Free 7-day Trial
All Articles and Columns »

Western Union: Old Name, New Opportunities

July 26, 2011 | About:
tonyg34

tonyg34

4 followers
Introduction

Western Union (WU) has a long and very interesting history that plays an integral part in America's Manifest Destiny, and that story continues today in the company's leading role in international remittances. The company was one of the original members of the Dow Jones Transportation Average in 1884 and has endured every market cycle and new disruptive technology since its inception in 1851.

Investment Thesis

Western Union is positioned for long-term success because of the combination of demographic trends, new market opportunities, and its advantages of scale. The company is poised to expand its share of the global remittance market, and that should support continued strong cash flow, allowing shareholders to be rewarded with acquisitions, share buybacks and increased dividends.

Overview

The business consists of these operating segments:

Consumer-to-consumer (C2C): Money transfer services between consumers. The global financial crisis has certainly dampened growth in this, the most important of Western Union's business segments. At least 200 million people live outside their country of origin. Primarily, immigrants move from poorer to wealthier countries in search of opportunity. When these immigrants leave their nations of origin, they often leave behind family members in need of support. Most money transfers are typically sent to cover the living expenses of relatives residing in other countries.



Global Business Payments
(B2B): Payments made by consumers or businesses to other businesses. This business primarily caters to "underbanked" customers and allows for the payment of bills direct to businesses — even internationally, or on someone else's behalf.

Other Operating Segments: Money order and prepaid services. The company offers Visa (V) and Mastercard (MA) branded prepaid credit cards. Prepaid cards act as a store of value for customers who do not have access to traditional checking accounts. This business segment has come under regulatory scrutiny as it is seen as a highly effective mains of laundering money internationally.

Business Quality

Risk

Competition - As large institutional banks expand into developing markets, Western Union is facing increasing competition from international banks offering remittance services.

Technology - As customers in developing nations have increased access to the Internet, the company faces competition for online payment firms such as PayPal. Likewise, as customers gain access to mobile devices this expands the options for transferring funds. Yes, there's an app for that.

Immigration Reform - Any change in immigration laws worldwide could make it harder for people to relocate to developed economies, which would hurt money transfer volume.

Regulatory Reform - The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, established by the Dodd-Frank Act, makes way for more scrutiny of remittances and leaves open the on-going possibility of further regulatory action. Regulation of any industry tends to favor the largest operators and promote industry consolidation in that it raises the barriers of entry, but typically also puts pressures on margins by either setting price limits or increasing operating costs.

Brand Value - The name Western Union is synonymous with sending money. While the company has earned a reputation as a safe and reliable way to send money, it is very unlikely that customers feel any attachment or a have a sense of loyalty to financial institutions in general or Western Union in particular.

Opportunity

Demographics - The demographics behind immigrant population growth are firmly in place for the foreseeable future. Slow population growth in developed nations and the vast disparity in standards of living for poorer nations is what pumps the blood of the C2C market, the heart of Western Union. With around four billion under-banked people in the world, Western Union's global network has great potential to provide a variety of customer services.

Scalability - Western Union is the clear leader in an industry where size confers strength. They process almost five times as many transactions as their next closest competitor, MoneyGram International. The money transfer business is scalable because the cost of processing additional transactions is minimal. This gives the company a cost advantage over rivals. Also, the company's size creates a network effect, as each new agent makes using Western Union more convenient for customers. Western Union currently has about 460,000 worldwide agent locations.

Growth - On a related topic to scalability, Western Union still has plenty of room to grow as it has barely penetrated the remittance markets of India and China. Also, with only a 20% market share, the company can continue to grow its market share in established markets because its unique cost advantage allows it to price out competitors.

Technology - Instead of a threat, I think new technologies will allow Western Union to grow remittance volumes and capture greater market share. For example, low priced cell phones have prompted the explosion of mobile banking in Kenya, where banks have not successfully reached large segments of the population. Reading recent conference transcripts, the company is intensely focused on expanding its product offerings to monetize the network through initiatives in online payments (ACH transfers), mobile-to-mobile payments, prepaid card services and micro-lending services. The company can use its agent network, brand recognition, international compliance capabilities, and global reach to make moving money around the world faster and easier. Like First Date Corporation, or Visa and MasterCard, Western Union is in the business of driving transaction volume, and new technologies promote that end.

