Wells Fargo + Wachovia = 5th blog for the stagecoach
January 6, 2009
“We understand you are going to have questions and comments about what’s going on. That’s why we created this blog – for you, our customers.”
– WF/Wachovia Blog
“One team, twice as strong.”
That’s the slogan on Wells Fargo’s latest online social media effort, The Wells Fargo – Wachovia Blog. Wells Fargo created the blog for customers with questions or concerns about the merger with Wachovia.
The blog promises to provide an “educational and informational resource, as well as a place where you can ask questions, join the conversation, and just get to know us a little better.”
This is at least the fifth blog Wells Fargo has launched. It is widely acknowledged that Wells Fargo has the most active blogs of any financial institution in the world.
The “One team, twice as strong” message Wells Fargo is using for its merger communications is similar to PNC’s take on its takeover of National City: “Two of America’s best-known banks. Now simply one of America’s best.”
“This isn’t a blog at all and is a gimmick.”
– Comment on the
WF/Wachovia blog
Writing responsibilities will be spread among a total of five different bloggers. The inaugural post, published January 2, was authored by John Stumpf, President & CEO/Wells Fargo. Other bloggers will include three brand stewards from Wells Fargo and a communications manager from Wachovia.
There have been four posts from three different authors in the four days since the blog’s launch.
Customers can leave comments and questions on the blog. In fact, one article titled “This Blog Is About You” has received at least 50 comments in the four days since it’s been published.
To facilitate comments, the blog’s designers have conspicuously embedded the comment box in the top-right corner of the latest article.
“How can anyone say ‘great job’ or that it’s ‘authentic’? Give me a break.”
– Comment on the
WF/Wachovia blog
A lot of the comments are positive and supportive, but many look like they come from inside Wachovia or Wells Fargo. Like the one from Ilieva Ageenko, SVP/Wachovia: “The conversation is authentic and personal.”
One Wachovia employee chimed in saying, “Great blog!! Will I have a job next week?? Seems like everyone is awful cheerful.”
Someone else, presumably an employee, asked incredulously, “So….is that it? A couple of company-inspired notes do not constitute a blog. I want this combination to succeed as much as anyone, but propaganda does nothing to make this work any better.”
Key Takeaway: Make sure employees know that if they are leaving a comment at your company blog that they must identify themselves. If they don’t it can (and probably will) backfire…bigtime.
Many of the legitimate comments are about products or services. Most responses to people’s comments and questions simply direct people to a FAQ page about the merger.
Some comments are definitively on the negative side, delivered with the kind of brutal candor one can expect when launching a social media campaign.
“This ‘blog’ is indeed a way to post press releases and make your customers think the two companies are reaching out in an informal way,” one person complained. “This isn’t a blog at all and is a gimmick,” he continued, adding this final dare: “Post this comment and prove me wrong.”
“The comments are only positive and there’s not a single bit of compelling content posted yet,” another person observed. “How can anyone say ‘great job’ or that it’s ‘authentic’? Give me a break.”
Reality Check: Harsh comments come with the territory. If your organization can’t handle this kind of heat, don’t bother blogging.
It’s worth noting that the merger between Wells Fargo and Wachovia just got underway. Most banks would have waited to launch an aggressive communications campaign until decisions had been made and things were more crystallized. By launching this blog now, in the very beginning of the merger, Wells Fargo is opting for a more proactive approach with its customer communications.
Key Question: Will Wells Fargo use feedback provided by customers in the comments of this blog to guide decisions about the merger? Will they listen to Wachovia customers, like Natalie, who begged them, “Please don’t get rid of Way2Save!”
Bonus Questions: How long will Wachovia’s Twitter account survive? And when will Wells Fargo launch a Twitter account?
Share
Previous related stories from The Financial Brand:
- NAB’S UBank: A cautionary tale in social media
- Twitter is white hot in the financial industry
- Someone’s someday is coming
- First Direct microsite serves up transparency and honesty
SPONSORED MESSAGE: Is your bank or credit union ready to go green with its branches? Watch this free webinar playback, “Green Is The New Black,” where the branch-building experts at Momentum outline the strategy, rationale, challenges, advantages and ROI of eco-friendly financial facilities. WATCH NOW
Filed Under: Social Media
Tags: blog, merger, Wachovia, Wells Fargo
January 6th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I am part of the team working on the Well Fargo Wachovia Blog. Thanks for the comments, which we are taking to heart. We haven’t found many examples of brands that have used blogs as part of a merger. If you come across any examples, please let us know. We can always learn from others experience. Thanks again.
