghai, China (very interesting specific), South Korea, Finland, Hong Kong, China  (again very interesting specific) and Singapore). Some trace this back to its roots in Confucianism and its mindset of lifelong learning instead of education as a means to an end. Others will trace it back to the equally popular beliefs of Amy Chua-ism, also known as "Tiger Mom-ism".

So what do we do now? If it is a lot of culture, that will take a long time to change won't it? What should we do in the meantime? Excellent question. From a young-person's perspective, there's a couple things we can do immediately to encourage educational excellence:

1. Teach strong values. All the intelligence in the world means nothing if it used for evil. Take a cue from Spiderman kids...with great power comes great responsiblity.
2. Encourage reflection. A desire for learning should be born out of something more than just wanting to make money--encourage people to look beyond the immediate. Yes, I know money will buy you a boat which will make you happy, but why? Is it the freedom that you enjoy? The independence? Find your core driver and see where else it will take you--if independence is your thing, see if that parlays into helping women in third world countries gain their independence through micro-loans. Find ways to apply your personal interests and invest yourself so that it makes you want to keep learning
3. Outline the logistics. Sure, its easy to say that after a million years (that's an approximation) of medical school, you get to be a neurosurgeon. Begin saving lives. But let's break it down at an early age--at each step we should outline the next step while keeping the big goal in mind. Go to high school. Go to a good university. Study for your MCAT. Apply to medical school. Go to medical school. Breaking it down to manageable steps so that young people have a clear view of what the next milestone should be would help. I see a lot of people getting confused and disoriented around the college years and the medical school/residency years.
4. Bureaucracy/Tuition. Stop the mountains of paperwork, or at least give clear guidance as to what needs to be filled out, by whom, when, and what it will mean. Tuition. Stop raising it all the time. Especially when our families are struggling to pay bills. Please. Thank you.
5. This one is for parents. Stop coddling your kids. I'm not even kidding, my significant other did not have his own bank account until after he graduated college. He had never paid a bill in his life.He never had a real interview until a year after college. He didn't know how to apply for a credit card. Take the credit card with unlimited funds away.  Now slowly move away from your child. They will not implode. I promise.
6. And this one's for the kids. Finally, please stop filling your mind with trash. I know, I know. I'm super boring. Go ahead-- watch trash television if you really want to--CSI or Law and Order SVU, Millionaire Matchmaker, whatever. But let's put some limits on it. This means no Jersey Shore. Why? Because sentences like "Snooki wants a perfect guy--a juicehead gorilla with a tan. They frolick" (TRANSLATION: A randomly nicknamed girl who can't spell her own name consistently wants a new man to be around because she hasn't been physically attached to one in over 5 hours and this is reality television. She wants a 'roided-out monster with a tan because a tan is obviously super important. (Orange complexions are just part of that evolutionary programming...along with height and good teeth) She also learned the word "frolick" yesterday, so she doesn't know what that means, but she wants to do it) is not only the most ridiculous sentence ever and makes me want to cry, it's also a really bad example for our youngins. If we stop watching maybe they'll pull it off the air and the cast can fade into obscurity. *hope hope hope*

But...I Haven't Even Started Yet!

Alright. I've had enough. No more Nice-Guy (or Nice-Girl in my case). I'm sick of the increasingly depressing forecasts for America. Yes. We're in a financial mess right now. Yes, our politicians are behaving a bit ridiculously and focusing on partisan politics in a time when what we really need is a united mindset to find a solution to our problems (but honestly, is that so different than what happens normally?).

Everywhere I turn, there are "serious concern" articles about America now (sagging employment rates, a prolonged recession, etc.), but an equal if not greater number of "serious concern" articles about the levels of success in America's future. And what does it all come down to? People just aren't that convinced that the future of America will be as innovative or forward-thinking as generations past. To put it bluntly, they're really just not sure that my generation will be able to produce the types of success that America has enjoyed in the past--will we have the Thomas Edisons in my generation? Another Steve Jobs? Maybe someone that could be more like Bill Gates? They'll even settle for a John Pemberton (he invented Coca-Cola, I had to look that one up).

I know that this worry comes from a good place-- it's normal for our parental generation to be worried about the generations to come. Good even. But enough is enough. Let's call out this worry for what it is-- a projection of economic worry manifested into the physical and tangible that is currently represented by the youth. Is it possible that the American economy will falter a bit in comparison to international markets (after years and years of unbridled success) in the future? Maybe. Will that be due to the inability of my generation? Absolutely not!

