Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
You have inside information that I don't have because I did not state that it was their no. 1 priority, I was just stating that obviously they work with many companies.
Remember BX is involved with arranging a multitude of deals on an ongoing business, not every deal is for WMIH.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly..
Gotta remember on the Internet you can be whoever or whatever you want. :)
Sounds like the bank i know.
WASHINGTON (AP) — JPMorgan Chase has been ordered to take steps to correct poor risk management that led to a surprise trading loss last year of more than $6 billion.
Federal regulators also on Monday cited the bank for lapses in oversight that could allow the bank to be used for money laundering.
JPMorgan, the nation's largest bank by assets, will not pay a fine under the agreements with the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency, a Treasury Department agency. The bank promised to strengthen its policies and procedures to control risk and to screen customers to prevent money laundering.
The regulators each issued two cease-and-desist orders against JPMorgan, a sanction that requires a bank to change its practices. They said they had found "deficiencies" in the bank's procedures for preventing money laundering, and also uncovered "unsafe or unsound practices" regarding management of risk. The orders said the regulators and other government agencies could pursue further action.
Britain's Financial Services Authority, meanwhile, said in a statement Monday that its own investigation into JPMorgan's trading loss continues.
The U.S. regulators said that the bank has committed to take "all necessary and appropriate steps" to correct the problems.
JPMorgan neither admitted nor denied the regulators' findings in agreeing to the accords.
"We've been working hard to fully remediate the issues" related to risk management, JPMorgan spokesman Mark Kornblau said. He added that the bank has also made preventing money laundering a "top priority."
In May, JPMorgan disclosed that its London office lost billions in trades designed to hedge against risk. The bank later said that some traders had tried to hide the size of the losses.
The loss, which occurred less than four years after the 2008 financial crisis, hurt the bank's reputation. JPMorgan had survived the crisis by taking fewer risks than its competitors.
In June, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon acknowledged before congressional lawmakers that the bank made mistakes but he defended its strategy for managing risk.
Still, the bank took action against several employees at the heart of the controversy. Two senior managers and a trader linked to the London trading operation were fired. The bank took back nearly two years' compensation from them.
In addition to the firings, Ina Drew, the bank's chief investment officer overseeing its trading strategy, retired after 30 years at the bank and voluntarily repaid two years' salary.
The bank also made a broad reshuffle of its top management, in an apparent bid to restore investors' trust.
The second action announced Monday against JPMorgan was related to money laundering controls. The accord did not cite any specific case, but the agreement reached was similar to one Citibank struck with regulators in April.
The bank was cited for poorly monitoring potential money laundering at a time when a number of banks have been the spotlight for such abuse.
HSBC agreed last month to pay $1.9 billion — the largest penalty ever imposed on a bank — for lapses the Justice Department said enabled Mexican drug traffickers, Iran, Libya and others under U.S. sanction to move money around the world. And Standard Chartered Bank is paying $327 million to settle U.S. and New York City charges that it laundered money on behalf of four countries subject to U.S. sanctions: Iran, Sudan, Libya and Burma.
Money laundering takes profits from the trafficking of drugs or arms or other illicit activities and passes them through bank accounts or other legitimate businesses to disguise the illegal activity.
WASHINGTON (AP) — JPMorgan Chase has been ordered to take steps to correct poor risk management that led to a surprise trading loss last year of more than $6 billion.
Federal regulators also on Monday cited the bank for lapses in oversight that could allow the bank to be used for money laundering.
JPMorgan, the nation's largest bank by assets, will not pay a fine under the agreements with the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency, a Treasury Department agency. The bank promised to strengthen its policies and procedures to control risk and to screen customers to prevent money laundering.
The regulators each issued two cease-and-desist orders against JPMorgan, a sanction that requires a bank to change its practices. They said they had found "deficiencies" in the bank's procedures for preventing money laundering, and also uncovered "unsafe or unsound practices" regarding management of risk. The orders said the regulators and other government agencies could pursue further action.
Britain's Financial Services Authority, meanwhile, said in a statement Monday that its own investigation into JPMorgan's trading loss continues.
The U.S. regulators said that the bank has committed to take "all necessary and appropriate steps" to correct the problems.
JPMorgan neither admitted nor denied the regulators' findings in agreeing to the accords.
"We've been working hard to fully remediate the issues" related to risk management, JPMorgan spokesman Mark Kornblau said. He added that the bank has also made preventing money laundering a "top priority."