January 7th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Thanks for your great feedback and thoughts on this. You’re correct that we did run into the issue of employees leaving comments, and not identifying themselves. We quickly corrected the Illeava example, and added her title and company. It’s our internal policy to have team members specify their employment relationship, but the newly integrated Wachovia team members didn’t know that. We’re in the process now of modifying our comment form, to have a call-out to team members which states they must identify their work relationship.
Thanks again for the great feedback!
January 7th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Hi Ed. Thanks for dropping in and sharing. It’s great to see Wells Fargo be so willing to experiment, and staying in-tune with what people are saying about the bank (and its blogs).
And you’re right Tim: This is a very pioneering idea.
January 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am
UPDATE: Wells Fargo has updated its policies for employee comments. You can see the new policy here (the fourth checkmarked/bulleted item). For reference, here’s the old comment policy.
January 9th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
What’s interesting about this (related to your comment about not waiting until all merger issues have been thought through) is the issue regarding employee identification. Wells didnt start with that, then people mentioned it, then they updated the blog comment process. A lot of companies would be scared to admit a misstep and correct it in the glaring openness of the Internet. A lot of credibility is to be gained from an “oops we goofed and now we fixed it” attitude rather than “no comment.”
January 10th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Very good point Greg.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:13 am
that Wells/Wachovia blog is a joke.
I just posted this question/comment, I highly doubt it makes it onto the web page.
===============
Matt said (regarding the PGA Tour event): “Branding decisions for future tournaments have not yet been made.”
Lucas asks: if WFC had any interest whatsoever in continuing with this event then why didn’t they use the ‘09 tournament as a springboard for the Wells Fargo “brand” in the region? Wells could have used the tourney as a tool to rally customers and employees. Correct me if I am wrong, but allowing the tournament to proceed in ‘09 as “The Wachovia” sends a clear signal that ‘09 is the last year that the bank will be involved in the event?
January 12th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Full page ad in USA today, back page of Money section, for this merger. BORRRR-ing.
They could have had more impact with a completely white page that just said “We merged. Trust us. It’s a good deal (hopefully for you too.)
January 12th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
That’s basically what the TV ad says too.
January 12th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Wells Fargo is early in the process. They should be commended for getting the communications out early. I never got any communications on the project plan this early with any of the NationsBank or First Bank/US Bank mergers I worked on. @dmgerbino
January 12th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
You’re right David. As someone on another blog pointed out, Citibank is opting for the more traditional, tight-lipped approach to its merger with WaMu.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Jeffrey, JP Morgan took over WaMu…
…must be an indication that they are being tight lipped too!!
David, Wells Fargo is putting a lot of words “out in the space” (a b/e/c sandwich for u if u get that quote) — but nothing of substance is being communicated whatsoever.
please point out anything I might be missing.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Sorry Lucas, I meant Chase, not Citi. Citi is the other firm that wanted Wachovia. (They both start with Cs.)
January 14th, 2009 at 6:59 am
to my surprise Matt did respond to my question about the PGA Tour event, he said:
“As early as last October, we faced a decision about how to brand the 2009 tournament, considering that tickets were going on sale and the amount of time that was needed to create all of the branded materials for such a large-scale event. In addition, knowing that the Wachovia brand would still be very visible by the time the tournament started in late April, the decision was made to move forward with it again being called the Wachovia Championship for 2009.”
My response to him was that:
- thank you for response, didn’t expect one
- having said that, not buying the explanation
- there was plenty of time to pull it together
- gave him 5:1 odds that WFC not involved in the event after ‘09 (lunch bet)
They didn’t publish my response to his response
January 14th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
@Lucas: we’re posting your comments, so I hope with that we’ll earn your trust. What Matt wrote is the truth. The tickets for this event were printed in October, before the deal closed. It didn’t make sense to consider re-branding then.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Ed,
I was just about to post here to say that you all had posted the comment on the other blog, thank you.
However, as for the tourney, I’m still not buying it — a ticket printing deadline is an easy thing to move around, and the artwork is easy to change.
And the story from 10/10/08 in this link says exactly that: “Tickets were within five days of being printed when we stopped the presses,” Tournament Director Kym Hougham said.
http://www.golfweek.com/business/tours-associations/story/golf-economy-feature-101008
Another interesting quote from the article: “The Charlotte tournament expects to continue, with the contract assumed by Wells Fargo.”
I feel certain Wells Fargo didn’t say that, it appears author may have read more into whatever comments were made to him than what was really there.