Financial Strength

Western Union is a strong generator of free cash flow. Cash flow is important because it gives management the opportunity to increase shareholder value through actions like paying dynasty building dividends, buying back shares, and funding organic business growth. The reinvestment needs of the company are quite small. New agents often require little more than hanging a sign in the window. The company's leading market position effectively allows it to set prices for the industry, pushing prices down to a level that competitors simply can't match.

The company does have over $3 billion in long term debt but management is obviously content with its ability to generate enough free cash flow to cover its debts as the company has focused instead on buying back shares, increasing its dividend and making tuck in acquisitions.

Since its IPO in 2006 Western Union has reduced its shares outstanding from 777 million to 632 million and plans on making an additional $890 million investment in share repurchases in the second half of 2011. Additionally, the company has rapidly increased its dividend from $.01 in 2006 to its current payout of $.08 per quarter. Obviously that rate of dividend increase is unsustainable on a percentage basis but the company has established a track record of dividend payments, and with a pay out ratio of 20% there is a wide margin of safety and plenty of room for growth.

Interested readers can look to their favorite financial websites, like GuruFocus or Morningstar, for a quick view of the company’s financial records and will likely be impressed by the high margins and returns that Western Union has been able to deliver, even in the recession years. (http://www.gurufocus.com/financials.php?symbol=WU)

Management

Although the company has a limited history operating as a stand-alone business, I have grown fond of Western Union’s management. In addition to shareholder friendly services like share repurchases and dividend increases, I am very impressed with the clarity with which the company communicates with its shareholders. CEO Hikmet Ersek and CFO Scott Scheirman have been forthright both in quarterly conference calls and in interviews about the various challenges Western Union faces and how the company intends to deal with those issues. This in and of itself signifies nothing of the company's ability to stave off economic, competitive or technological threats but the fact that management is willing to openly discuss the company's shortcomings shows that they are in tune with markets and prepared for change. The majority of these concerns are regarding the threats of new technologies such as mobile apps and how the company is positioning itself to compete in this space.

I’m not interested in writing a PR piece for the company, but interested readers can learn more about managements initiatives online or by reading conference call transcripts.

Valuation

Using the GuruFocus Fair Value Calculator, our starting point for valuing the business is $29.85 which we derived using the following assumptions: growth rate of 8.6% using the average growth rate of the last five years; a terminal growth rate of 3% based on popular assumptions of inflation; a discount rate of 11% because that is what was recommended on the site; and a book value of 0.43 based on last quarter's report. All of which implies a margin of safety of 36% which is awfully good for a proven industry leader.

You may of course take issue with any or all of the variables I used and come up with a wide variety of possible fair value estimates.

If we adopt the reverse DCF method, in order to reach the stock's current price of $19 per share based on a terminal rate of 3% and a discount rate of 11%, the market is currently pricing Western Union at 0% growth.

I understand the pessimism given the current outlook for the European and American economies, but even if revenues are flat for 10 years the share buyback program will drive EPS growth above 0%. That is the true measure of the margin of safety in this stock — it is literally being priced for failure, as in a negative real growth rate after buybacks and dividends. I think this makes Western Union one of the lowest risk investments available in today's market.

Given the impact on Western Union’s core C2C transactions volumes caused by the recession, it is reasonable to assume that the company could achieve growth in the low double digits in a return to “more normal” operating conditions. The company was forced to withdraw the long term earnings growth forecast of 15-18% it made in its IPO year of 2006 due to the financial crisis, and a 12% growth forecast effectively splits the difference from its previous bubble optimism and today’s recession level 8% EPS growth. That represents substantial upside to our DCF model.

Let’s not hide behind political correctness. Western Union serves immigrant workers, the people most severely affected by the housing market crash and subsequent recession. Any improvement in employment or housing markets will eventually show up on Western Union’s bottom line. The market is over emphasizing weakness in the US - Mexico corridor transaction volume in the short term. Longer term Western Union is becoming a much more global brand while still expanding its market share in mature markets, even in the face of weak employment. Western Union could almost be considered a leveraged play on a rebound in global employment rates.

