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.
Sorry missed that one. Would be interesting to see how many hours specific to Rosen then is billed per month with all his trial work. IF more than the month even has in it, BINGO, or YAHTZEE.
If it is for others then do all these people earn the same hourly wage there? I doubt it.
Great for all those holding long here I do not disagree. Great potential to even be able to tender an offer for BB in the first place speaks itself to the companies strengths and how they see themselves in the marketplace. GLTA here. Yes I almost bought getting caught up in the excitement on Friday. We'll all see where it goes from here, I wish everyone well here.
I believe mailing them makes it a federal crime.
True enough, now that I will agree with. Thank you.
You do realize it is just a possibility they make an offer and then an offer is accepted right? This is NOT a done deal please do not be mislead here with your hard earned money. This all has to be accepted first if the offer is even made. I am not a naysayer because I really could care less but please do not put your life savings in here for the hype caused by something that may happen. There are other firms that I am sure will offer to buy this as well. Sorry longs but someone has to say this, and you all stuck on pumping it to death.
So they might make an offer for Blockbuster, meanwhile a judge declared another offer not worthy by a worthy group as well. So in my judgement this may go nowhere as well here, this news does not mean it's a done deal by any means here just pure speculation.
Others can come forward and make offers here to buy this company, does not mean TDGI gets this company and this deal. Use common sense here folks, up on frenzy buying today is all.
It is interesting that JPM cannot seem to come up with the assets it acquired in this major steal, yet they seem to be able to sell certain items for profit that no one seems to know how they acquired them in the first place. Interesting to say the least. No asset listing but we are selling these assets? Things that make one go HMMMMMM....................
So which is correct in the I Box I see a chart whereas in 2010 it hit over $5.00 yet the small chart when you click on one year chart never shows it going to %5.00 let along .25 cents. Not sure which one is the lie.
Large Green I believe it too, no one is above the law and as long as all judges are still independent from payoffs then the law will be on our side and if not Susman will know what to do about that topic should it raise it's ugly head here. Mistrial for one.
Bought 10K shares more today.
So Elea do you guarantee that statement? I doubt it. Do you have inside knowledge here? I doubt it. So my suggestion is don't say such things.
JPM having all these documents ahead of time is known to us contractors as bid rigging, oh yeah this is the real world, and they are not in it. Sorry folks lost my head for a second.
Take a look at the 2 year chart here in this Ihub next to the quote, I notice very similarities from Dec. 2009 to March 2010 and match that up now with Dec. 2010 and now March 2011, look similar to me. Next stop April 2011. Take a look see anything different here.
Can I ask if there are any folks on this board currently serving or working in Iraq? Let me know, thank you.
Any folks here currently serving in Iraq? Let me know.
How much money are we making in this deal? HMMMMM normal no news with no numbers, Ho Hum.
See link about foreclosures, JPM other banks.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=46657365
Anyone here been to visit them in Vegas at the below address?
Corporate Office
8883 W. Flamingo Rd.
Suite 102
Las Vegas, Nevada
89147
Tel:1(702)940-0494
Fax:1(702)942-3397
GoldUranDiamondTrade new member I see from Feb. 25, 2011. Why the interest all of a sudden? Things that make one go HMMMMMMM..........
For those whom are not aware of this new rule change taking affect on Feb. 28, 2011. Below.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
For those who do not know these rules go into affect on Feb. 28, 2011 for the MM's games.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
For all who did not know these new rules going into affect on Feb. 28, 2011 for our nice MM's buds.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
For those interested the MM's will have new rules starting tomorrow Feb. 28, 2011.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
Not that it affects this investment too much but perhaps new rules for MM's taking affect Feb. 28, 2011. Short version.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
All those interested the rules they are finally changing for those nice MM's. Feb. 28th 2011 takes affect short version.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
Not that it matters too much on this stock but for all boards information takes affect Feb. 28, 2011.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
New Rules Taking affect February 28, 2011.