The tournament didn’t even announce a sale date for tickets until 11/13/08.
http://www.wachoviachampionship.com/pages/0,,5269_5273%5E1819,00.html
About the only reason I can think of for Wells Fargo to not have stepped up right away is if the bank was worried that the deal might not ultimately close — and that’s reasonable. But even now it would be easy to co-op some advertising and customer/employee activities for the ‘09 event with a joint Wells Fargo/Wachovia theme, regardless of what’s printed on the tickets. It would be a great platform for Wells Fargo to promote the brand/combination in the region, and nationally on the broadcast (after all, its one of the few events Tiger plays in, coverage is huge).
But ‘09 isn’t really the issue, ‘10 and forward is. In May of ‘08 the tourney announced a contract extension with Wachovia through the 2014 event:
http://www.wachoviachampionship.com/pages/0,,5269_5273%5E1755,00.html
PGA Tour sponsorship packages are simple and easy to understand. All companies don’t like the medium, and that’s ok too. Maybe Wells Fargo wants to wait until after the ‘09 event to say “we’re out”, might be good to wait so as not to put damper on the current event.
But given the simplicity of this particular sponsorship package, and decision, my gut tells me that if there was a commitment to assume that contract through ‘14, an announcement would have already been made and Wells Fargo would use the ‘09 event as a springboard for maximizing their returns from future events.
What am I missing?
Moving the line to 7-1…
January 14th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
WF has probably not had any time to sit down and look at how sponsorships will wash out post-merger. It just simply isn’t the most pressing priority.
A healthy bank just took over a distressed bank. They have to look at everything — globally, holistically — to see where they stand financially. I imagine this is a complex task. It seems irresponsible to be making isolated, long-term commitments involving millions of dollars until accountants and marketing teams have had a fair chance to evaluate their current position and determine their future strategic direction.
Lucas, can you please help everyone understand why a commitment needs to be expressed from WF — now, today — on the single sponsorship of one golf tournament. Is the tournament in jeopardy? And why are you so sure that WF will not be sponsoring the tournament in the years ahead? Simply because they haven’t made the commitment yet? That seems kind of pessimistic.
I’m sensing you have a vested interest in the tournament’s success. Am I wrong?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Jeffrey,
1. The sponsorship commitment annually is a drop in the bucket relative to WFC’s global advertising/promotional budget. (and this event does get global coverage due to Tiger’s presence…given the knee, he might not be there this year, but he normally plays)
2. Yes, the tourney will be in jeopardy without their commitment. The organizers/hosts of this event are extremely well connected and probably would/will work it out if WFC didn’t sign on — but it’s not a certainty. I strongly suspect the PGA Tour brass have been ALL OVER the WFC people in an effort to get them to commit, they want this thing wrapped up and put to bed. An example would be the Ginn/LPGA event in SC that is now defunct after Ginn cancelled their sponsorship.
3. I understand exactly what’s going on in terms of the operations of these two banks, as well as the various challenges/priorities. If they can’t make a decision as simple as this one before looking at “everything — globally, holistically — to see where they stand”, then there is no chance of this merger succeeding. (and don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying it won’t succeed)
4. I’m by no means sure of the outcome, but I would be willing to wager on it
A gentleman’s wager that is. I think the decision has already been made.
5. You are wrong, I have no connection whatsoever to the event other than the fact I am a fan of golf broadly. I happened to be inn Charlotte and did attend it for one day maybe 4 years ago. In all honesty, I think it’s run poorly from the perspective of the fan in attendance. From the perspective of the players, it’s considered one of the best events on tour.
Other than that, I’m just an interested observer watching fromthe wings, nothing more, nothing less. Fortunately blogs like yours allow me to express an opinion — so, thank you for that!
January 18th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
moving the odds to 9:1…
…any takers? Ed? Matt?
get a kick out of the “one team, twice as strong” motto. why is it that only one WB exec was seated on the 12 person executive operating committee?
does “one team” = the WFC team?
PS…nothing wrong with shooting straight — how about a “you blew it and we’re running the show now” motto?!?
January 20th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
nobody seems to kill a thread better than me, dauum…
at this pace WFC really won’t be able to afford the tourney, stock down ~60% from the peak on the heels of the deal announcement.
obviously the tide’s gone out on all banking boats, to a degree, but WFC was way in front of the pack and then cast aside all their safety gear (rafts, preservers, flashlights, flares, shark suits, everything…) in an effort to lighten up and garner just a little bit more speed — unfortunately that shadow on the horizon was a series of 100′ rogue waves…
…hold on fellas.
January 23rd, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Ok, in an effort to generate some action we are moving the line to 11:1.