To this, I say unto all of you nay-sayers: Seriously? Seriously?! You're worried that we can't acclimate in a global market? You're worried that we won't be as innovative as things in the past? You're worried we'll be out-shined (out-shone?) by our Indian and Chinese counterparts? Okay. Let's set the record straight.

First of all, we grew up in a global market. There's nothing that we need to acclimate to! We grew up in a world where there were more Kentucky Fried Chickens in China than the U.S., and where off-shoring is normal course of business. We don't recognize Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart or Microsoft to be American companies--in fact, we expect the brands we trust to be global (that means inclusive of places outside of the U.S.). Blame it on what you will-- the disregard of physical space due to the growth of instant communications, the widespread sharing of ideas due to the internet--but my generation simply has a different perspective on what the workplace looks like now, and for good reason.

So innovation. I get it. It's hard to compare to...the man who invented light bulbs. You're right, we probably won't be inventing the computer again. And you know, I really like Coke as it is, so that's probably out of the question too. But that doesn't mean that this is the swan's song for all innovation in general! Let me remind you that older generations might have invented the internet, but we invented Facebook, Groupon and yeah--I'll claim it--Google. They may have invented Windows and Linux, but we invented Android. They invented light bulbs, but we invented optical computing, 3D printing and pioneered artificial organ growth and bio-fuels with record numbers of start ups. Let's call it even.

Yup. Americans are bad at math, or so goes the stereotype. Our educational system is outdated and far too lax on our youth. We're just not learning enough when you compare us to India or China!So this, I will cede that there is a bit of truth. Our educational system is not stellar, and there is always room for improvement. However, this is due to our strange government funding distribution system (run by *ahem* older generations), inadequate educators who are incentivized by the wrong things (like money or test scores, whose sub-par work is currently being supplemented by programs like Teach for America and ACE that are powered by younger people, reaching out to those lower-paying "unteachable communities"). Frankly, performance issues are also being exaggerated. My generation does have some pockets where education really has no place (its the same dark hole where "Jersey Shore" rules and "16 and Pregnant" is considered quality television). However, there is also a much larger pocket that is beginning to realize that beyond the sheltered existence provided by mom and dad, there is a big world that demands only the best. Kids are going to college in record numbers, advanced degrees are also at an all-time high. We might not be good at math, but we're trying really damn hard to make up for it. We're hungry for it just as much as the next country.

To end my rant, just give us a little credit. We haven't even stepped on the field yet and nay-sayers are already calling the game. That's just unfair. Give us the benefit of a doubt--I think that my generation will surprise you.

Mobile Movements

So... the mobile hysteria keeps moving forward. I keep reading all these differing accounts about the potential mobile revenue that can be generated (whether it be from banking or payments), and now that the media has accepted this mobile medium a bit more, there's a huge amount of discrepancy between the viewpoints. There's one camp that keeps releasing "news stories" that say things like "mobile banking hitting the tipping point!"..."Cash On Its Deathbed!"...but they release them....every week. Nevertheless...Finextra estimated that there were over 4.6 billion mobile payments made in 2010 (and KPMG found through a survey that people believe mobile payments will be mainstream by 2014), and the big players are definitely marching forward to capitalize on that!

• Google Wallet finally launched to mixed reviews. (This is actually a real thing, contrary to the hysteria over Google getting into the credit card business earlier this year.) The pros seem to be that they've gotten a lot of huge merchants to sign up (Macy's, American Eagle, Jamba Juice, etc.) but currently their functionality is only rolled out to one phone and (probably because of the newness) is still causing a lot of confusion at point of sale. I had the opportunity to see it in action at the Macy's in Chicago at Water Tower, and it went something like this:

1. Customer goes up to counter with product. Notices reader
2. Customer fumbles around in (overly) gigantic purse, finds phone. Presents phone to cashier
3. Cashier looks confused, which results in a great moment where customer and sales person just blankly stare at each other (reminiscent of what I would imagine it was like when humans first tried to use the wheel--stare at device, stare at phone, stare at device, stare at each other, shift weight from foot to foot awkwardly)
4. Cashier realizes its a tapping thing...awkwardly pats the terminal
5. Customer initializes app. Tries to tap. Taps too fast. Terminal declines. Taps again, too slow. Terminal doesn't register. Taps again. Some error occurs
6. Cashier takes phone and tries to tap. Transaction goes through
7. Cashier and customer awkwardly laugh it off and customer is on their way

Yup. Sounds way faster. It's the wave of the future people! ...and the future is awkward and confused.