In May, JPMorgan disclosed that its London office lost billions in trades designed to hedge against risk. The bank later said that some traders had tried to hide the size of the losses.
The loss, which occurred less than four years after the 2008 financial crisis, hurt the bank's reputation. JPMorgan had survived the crisis by taking fewer risks than its competitors.
In June, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon acknowledged before congressional lawmakers that the bank made mistakes but he defended its strategy for managing risk.
Still, the bank took action against several employees at the heart of the controversy. Two senior managers and a trader linked to the London trading operation were fired. The bank took back nearly two years' compensation from them.
In addition to the firings, Ina Drew, the bank's chief investment officer overseeing its trading strategy, retired after 30 years at the bank and voluntarily repaid two years' salary.
The bank also made a broad reshuffle of its top management, in an apparent bid to restore investors' trust.
The second action announced Monday against JPMorgan was related to money laundering controls. The accord did not cite any specific case, but the agreement reached was similar to one Citibank struck with regulators in April.
The bank was cited for poorly monitoring potential money laundering at a time when a number of banks have been the spotlight for such abuse.
HSBC agreed last month to pay $1.9 billion — the largest penalty ever imposed on a bank — for lapses the Justice Department said enabled Mexican drug traffickers, Iran, Libya and others under U.S. sanction to move money around the world. And Standard Chartered Bank is paying $327 million to settle U.S. and New York City charges that it laundered money on behalf of four countries subject to U.S. sanctions: Iran, Sudan, Libya and Burma.
Money laundering takes profits from the trafficking of drugs or arms or other illicit activities and passes them through bank accounts or other legitimate businesses to disguise the illegal activity.
Am I the only one that doesn't get this?
No, I hope that there's at least two of us! :)
All i can say is BS.
Agreed, time will tell. If nothing else we have learned to be patient.(well some):)
Happy New Year to all.
Good posts, nice to read the voice of reason.
Definitely a great job by David , however it all shakes out.
Be honest with yourself and with others - you would be complaining under either of these scenarios.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly , some here have nothing better to do.
Well said,now maybe some pictures. :)
What can i say other than , very well done.
Well said, thank you.
AGREED
Well said 'Large Green'
Perhaps you could donate your shares to a good cause and get a tax write off and be done with your anguish.
...:)
Hear Hear
The rest of the story .... :)
Agree,i think in time it will all be worth it.
Good listen,thanks fio.
I'm sure Rosie will get a kick out of it. However, this author had great points through the entire objection. It's just too bad that this objection will be overlooked by all parties and the POS will pass even though it stinks to high heaven
------------------------------------------------------------------
And written by a person from Germany. Like most, still looking for that level playing field in life.....sad
Well said Jest ,i am in total agreement.
Here here.
Great job Catz.
Same page Uzualsuspect,i believe a ongoing business has always been the plan,just different owners in the plan now. IMO :)
You can add me finally also. :)
Very good info,thank you. IMO
You may think its full of crap, but I think it is flat out honest.
This has the answers to many questions that have been batted around here by the Eeyore's and the Mad Hatters.
If you are an investor, you read it, you think about it and you rationally use this very important info to inform your investment decisions.
If you are still a toddler in the "terrible twos" you get mad, stomp your feet, point fingers, deny, and go to bed dreaming that the pony you are sure Dad is buying you (even though he has said "no" over one hundred times) will be in the backyard tomorrow.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Clawmann,i agree most probably did not even take the time to read the question and answers much less digest it. IMO
I find it interesting that MW and S/G are saying vote yes on the settlement regardless of the outcome of Dime and TPS. It would be nice to know the future value they see in the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not see how S/G can come out and state a value unless Catz got his crystal ball repaired and loaned it to them.
Yea,thanks to translate. :)
Happy New Year to you.
Hear hear and a great New Year to all.
Exactly Dion,do not have enough specific information to make intelligent decision. IMO
Thank you Catz.... :)
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229111220000000000002.pdf
While reading equities letter i found this quite interesting (page 14) "Pro rata share of 200 million shares of new common stock of Reorganized WMI and the right to appoint a controlling majority of Reorganized WMI's board of directors. Reorganized WMI will be capitalized with $75 million in cash, a $125 million credit facility, and other assets. :)
Good job Catz for what little there was to work with. IMO
I am thinking your correct Jack. :)
I believe you will see info. when this is all said and done. IMO