Conclusion

Western Union's moat can be a little hard to understand. They serve the under-served, some would say the bottom of the pyramid, but I see it as the future of the world — the emerging middle class. The person sending the money typically has numerous options at his/her disposal from traditional banking operations. However, the person receiving the funds does not. Herein lies the strength of the company. While it may seem obvious that global economic growth and new technologies will chip away at Western Union's position serving under-banked customers, these same factors also allow the company to expand into a much larger financial institution offering services beyond C2C and B2B international remittances, primarily in online and mobile payment solutions, and prepaid card services.

Western Union is the type of company a younger Warren Buffett might have liked (he used to be a shareholder, FYI). A strong generator of free cash flow, selling at an attractive price. The reinvestment needs of the company are quite small. The company's market position effectively allows it to set prices for the industry, pushing prices down to a level that competitors can't match. It is also aggressively expanding its global agent network and expanding its product offerings to monetize the network.

If management remains focused on changes in the market, new technologies should prove to be a source of growth rather than a threat. The company is making meaningful progress in electronic channels, westernunion.com, account-to-cash, mobile payments and pre-paid cards. These efforts will continue to give the company access to new customers and provide more choice for existing customers to continue doing business with Western Union.

Rating: 3.2/5 (34 votes)

Comments

tonyg34
Tonyg34 - 2 years ago
last month the points received in the comments section made a difference in the contest results so don't be too shy to leave a comment; even if you hated the article I'd like the opportunity to address your concerns and learn what not to do next time. Some possible talking points include detailing WU's strategy in mobile transfers, the impact of CFPB regulations, and partnerships with banks and card issuers.

For example, I think a credit card issuer like COF would benefit from a partnership with WU. WU is not an fdic bank and does not make loans, nor does it withhold the principal loaded onto prepaid cards in depository accounts or earn interest on said accounts. If COF and WU partnered, COF would not only grow its card issuing business, it would also be able to earn interest income on the amounts deposited on WU's prepaid cards. Furthermore, the analysts at COF would be able to use information gained on WU customers to devise an internal credit rating score and thus offer underbanked customers a line of products that grows to fit their needs as they become integrated into their host countries economic system. These same customers could potentially use their credit standings with WU to cosign credit applications or loans on behalf of their families abroad, thus transforming WU into an emerging markets bank.

Wildly speculative to say the least, but this is how I amuse myself in my spare time and it helps to keep investing fun.

TheBourqueReport
TheBourqueReport - 2 years ago
I used to be an avid user of Western Union, even when they charged 8-10% of the money you were sending, but I believe they don't quite have the type of moat that will withstand all attacks. Banks here in Canada are starting to offer free transfers to other bank accounts (even between banks), Paypal is cheaper than Western Union (and no pick up!), etc.

They made a billion last year, and it is true they did that with little reinvestment and they are the largest, however, I believe their competitors will slowly devour their profit margins. As they do, the WU franchisees will feel their pockets pinched, and they will slowly start to go under. When that happens, the royalties that WU (the parent) feels will dramatically drop. With 7.3 billion in liabilities and 5.4 billion in assets, at todays price you are paying approximately EV/FCF of 14x. There are companies out there today with EV/FCF of<7x that are easily expected to grow and reinvest at high rates of return, so I don't see why I would buy Western Union shares at these prices.

Chris Bourque

TheBourqueReport@gmail.com
tonyg34
Tonyg34 - 2 years ago
Mr. Bourque:

Thank you for taking the time to comment. You are right about banks offering ACH transfers to other banks and PayPal, AliPay etc offering prepaid online services. Western Union's value added service in these areas lies in cross border transactions and their ability to serve customers who don't have checking accounts. Getting a checking account, with online services, is the norm in N. America but is very much not the case in the rest of the world. AliPay signed a partnership with WU specifically to address compliance issues regarding cross border transactions and extend service to customers who don't have traditional banking outlets. Western Union's moat is all about serving un-banked and under-banked customers.

WU is attempting to monetize their existing business network by expanding product offerings. They may very well fail miserably at it, but I have a set of metrics (like growing bank partnerships, online and mobile transaction adoption rates, &c.) that allow me to measure whether they are successful or not. Hopefully I will be prudent and aware enough to sell if things deteriorate. At this time the company is proving themselves successful with their new initiatives. In the most recent quarter they grew revenue in every category with 35% increase in electronic transfers and raised guidance. We will have to wait and see what happens as more competitors arrive on the scene. I happen to believe (right or wrong) that WU is in a position to set prices for the industry and can drive smaller businesses out of the market. Furthermore, I believe that WU will establish relations with banks to provide transaction services at a fee that makes it not worth the banks efforts to assume the service themselves (like TSS) and that they have a unique first mover advantage in emerging markets. They recently inked a deal with Regions Financial (RF) to offer cross border transaction, and so forth.

