|
Citigroup Saw No Red Flags Even as It Made Bolder Bets
11-23-2008, 01:31 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.
|
|
|
|
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!
|
11-23-2008, 03:35 PM
|
#2
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 59
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco
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.
|
|
|
11-23-2008, 03:56 PM
|
#3
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 73
|
They were wanting to buy Wachovia!!!!!!
This whole thing is nuts!
|
|
|
11-23-2008, 04:42 PM
|
#4
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule
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.
|
|
|
11-23-2008, 07:06 PM
|
#5
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
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:
|
|
|
11-23-2008, 07:14 PM
|
#6
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule
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".
|
|
|
11-23-2008, 07:19 PM
|
#7
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas: No Country for Old Men
Posts: 50,004
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go
" . . . 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
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 02:21 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
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
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 04:28 AM
|
#9
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 184
|
LBO Planet Earth
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco
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?
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 04:49 AM
|
#10
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 73
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal3
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.
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 06:43 AM
|
#11
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees Rule
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
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 08:11 AM
|
#12
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
|
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.
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 08:20 AM
|
#13
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 14,404
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go
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.
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 08:44 AM
|
#14
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem
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.
|
|
|
11-24-2008, 11:38 AM
|
#15
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,983
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go
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
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Quick Links
|
|
|