short version:
Quote: There's 3 new laws gaining attention in the NSS market reform arena: FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations. FINRA 2010-043, also starting on 2/28/11 reinstates the "short sale exempt" (SSE) marking requirements for trade reporting and the OATS system. Those MMs accessing the bona fide MM exemption from executing pre-borrows or "locates" before admittedly naked short sales must now FORMALLY acknowledge the accessing of that universally-abused exemption. Being that these trades are theoretically being made to "inject liquidity" then the excuse to hide the related trade data from the public's eyes goes out the window. You can't have it both ways and claim the bona fide MM exemption and later claim that the related trade data needs to be kept secret because it might reveal a "proprietary trading strategy".
Truly bona fide MMs that are able to legally access that universally-abused exemption cover their naked short position on the next downtick after their short sale when buy side liquidity is in need of being ejected as share prices fall. The 3rd new rule which is in effect now states that the offers and bids that MMs post must be of approximately the same size. No longer can the offers be of 1 million shares and the offsetting bid good for the minimum 5,000 shares.
The verbiage in 4320 is especially well done as it FINALLY puts the clearing firms that aid and abet this crime wave on the spot. With the FFETF, which is made up of 25 different agencies, now on the scene the transparency has increased markedly. You can imagine how critical the lack of transparency is to a crime involving selling nonexistent securities and then refusing to ever deliver that which you sold AFTER being allowed access to the funds of the investor being defrauded.
Here are the links to the rules SR-FINRA-2010-028 and SR-FINRA-2010-043:
www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2010/P121522
Notice the part I marked in bold in the quote above:
"FINRA 4320 goes into effect on 2/28/11. It mandates 13 day buy-ins for open delivery failures FINALLY applying to shares of non-reporting corporations."
On Geraldo tonight on Fox News Channel is Medical Marijuana stores coming up soon after this first segment. All should watch this show tonight. GLTA here.
Nice balance here holding around .0006 not below .0005, good sign here with all that up/down volume on Friday. Watch next week.
Good luck on getting out on Monday or averaging down some, not good news here. Sell.
CBIS on it's way to the moon, no funds to buy any today, so sad. GLTA here still holding 1 million strong here. Maybe we get some off shoot here with any luck.
Thought you may all be interested in reading this article. Mentions Lehman and Chinese investments.
Special report: China flexed its muscles using U.S. Treasuries
By Emily Flitter Emily Flitter – Thu Feb 17, 10:21 am ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Confidential diplomatic cables from the U.S. embassies in Beijing and Hong Kong lay bare China's growing influence as America's largest creditor.
As the U.S. Federal Reserve grappled with the aftershocks of financial crisis, the Chinese, like many others, suffered huge losses from their investments in American financial firms -- from Lehman Brothers to the Primary Reserve Fund, the money market fund that broke the buck.
The cables, obtained by WikiLeaks, show that escalating Chinese pressure prompted a procession of soothing visits from the U.S.Treasury Department. In one striking instance, a top Chinese money manager directly asked U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for a favor.
In June, 2009, the head of China's powerful sovereign wealth fund met with Geithner and requested that he lean on regulators at the U.S. Federal Reserve to speed up the approval of its $1.2 billion investment in Morgan Stanley, according to the cables, which were provided to Reuters by a third party.
Although the cables do not mention if Geithner took any action, China's deal to buy Morgan Stanley shares was announced the very next day.
The two Treasury officials to whom the cables were addressed, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Asia Robert Dohner and Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Monetary and Financial Policy Mark Sobel, declined through a spokesperson to comment for this story. The State Department also declined to comment.
China is America's biggest foreign lender, playing a crucial role in the U.S.Treasury auctions that allow Washington to borrow what it needs to keep its government running. At the same time, the United States is China's top export destination: America's trade deficit with the nation reached a record $273.1 billion in 2010. Most economists describe the two economies as co-dependent.
The concern in certain influential Washington and Wall Street circles is that Beijing would leverage its position as the main enabler of U.S. overspending. And the cables provide a glimpse into how much politics inform relations between the world's two largest economies.