WU has been lowering prices on their services to grow volume and consolidate market share for a while now. Basically the opposite of the tobacco industry, more like WalMart. I'm sure there are better investment opportunities out there. I hope to find them, too. Please continue to share your insights. I contribute to sites like GuruFocus b/c I learn more by writing and sharing then just reading.

I don't think the value of WU can be derived from a multiple on its current assets, they don't own or make anything useful in the physical sense. The company stands poised to deliver solid returns based on its potential to return cash to shareholders, they are like the ADP of the underprivileged.

My real impetus for investing in WU is all based around the demographics. Wide income gaps and aging populations. If you look at the macro trends, the income gaps between developing and developed countries — what you can earn in Italy versus Romania, or in the U.S. versus Mexico — are huge. You might earn $10 a day in one country when you can earn $10 to $15 an hour in the U.S. or in Italy. That income gap is going to be wide for decades. And the other factor is aging populations. In parts of Europe and Russia, populations are aging, and migrants are going to have to continue to come to those countries to perform services. If that stays intact then WU stays in business.

http://news.morningstar.com/all/ViewNews.aspx?article=/BW/20110726005557_univ.xml
TheBourqueReport
TheBourqueReport - 2 years ago
"

Western Union's moat is all about serving un-banked and under-banked customers."

I don't consider that a moat, because banks will, of course, be built if they are profitable. And electronic transfers, such as paypal's (which are even pricey because of the scale), can become a lot cheaper. If WU comes down in price, even if the volume goes up 10x as they capture all money transfering in the world, it will make no difference if their profit margins drop by 99% as competitors edge their way in.

How much *added cost* does it take for a bank to partner with another bank and offer the same service? Pennies per transaction. To wire money from one bank account to another is CHEAPPP. It's mostly automated! If all the major banks in Canada have partnered up, and allow you to transfer money for $2 (some are even free), because you already have the locations and its an easy way for all of them to increase their profits (at money transfer company's like WU's expense), why wouldn't you do it?

Don't get me wrong, they will be profitable, but I believe it will be a longterm declining earning stream. Transfering money really is a commodity industry once things can be done over the internet. If you were sending $500 or $50 000 to your friend in Africa, and if your bank partners with an African bank to do this for cheap, why would you even consider WU if it costs $50 or $500 compared to a bank that might charge $5 or $50. It's not like the bank had to do anything extra (other than collect more fees) and the banks like it because they believe they will get more deposits by offering more services.

Before the internet, something like WU would be advantageous because of the locations, and would make sending money a lot faster than sending money or a cheque or money order through the mail. That really isn't required any more.

I just don't think it's undervalued. I think the proof that their strategy isn't working is in the numbers. In 2006 they had Revenue of 4470 million with operating income of 1311 million with assets of 5321 million while in 2010 they had Revenue of 5193 million with operating income of 1300 million with assets of 7929 million. So they added about 2.6 billion of assets in order to keep their operating income flat. That seems like a declining business to me.
tonyg34
Tonyg34 - 2 years ago
Right, so there are back to where they were before the crash and global economic slowdown and now when the economy turns they will return to growth. In the mean time they have significantly expanded their operational reach and returned a healthy part of their cash flow to shareholders. The company is priced for literally 0% growth and recent operating results suggest they can outperform those expectations. They just raised guidance.

I really do appreciate your correspondence and you are right to point out that I didn't adequately elaborate on how the value of their moat is being attacked, but if HSBC could take away WU's business they would have made a move by now,. Google is a bigger threat than PayPal or any bank, as developing market consumers gain access to prepaid phones way before they get access to traditional banking.

The future growth of the company depends on mobile transfers, but can they walk and chew gum at the same time? (invest in new products and still grow revenue?) As you pointed out they failed that test over the last four years, but how much of that is attributable to the US housing market and "the great recession/global slowdown". The drop and rebound in transaction volumes through this period suggests that they can generate enough cash flow to fund acquisitions/invest in new product lines and still buy back shares/pay a divvy, but only if the economy doesn't take a another dip. The stock definitely depends on a rebound in the global economy.