• PayPal is hanging tough in the game by releasing their plans for mobility--which spans beyond mobile payments and is focused more on in-aisle check out, ways to perform "mobile shopping" and other merchant capabilities
• ISIS....well...ISIS is still being ISIS. Originally started as mobile payment platform, its evolved to be essentially a white label solution for banks to develop mobile capabilities. It did announce some firm commitments though by partnering with some security companies (again the security issue we keep seeing popping up every where). I know that a lot of people have given ISIS a lot of grief, but the fact still stands it is the closest thing we currently have to a truly collaborative business model that offers a comprehensive mobile payment solution (issuer, bank, merchants, network, etc.). Can't hate 'em for trying...
• Visa is planning to kill two birds with one stone by integrating EMV (regulatory requirement) chips and mobile payment chips by accelerating their roll out of chip technology in the U.S. This is actually an ingenious strategy because saying "this chip is for compliance and security" is easier to sell than to say "this chip is for mobile payments which you're not sure you want to use due to security reasons any way". Overall, a strong move

There have also been some interesting partnerships:

• First Data (the largest processors in the industry) chose VeriFone to focus on the security of mobile payments (consistently ranked as the top concern of customers and merchants alike). This would enable VeriFone's PAYWare Mobile to enable secure mobile payment options. FirstData get a new product to increase their revenue from trxn fees, VeriFone gets an increased distribution network and increased sales in its product
• Motorola threw some pretty extensive funding behind Vivotech ($24 Million!). This is mostly interesting to me because Google just purchased Motorola, and in doing so acquired a ton of patents, a experienced workforce (they laid off 800 employees though) and a bunch of new, interesting functionalities that include mobile security software. In doing so, Google has really set itself up to take over the end-to-end value chain of mobile payments from hardware to payment process to merchants. Props. (Some claim though that Google still has more than enough competition coming from other alternative players like Facebook though)
• Verizon is countering with their partnerships too..they recently announced that they would partner with American Express' Serve, which would allow customers to buy things by typing in their phone number into their phone (which doubles as an authentication feature)

Phew. Glad I got that out of my system. I feel better now, don't you?

We're Angry! About....Stuff!

Old-Timey Protests

Current Protests

Let me be clear. I'm all for a good social uprising. Change the established practice! Shake things up! Push for critical social innovation! Show (fill in the blank organization) that they're doing something that makes you cranky! That being said, I'm a bit embarrassed about how low our forms of protest have fallen. 

I know. Things are pretty messed up right now. Esquire actually did a great about the value of the dollar, just one of the many things that people aren't particularly thrilled about right now, in their most recent issue. I highly recommend it. Back to protests. The Economist noted our (global, collective) failure to focus on our protest goals in a recent article titled "Not Quite Together". They made some good points about the global protesting spirit is alive in kicking (Occupy Wall Street in New York, austerity ruckus in Greece, unemployment marches in Spain, etc.), but that a lot of it is misguided. For the most poignant example, I don't think we need to look much farther than our own country though...So, for example:

• Movement: Occupy Wall Street- Although initially jump started as a protest of the 99% against the 1%, this particular movement has generated a lot of publicity, and because of its high visibility, has made very clear some of the problems in this outraged group. Even though this movement bills itself as the majority finally taking back what is due to them, underneath the Facebook groups and twittering, this is really not that different than the austerity movements in Greece. The American economy is turmoil. Undoubtedly, these banks hold a lot of that responsibility. The American public pays the price for their poor decisions. The "why do I have to pay for this?" mentality begins. Anger ensues.
• Interesting Facts:  
• There have actually been studies on the science and mathematics behind protests. For example, in a sample of European protests between 1980 and 1995, austerity-focused protests attracted over 700K people on average, whereas other protests attract less. Anti-war protests for example, only attract 15K on average
• Protests, especially the ones related to spending cuts during times of increasing expenditure, have no party preference. In another study of protests in Latin America between 1937 and 1995, researchers found that tight link cuts and instability that cuts across democracies and autocracies alike
• Researchers also found that a 1% increase in GDP results in a reduction of estimated protests per year by about 0.4 events (roughly half the impact of a similar increase in the government budget)
• What went wrong?  
• Misinformation and scattered agendas. It's supposed to be about the 99% against the 1%. In fact, it is clear based on financial data that approximately 58% of the real economic growth in America of the past 30 years was captured by the top 1% of earners. For obvious reasons, societies with a larger income disparity generally have more civil unrest. However, research on wage growth in the United States questions whether this polarization is really based on wealth capture or if it really is due to the dramatic segmentation of the labor force into high and low-skill segments (cannibalizing the middle-skill/middle-wage positions), which would result in social discomfort
• Most financial firms in New York have moved to midtown long ago, and although it is a symbolic space, the sheer numbers have begun to cause serious concerns for sanitation and public safety. As the signs above show, these protesters believe they're united, but its become a farce of itself- ultimately more trendy than impactful. The demographic in attendance is pretty young (mostly around college age/young professionals), but relatively well educated (most hold college degrees). By itself that makes me wonder-- how 'majority' can you be if you were educated at one of the best universities in the nation? (NYU, Columbia, etc are in the area) or if you have the means to be living near Manhattan? 
• Early splintering. We started with the chant of "I am the 99%", but then...wait... we got really mathematical about it and came up with some 53%-ers too. Although this is really just the conservative retort to the protest, some of their points do resonate (To feed my family, I'm working or trying to find a job, not camping out in Manhattan). I can't admit that I support them wholeheartedly though. I'm from California after all