Come on now people, 11 lunches to be won, 1 lunch to be lost…that’s a no brainer, take a flyer!!!!
Hey Ed, what happened to the Stumpf section of your “blog”? Seems to have disappeared.
Also, what’s up with the 11:1 ratio of WFC exec’s vs. WB exec’s on the operating committee? I know that’s been asked about a couple times on the “blog”, but never made it through the screeners…
Hey, look at that, 11:1 odds…same as the exec committee breakdown!!!!
January 24th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
booooor-ing…..
January 28th, 2009 at 6:41 am
Moving the odds back down to 7:1
This sentence appeared in a Charlotte Observer article today that was about bank sponsorship activities:
“At Wells Fargo, the San Francisco-based bank plans to honor current sponsorship contracts made by Wachovia, spokeswoman Mary Eshet said.”
I guess the whole thing hinges on the word “current”. Does this mean current year, as in ‘09? Or current contracts that extend into the future? (Wachovia had signed a contract to sponsor the Charlotte PGA Tour event through 2014)
January 28th, 2009 at 11:25 am
If I was in WF’s shoes, I’d adhere to any sponsorship contracts according to their agreed terms. If I wanted to discontinue any sponsorships, I’d let them expire when the contract is complete. It sounds to me like this is what WF is doing. I’m interpreting “current” as in “contracts that aren’t expiring this year.” If Wachovia signed a contract for the golf championship through 2014, it sounds like WF will honor it.
January 30th, 2009 at 6:23 am
Jeffrey,
I hope you are right. This event it one of the VERY BEST on tour and one of only a handful outside of the majors that Tiger traditionally plays in. They could really get a LOT of great BRAND MILEAGE out of it if they handled it properly. And it would go a long way toward showing Charlotte that WFC is interested in the “community”…which just so happens to be one of the “core values” that the banks consistently highlight!! (as per your study)
However, I have been able to confirm the ‘10-’14 status remains “to be determined”, at least as far as anyone in Charlotte knows — and that doesn’t mean much because Charlotte is out of the loop at this point.
Line stays at 7:1
January 30th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Lucas, I just realized you might want to be asking Barney Frank what he thinks about the Wachovia Championship sponsorship, not Wells Fargo.
January 30th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Good one!
All joking aside, what allude to isn’t just a maybe, it’s a fact. Just see what happened with Citigroup, Geithner, and the jet.
I think Wells Fargo still controls their own destiny on discretionary spends like this golf event. At least for now they do.
But take a look at the Chrysler Bob Hope Invitational (another PGA Tour event) that was held in Palm Springs last week…Chrysler was almost invisible — on purpose. No doubt the reason was they didn’t want raise the hackles of the politicians. There was talk that Bank of America was looking at a $20million sponsorship deal with the NY Yankee’s — laying 10-1 lunch odds that one goes by the wayside and I don’t expect to get any takers!
Oh for this to all be over…
February 3rd, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Well, Barney reared his ugly head today (figuratively). I thought Wells was still in control of their discretionary spend but that theory went out the window today with the cancellation of the Vegas trip.
At this point I doubt sponsoring a PGA Tour event is in the cards until the TARP $$ get paid back. While I think WFC had already made their mind not to sponsor the Wachovia/Charlotte event after ‘09, these developments give them a clean way out — and I can’t blame them.
Johnny, better get busy finding a new sponsor…
February 9th, 2009 at 4:24 am
[...] bank may have capitulated, but it isn’t laying down without a fight. On its new blog, Wells Fargo chastised the media’s coverage as “misleading.” The blog post also [...]
February 25th, 2009 at 6:18 am
**BN 0:00 Wells Fargo Cutting Costs at Golf Event Amid Political Pressure**
Headline hit at midnight. This is unfortunate. The Charlotte tour event is a perfect platform for the Wells/Wachovia combination to create brand awareness regionally, nationally, and even globally. But with this kind of political pressure I can certainly see where Wells would shrink away.
I personally thought the event would be abandoned by Wells anyway but I can’t blame them in the least for bailing out now (pun intended;-).
Odds moved to 20-1 against Wells being involved with this event in ‘10.
February 27th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Ed,
So you have to leave the tourney named The Wachovia because ticket printing deadlines in October, but now you are removing any traces of the Wachovia name 2 months in advance of the event?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/27/sports/AP-GLF-Wachovia-Sponsor.html?_r=1
March 28th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
So the status of the situation is that Wells Fargo is writing an $8mm check every year and not using the tourney for anything, whatsoever.
Does that make sense to anyone??
Ed Terpening, can you comment on this?