If everything was rosey the stock wouldn't be worth considering. Its attractively priced b/c of fears of continued slowdown in US/Europe as debt talks grab headlines. In the really long term, as living standards in the developing world rise, of course the business model deteriorates, but that's not in the next 5 years. The company has been written off in the western world for dead, but such reports are premature.

Thanks for taking my article seriously enough to engage me in discussion, I will watch the trend line in return on assets to see if you are right about the business deteriorating.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 years ago
Hi all.....

WU goes to developing countries and pays the local bank/postoffice millions of dollars upfront. The bank/postoffice distributes at local outlets in local currency. The local bank has an incentive to deplete the cash quickly..... cycle, rinse, repeat.

Importantly, it's WU that checks the identity of both receiver and sender. The clerk doing that is a local emplyee but he/she uses WU systems and procedures to check the identity.

The bank/post office views WU as a cheap source of foreign currency and an opportunity to leverage their local network.

Now let's see what Paypal needs to do if they feel they need to leave their own wonderful niche. They would:

- Have to build a relationship with the local banks to do the forex.

- Create a system to monitor all the transactions to comply with many anti-terrorism rules.

IMO, there are barriers to entry at three points.

1) The physical network (it's well understood but probably eroding).

2) The relationship with local banks in developing countries. These banks don't want to kill the WU goose that produces the golden eggs.

and

3) The need to have a system to comply with anti-terrorism rules and regulations. Paypal, for example, depends on the identification systems of banks. They don't have their own system to track identity. It's the bank that knows who you are, not Paypal.

An app on an iPhone isn't going to change this.

If you're selling wallets, worry about modern digital payment methods. WU doesn't sell wallets.

my 2 cents.
TheBourqueReport
TheBourqueReport - 2 years ago
I decided to do a little case study and compare WU to Paypal in terms of how much it would cost to send $5000 CAD to China.

Paypal charges 3% for currency conversion fees and costs $25 for a total of $175.

Western Union charges $59 and also gets you on the exchange rate. According to the Bank of Canada, today it costs

6.8027 CNY to buy $1 CAD, however on WU's website it shows

1 Canadian Dollar (CAD) = 6.6601464 Chinese Yuan Renminbi (CNY) for sending $5000 CAD to China today.

This is dinging you another $5000 * 0.020955 = $104.78 CAD, for a total cost of $163.78 to send $5000 for Western Union.

They seem pretty comparable which I did not expect. Both try to hide that the true costs come from currency conversion. For some reason I remember the fee charged by WU to be much larger, but that was maybe 8 years ago.

Either way, the show of a good business is one that can earn high, and sustainable returns on capital over the long term. In this case, I believe the cost of doing business will go down and the price will go down further as competition arises. WU was once a monopoly, but now competitors are making inroads, and it's pretty tough to tell with reasonable precision how successful (in terms of market share and profit margin) they will be in the next 10 to 20 years. If it costed $300 to send through Paypal and $100 to send through WU I might be more convinced of your Walmart analogy, especially if Paypal was the large company and WU was the small one because then there would be lots of room to grow. If it was a declining industry and competitors were looking to exit and WU was the largest low cost provider I would be more interested as well, because then you can usually scale your price increases above your volume losses.

In this case, at this price, it's in my too hard to conservatively value pile.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 years ago
Good work.

$5000 is waaaay more than the typical WU client would transfer. Round christmas they do 5-for-50 deals. You send $ 50 for $ 5. One way to look at it is the 10% cost (excluding exchange rates). OK, that's terrible no ? Now try to think of another way to send ANY amount to Pakistan for $5, safely, within 24h.

Paypal is instant..... until you try to collect the cash. First it must be transferred to the recipients bank account and that takes some time to clear.

TheBourqueReport
TheBourqueReport - 2 years ago
"

Good work.

$5000 is waaaay more than the typical WU client would transfer. Round christmas they do 5-for-50 deals. You send $ 50 for $ 5. One way to look at it is the 10% cost (excluding exchange rates). OK, that's terrible no ? Now try to think of another way to send ANY amount to Pakistan for $5, safely, within 24h.