 So. I'm torn. I keep thinking about a saying I heard in college, "If you're young and conservative, you have no heart. If you're old and liberal, you have no brain". The point is that your views will change as you move through your life depending on where you are socioeconomically. I know that I make more than your average 25 year-old. I know a lot of people who are struggling through this hard economic time, so I give thanks every day that I have a job and that I can save money for a rainy day. I live frugally and I believe in postponing current happiness for future security (that one is actually probably more cultural). I'm fiscally conservative and am a crazy savings account-er. But I still feel the need to support this protest. The financial system failed Americans. But many Americans also tried to "outsmart" the financial system by living outside their means. They're both at fault, but to fix this mess, I just have to think that there must be a better (more effective) way.

Too Big To Be Popular

Suffice it to say that Bank of America has had a rough go this year. I know, I know....all of us have had a rough couple years, and the FS industry will continue to feel it the worst, but I feel like our poor friends at BofA has had it particularly hard. After the financial melt down, they were met with throngs of angry consumers and a buffet of high visibility, embarrassing issues. In late August, they seemed to be entering an upswing when Warren Buffet invested $5M into the company, but was immediately thrown to a new round of questioning when the Wall Street Journal published that they might be taken over by JP Morgan. (Not that Buffet investing is particularly surprising since he's basically gone on record to say "Who doesn't like a fire sale? They're practically giving it away! Normal people buy extra socks when there's a sale, Buffet buys into giant financial companies. Different strokes I guess.) After multiple reports of behind-doors meetings between Geithner and JP Morgan's CEO (Jamie Dimon) and claims that this sort of transaction would be prohibited because BofA and JP Morgan would cumulatively control too much of the financial sector, reports just stopped coming, and the world began to focus more on BofA's embarrassing problems.

Most likely in an attempt to get their balance sheet back in order, Bank of America also announced in August that it would selling off its international international credit card businesses. In doing so, Bank of America was pretty much cannibalized by other companies, with TD Bank (Canada), Apollo Capital Management (Spain) and Barclays dismantled their existing portfolios and subsumed them into existing operations. After earnings calls or what people are now just calling "results", it was revealed that Bank of America finally fell behind JP Morgan (ouch) in being the largest American bank as measured by assets. To add insult to injury, this happened despite the fact that JP Morgan faced its own decreases in revenue this year. Bank of America did manage to sneak in some upbeat messages during their results calls, but these points were later revealed to be inflated by a more "creative" interpretation of one-time items and releases of loan-loss reserves. Buffet also went on record to say that Bank of America was "not properly integrating their systems or cutting unnecessary branches" at the same time that Bank of America announced that they planned to cut approximately 30,000 jobs over the next few years. Whether the intent was to justify or critique is questionable.

Finally, as one of the first banks to announce the debit card fee, Bank of America was the last major bank to eat their words and cancel their plans for this fee. (I mean, who can blame them? People were setting their cards on fire in protest in front of their offices...seems a bit extreme in this day and age when there's world hunger, etc. But hey! Find your cause and go for it. For the record though, the fee was $5/purchase, so it probably would've added up pretty quickly.) All in all, it is definitely hard to feel bad for these guys after all of this mess, but it could be important to keep in mind that we can't punish them forever. Yes, they definitely made choices in the management of their assets, but at the end of the day, the money to repair the damage they've done has to come from somewhere. They should take a more gradual approach to repairing (no $5 fees) but they will inevitably need to raise revenue if they want things ever to stabilize. That will be something that both Bank of America and American consumers will need to come to terms with.