One cable cites Chinese money managers expressing concern that U.S. arms sales to Taiwan -- a major, longstanding irritant in the relationship -- could sour the Chinese public on Treasury purchases.
The subject of Taiwan came up during an October 9, 2008 meeting the U.S. financial attache's office had with Liu Jiahua, Deputy Director General of China's foreign currency reserve manager, the secretive behemoth known as the State Administration for Foreign Exchange, or SAFE.
"Liu observed that the recent U.S. announcement of another arms sale to Taiwan made it more difficult for the Chinese government to explain its policies supportive of the U.S. to the Chinese public," reads an account of his comments in one of the cables.
The cables also indicate a high level of confidence among the Americans that China can't entirely stop buying U.S. debt, a sentiment shared by most economists who describe the dynamic as a form of mutually assured financial destruction.
But the cables do show that China can and will pull back, with financial repercussions. In the spring of 2009, with U.S.-China financial tensions running especially high, China's Treasury holdings fell to around $764 billion, down from nearly $900 billion. In July, after tensions between the two nations mostly subsided, its holdings rose to a record $940 billion.
During the financial turmoil, the cables show that Beijing also shifted its portfolio away from longer-term Treasury notes, which helped drive up America's long-term borrowing costs.
NOT TOO BIG TO FAIL
The collapse of Lehman had a swift and powerful impact on SAFE. "Several interlocutors have told us that Lehman was a counterparty to SAFE in financial transactions and as a result SAFE suffered large losses when Lehman collapsed," Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing Dan Piccuta wrote in a cable to Washington on March 20, 2009.
The hit to its balance sheet is likely what prompted a Chinese official to tell a U.S. diplomat months earlier that SAFE was afraid to re-enter the U.S. repo market -- that is, it was reluctant to resume lending its short-term Treasuries to counterparties wanting to use them as collateral in cash loans.
On October 9, 2008, officials from the U.S. embassy's office of the financial attache in Beijing met with SAFE Deputy Director General Liu Jiahua. "SAFE is very concerned over the danger involved in lending U.S. Treasuries to U.S. financial institutions in the repurchase agreement market," Liu said.
Liu said SAFE's confidence in U.S. banks had been shaken. SAFE had exited the repo market, which is a way for corporations and financial institutions to borrow overnight.
The cable continues, "Liu remained noncommittal on the possible resumption of lending, but agreed that SAFE had sufficient confidence in those institutions and would consider a system whereby the Federal Reserve or other U.S. government agency would act as a guarantor."
Public opinion clearly rattled China's financial leaders. One cable shows Liu citing an internet discussion forum, saying "the Chinese leadership must pay close attention to public opinion in forming policies."
The U.S. government does not appear to have offered the Chinese a special setup guaranteeing U.S. banks. Instead, the cables show, American diplomats reassured the Chinese by pointing out that Washington had infused banks' balance sheets with $700 billion in fresh capital, effectively propping up the banking system.
FANNIE AND FREDDIE, GUARANTEED OR NOT
China holds hundreds of billions of dollars in debt issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the housing agencies known as Government Sponsored Entities, or GSEs.
Like many other investors, it purchased agency debt before the crisis with the expectation that Fannie and Freddie were implicitly backed by the U.S. government.
In September 2008, when the Treasury Department took control of the two GSEs, SAFE officials grew alarmed, the cables show. Suggestions that senior GSE debt holders would have to take a haircut sparked a public outcry in China. The media warned that the government's currency manager faced monstrous losses similar to those suffered earlier by the nation's sovereign wealth fund, China Investment Corp., after its investments in U.S. financial institutions blew up.
Media outlets had already heavily criticized the government for CIC's losses -- a Financial Times story circulated by outlets such as China Daily speculated that CIC had lost $80 billion of the government's foreign reserves. In late 2008 Chinese newspapers routinely ran headlines with the words "Fannie Mae" and "Freddie Mac" spelled out in English.
