Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Citigroup Saw No Red Flags Even as It Made Bolder Bets
Old 11-23-2008, 02:31 PM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
Citigroup Saw No Red Flags Even as It Made Bolder Bets

According to that article Citi's internal line of defense (Risk Mgmt) did not work.

The Regulators failed. Probably because some of the people who run the Federal groups are from Wall Streeters. Cronies and setting up for the next job

The Rating Agencies Failed. Greed and Money...

The internal risk management groups apparently failed.

Everyone looked the other way.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/bu...l?ref=business

They are likely to be the next AIG.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/bu...ml?ref=economy


I will never believe that some of those people did not know what was happening. At the very least the group working the CDO business had to know they were getting in over their heads.
__________________

__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-23-2008, 04:35 PM   #2
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post
According to that article Citi's internal line of defense (Risk Mgmt) did not work.

The Regulators failed. Probably because some of the people who run the Federal groups are from Wall Streeters. Cronies and setting up for the next job

The Rating Agencies Failed. Greed and Money...

The internal risk management groups apparently failed.

Everyone looked the other way.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/bu...l?ref=business

They are likely to be the next AIG.
It will be an interesting week. Thankfully the market will be closed on Thursday, it looks like we will need that.
__________________

__________________
DragoMuseveni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 04:56 PM   #3
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 73
They were wanting to buy Wachovia!!!!!!

This whole thing is nuts!
__________________
Yankees Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 05:42 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Helen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule View Post
They were wanting to buy Wachovia!!!!!!

This whole thing is nuts!
Yea, this whole thing unfolding is pretty incredible to watch. My partner and I just walked to the library and noticed 3 going out of business signs.

2009 is going to be ugly.
__________________
Helen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 08:06 PM   #5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
I'm shocked.

I read the whole NYT article and I didn't see Fannie or Freddie mentioned once. And here I thought they caused the entire problem. :confused:
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 08:14 PM   #6
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule View Post
They were wanting to buy Wachovia!!!!!!

This whole thing is nuts!
If you followed it closely it was pretty obvious that the Wachovia deal was designed to save Citi as much as it was designed to save Wachovia. Citi needed Wachovia's depositor base and to mitigate the impact of Wachovia's sour asset portfolio on Citi the government was assuming loan losses above a certain level. There was a reason Citi's share price jumped ~50% on the news.

When Wells offered a better deal (one that didn't require any taxpayer risk) FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said she still supported the Citi transaction as being "in the best interest of the financial system". I'd read that as saying "Citi needs this deal and Citi is too big to fail".
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 08:19 PM   #7
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
" . . . read, "Citi needs this deal and Citi is too big to fail".
I remember when "bailout" meant emergency egress from a damaged aircraft...

"The federal government was nearing an agreement Sunday night to rescue Citigroup Inc. by helping to remove billions of dollars in toxic assets from its balance sheet, people familiar with the talks say."

Bailout Talks Accelerate for Ailing Citigroup - WSJ.com
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 03:21 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
If you followed it closely it was pretty obvious that the Wachovia deal was designed to save Citi as much as it was designed to save Wachovia. Citi needed Wachovia's depositor base and to mitigate the impact of Wachovia's sour asset portfolio on Citi the government was assuming loan losses above a certain level. There was a reason Citi's share price jumped ~50% on the news.

When Wells offered a better deal (one that didn't require any taxpayer risk) FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said she still supported the Citi transaction as being "in the best interest of the financial system". I'd read that as saying "Citi needs this deal and Citi is too big to fail".

Interesting thought.

And I was thinking they were just greedy @$$h0!3s! They are really devious greedy @$$h0!3s. Money any way they can get it. Run the company in the ground taking ridiculous risks, take tax payer money for a bailout, then take the tax payer money and the Treasury's sweethheart dal for Wachovia ( buy out a competitor in the guise of being the "white knight" to rescue Wachovia's depositors fro bank failure when they know they--Citi-- are failing).