Paypal is instant..... until you try to collect the cash. First it must be transferred to the recipients bank account and that takes some time to clear.

"

Alright, now that we've established where they are in the competitive market, presently at the top, but not by a landslide, we can discuss why they will be able to use incremental invested capital to grow at rates exceeding what they have done in the past 5 years. I don't see why or how myself, especially as sinking in another 2.6 billion has kept operating income flat at 1 billion.

Do you think this situation is gaining them market share? Or do you think, as I do, that their competitive position was stronger 10 years ago when they had no competition and could charge higher rates, and that it's unlikely that they will raise prices from here? If you think, as I do, that they can't raise prices and are only going for increasing volume, then how much volume growth in the world (and that is captured by WU as opposed to new competition) is required for them to maintain their profit levels (decrease price by 6% might decrease net margin by 10% due to costs staying relatively flat or decreasing at slower rates).

I personally think that without reinvestment that the WU legacy business will be in slow decline, with costs going down per transaction, but prices going down more, and volume increasing roughly with the rate of the market, giving them an earning stream that declines a few percentage a year.

I also think there are two big risks when it comes to 'agents' (franchisees):

If there is more volume but less profit per transaction and more agents, the profits are spread more thinly among agents and they will start to close because they are uneconomic to run. I know its often just 1 or 2 people at a desk inside another store but if you can't pay the rent and the labour to pay off your bills, you are going to shut down.

Since the US dollar is so high today compared to foreign off the grid currencies, that is why the agents can be profitable, because US dollars are worth so much that even small transactions can do wonders for them. If they currencies level to equal purchasing power globally, which over a long period of time I believe they will (next 20 years I bet they will be closer in p.p. than they are today), then I think that these agents will lose a lot of their profitability since they deal commonly in US dollars. Anytime they lose any profitability it is likely that some of their agents will close.

Chris Bourque

TheBourqueReport@gmail.com
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 years ago
Fair points.

I like WU but it's not cheap enough. I would only consider buying at a price that's a bargain even if you're totally right.... say $15. That's a 50% discount to my estimate of IV.

As for agents closing.... The important agents are in places where $ 50 is a very meaningful amount of money... by definition. The day agents in rural areas of developing countries think its no longer worth the trouble... yeah that's the end of WU.
luishernadez
Luishernadez premium member - 2 years ago
I agree with the "price not being cheap enough". I bought a good position last year at around $15.

The business has "ridicilous" returns on both tangible and total capital. The return on tangible ex-cash ASSETS is 28%. The margins are great (21,5%) and the capex are almost irrelevant. The amount of agents around the world is an "irrepicable" asset that can provide a lot of value to the owner.

So... basically the argument about WU´s eroding moat are the following:

1. Under developed countries will eventually develop and will have a strong currency.

2. Eventually everyone will have a cell phone with internet access and will be able to use Paypal, or everyone will have a bank account and will be able to make transfers through the bank.

I think you have to realize what is the reality in the World. In Latin America (as an example) only around 20% of the population has a bank account. There are many countries that are going to take more than 30 years to maybe be close to being developed. That´s for the ones that make it. Many will never develop. Many will stay the same way they are now, with an informal economy and with family members that send money from developed countries.

So I think we can agree that WU has a LOT of time before its core business erodes in some way. WU is already providing mobile applications to transfer money. They are aware of the eventual LONG term partial erosion. Don´t you think that they have enough time to innovate and make the necessary changes in their business model in order to provide the services required in the future? They can certainly fund that innovation from their prodigious free cash flow. They are in every corner of the World. They know the local people, the culture. The employees are local people. The network is simply MASSIVE.

Only the future will tell, but I think they have a good chance and a lot of time to figure out the changes and the technology that are required to keep providing the services that they provide today.

Luis

TheBourqueReport
TheBourqueReport - 2 years ago
From Wells Fargo 2010 Annual Report:

"

The customer opened several

accounts and is sending money to China through

the ExpressSend® service, Wells Fargo’s way for

customers to send money to remittance network

members in other countries."

If one of the largest bank's in the world is getting into this industry, you can be sure that it's getting a lot more competitive!

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 years ago
WOW... after a century and a half of trying, Wells is finally going to put Western Union out of business.

Please leave your comment:


Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
Free 7-day Trial
FEEDBACK
Hide