To defuse the situation, the Treasury Department sent Undersecretary for International Affairs David McCormick to Beijing for two days in October 2008. The gesture went over well.
"All of Undersecretary McCormick's counterparts appeared to appreciate his willingness to come to Beijing in the midst of a financial crisis," Piccuta wrote in a cable dated October 29, 2008. "Interlocutors stressed that unless leaders' concerns about the viability of banks and U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) are assuaged, lower-level officials will be constrained from taking on greater counter-party risks."
The cables show McCormick trying to reassure the Chinese. "In each meeting, Undersecretary McCormick emphasized that even though the U.S. government did not explicitly guarantee GSE debt, it effectively did so by committing to inject up to $100 billion of equity in each institution to avoid insolvency and that this contractual commitment would remain for the life of these institutions," Piccuta wrote.
PACIFIC RIFT
The U.S. Federal Reserve announced a program to buy agency mortgage-backed securities and Treasuries in early 2009 to help flood the financial system with liquidity and stop Treasury yields from rising. But at first the purchases had very little impact on yields, which climbed steadily while the Treasury Department's auctions of new debt wobbled.
In China, top officials began publicly criticizing the inflationary side-effects of the Fed's program. They said the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet would devalue their Treasury holdings -- and indeed, the Chinese public watched as Treasury yields rose and the older debt the Chinese had sank in value.
On March 13, 2009, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said at a press conference he was "concerned" about the security of China's investments in U.S. Treasuries. The March 20 cable, titled "Premier Wen's comments on U.S. Treasuries: Protect China's investments," documents a score of Chinese officials discussing their worries about U.S. Treasuries and the potential consequences of their uncertainty.
One economist at Caijing Magazine, which diplomats described as a "respected" Chinese outlet, told U.S. officials in late February "there has been a 'huge debate' within the government about China's holdings of U.S. Treasuries."
According to the cable, the Chinese economist told U.S. embassy officials that "SAFE has been shifting its portfolio toward shorter-term assets to reduce the risk of capital losses from higher inflation."
That information dovetailed with data, released many months later, showing the Chinese had indeed sold longer-dated Treasuries and bought more T-bills, which surged to $210 billion by May 2009. The move likely contributed to the rise in long-term yields.
GEITHNER IN BEIJING
Tensions remained high during Geithner's visit to China -- his first as Treasury Secretary -- on June 1 and 2, 2009.
Geithner, who has lived in China and other parts of Asia and holds a master's in East Asian studies, met with top Chinese officials, including the head of CIC, China's $200 billion sovereign wealth fund, and the ministers of finance and commerce.
The trip had been scheduled for months with a predictable agenda, but the meetings were full of spontaneous discussion and frank complaints from the Chinese, the cables reveal.
Xie Xuren, China's minister of finance, met with Geithner on June 1 and "expressed concern about the potential for inflation and the long-term sustainability of U.S. budget deficits," according to a cable detailing Geithner's visit, dated June 17, 2009.
The next day, June 2, CIC Chairman Lou Jiwei confided in Geithner that his fund had halted all new investments in 2008 after the financial crisis broke out, but had since scoped out a new stake in Morgan Stanley, the U.S. investment bank.
At the time of Geithner's visit, Morgan Stanley was planning a new share issue to raise funds to repay the government for the money it received during the financial crisis.
"Lou asked if it would be possible for the Fed to expedite approval of CIC's request that this investment be exempted from restrictions on investment by bank holding companies, as the customary two-week process for considering such exemption requests is too long to allow CIC to take advantage of this opportunity," according to the cable.
There's no record in the cable of how Geithner responded, but it was only a day later, on June 3, that CIC announced plans to purchase $1.2 billion in Morgan Stanley shares.
A spokesperson for the Fed said in the instance of the June 3 CIC investment, no application for an exemption was made to the Federal Reserve Board.
(Additional reporting by Kristina Cooke and Mark Hosenball; Editing by Jim Impoco and Claudia Parsons)