BTW - Citi just took more of Taxpayers money. This is a sweeter deal than buying Wachovia... the money is free and guaranteed!

But we need to remember... they are too big to fail. Break that company up into a 100 pieces and sell it off now!

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/23/news...ion=2008112400
__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
LBO Planet Earth
Old 11-24-2008, 05:28 AM   #9
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 184
LBO Planet Earth

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post
I will never believe that some of those people did not know what was happening. At the very least the group working the CDO business had to know they were getting in over their heads.
I thought the financial world was collapsing because a houskeeper in San Diego making $20,000 per year lied about her income an bought a $500,000 house. Isn't that what caused the whole mess?
__________________
Hal3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 05:49 AM   #10
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal3 View Post
I thought the financial world was collapsing because a houskeeper in San Diego making $20,000 per year lied about her income an bought a $500,000 house. Isn't that what caused the whole mess?

That is what those republicans would like you to believe. It is all pretty amazing.

Like I said in another thread lets let the whole system crash quickly. This slow motion crash is well time consuming and painful. Get out of debt, grow veggies raise some chickens and goats and cut firewood. Its gonna be surviaval of the fittest. Oh yea get a gun and lots of ammo.
__________________
Yankees Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 07:43 AM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule View Post
They were wanting to buy Wachovia!!!!!!

This whole thing is nuts!
no it wasn't

Citi was going to take the depositor base and dump all the bad loans on the remains of Wachovia and let it go under
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 09:11 AM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post
BTW - Citi just took more of Taxpayers money. This is a sweeter deal than buying Wachovia... the money is free and guaranteed!
I wouldn't call it "free" . . .8% + warrants has a real cost. But it's certainly "below market" money.

On the other hand. If the government borrows 3 year money at 1.75% and lends to a company that it has guaranteed can't fail at 8% + equity upside, it might not be a bad deal for taxpayers.
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 09:20 AM   #13
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
On the other hand. If the government borrows 3 year money at 1.75% and lends to a company that it has guaranteed can't fail at 8% + equity upside, it might not be a bad deal for taxpayers.
Funny. "Guaranteed can't fail" because the government will keep pumping money in. This could be a really expensive "good deal." It's like a financial perpetual motion machine--we need somebody who knows thermodynamics to explain why it won't work. I wonder why the private money wasn't beating down the door to make this deal?

The government knows as much about ROI as Mother Theresa knew about G-strings.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 09:44 AM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
I wonder why the private money wasn't beating down the door to make this deal?
Your faith in the ability of private money to sniff out good deals in the current environment is belied by +900bp credit spreads on bonds of companies that have no prospect of default, and 100% recovery in default.

I'm also not aware of any private institution that has a 1.75% cost of capital. Last I checked Berkshire Hathaway 5 year CDS was trading at ~500bp over LIBOR . . . spread levels typically reserved for "junk" companies.
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2008, 12:38 PM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
Your faith in the ability of private money to sniff out good deals in the current environment is belied by +900bp credit spreads on bonds of companies that have no prospect of default, and 100% recovery in default.

I'm also not aware of any private institution that has a 1.75% cost of capital. Last I checked Berkshire Hathaway 5 year CDS was trading at ~500bp over LIBOR . . . spread levels typically reserved for "junk" companies.
This is a serious post. Could you name a few that you feel fall into this category?

Ha
__________________

__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ER Flags (Lots of Graphics) BigMoneyJim Other topics 16 10-29-2009 10:51 AM
In the Red Zone 4th&Goal Hi, I am... 2 11-17-2007 03:45 PM
Citigroup Paper: The Global Retirement Crisis - Threat to World Stability chinaco FIRE and Money 1 03-20-2007 03:18 PM
Flags of Our Fathers mickeyd Other topics 0 01-31-2007 02:05 PM
Red wine Danny Other topics 2 03-11-2006 05:31 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.