At the end of 2001, the strategy remained similar to that announced at the merger {large scale , broad scope ], with perhaps greater emphasis on distribution . 1Weill's letter to shareholders in the 20131 Annual Report comments : "We have played a lead role in defining the concept ofa fully diversified financial services firm. 'We have built distribution channels to every consumer wealth segment. In a world where value is migrating from manufacturing to distribution, and where open architecture is becoming mainstream, our strategy has positioned us favorably to provide multiple services to customers around the world .\" There was even some evidence of successful crossselling, with the company reporting a doubling ofcross-marlreting revenues between 1993 and 21301 . In addition to the scale and scope of its distribution network, the company stressed expense discipline , acquisitions expertise , and risk management Nevertheless , some skeptics remained . Morgan Stanley analysts Henry l'v'lc'Uey and Scott Patrick commented [April 2C")? 3: "We think that management should continue to simplify the story into one that is predicated on Citi's dominating a few global businesses versus diversifying and cross-selling. We are not convinced that cross -selling alone moves the earnings dial." Update : August 2W2 Since late 200E ,Citigroup has reported anumber of acquisitions and spinod'fs . Among the highlights In December 9, 2001 : Citigroup announced it would spin off its property and casualty business . The Travelers Property Casualty Corp IPO raised $3.?b in March. I May 21, 2002: Citigroup announced the purchase of Golden State Bancorp, the second largest thrift institution intheUS. The dealwould add 332branches ,l.5m customers ,and325bindeposits inCalitbrnia andlCevada. Questions for Analysis (a) 'What are Citigroup's major businesses '? Does large scale help it in some businesses '? Does small scale hurt in others T In what businesses has a broad range ofproducts been helpil '? {b} Has Citigroup's success to date reected economies of scale and scope or some other kind of "Sandy magic"? [c] If economies of scale and scope are important in this industry, why haven't more firms followed lCitigroup's strategy? [d] Do you see a clear advantage to focusing on distribution, as Weill's letter to shareholders suggests '? If so, how would you follow through? {e} Bottom line: Would you suggest to Sandy Weill that Citigroup expand, contract, or simply fine-tune its range ofproducts and services":| Be specific