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.
Poor_But_Happy, didn't you know it's called CHANGE and wealth distribution. However not from the upper echelon, but from the middle class to benefit but a few.
GYS
FWIW, saw Wamuq PPS declining on 7,8mill shares, looked at the tape to be sure. Yep, nervous nellies sold/took out their STOPS but what I saw was that short sellers covered!
Now WAMUQ was down, JPIG was down as well (market UP?) Wonder what gives there?
Yes, I heard that BoA took a hit but shouldn't have any bearing at GOLDEN BOY/J.DIMON and his company JPIG, or should it as stuff will be revealed shortly in this "sorted WAMU take-down"??
GYS
MONICALAW, HUH?
It's still JMW "duty" to approve or disapprove the POS POR as well as the GSA, and definitely not Rosenfarts, even though she's been snow-jobbed + lied to galore, as well as from other "participants" for many a year and turned a "blind eye" so to speak on many occasions as well.
Let's just see what she's made of.
I have my opinion of her but won't disclose at this point.
FWIW, women taken for fools/played by male counterparts, even in a court room, might just set the record straight, so to speak, PRONTO and with a vengeance!
GYS
BWTFDIK
MONICALAW + boardork, it's all good and nice that "we peons" pick up on that, but will JMW, that's the question.
So far she's been more than blind to what Rosenfart, debtors and HF's have played in her court room.
GYS
Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Loans from Fed
By Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz -
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
Chief executive officers from eight of the largest U.S. banks receiving government aid testify at a House Financial Services Committee hearing in Washington, D.C on Feb. 11, 2009. Photographer: Brendan Smialowski/Bloomberg
Bank ‘Aristocracy’ Borrowed $1.2 Trillion from Fed
Play Video
Aug. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Robert E. Litan, a former Justice Department official who in the 1990s served on a commission probing the causes of the savings and loan crisis, now vice president at the Kansas City, Missouri-based Kauffman Foundation, Richard Herring, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Roger Lister, a former Fed economist who’s now head of financial-institutions coverage at credit-rating firm DBRS Inc., and Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and now an economics professor at Harvard University, talk about the U.S. government's $1.2 trillion bailout of the banking system and the outlook for regulatory overhaul of the industry. (Source: Bloomberg)
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
Two weeks after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s bankruptcy triggered a global credit crisis, Morgan Stanley countered concerns that it might be next to go by announcing it had 'strong capital and liquidity positions.' Photographer: Jeremy Bales/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2T in Loans
A Wall Street sign stands outside the New York Stock Exchange in New York, U.S. The loans dwarfed the $160 billion in public bailouts the top 10 got from the U.S. Treasury, yet until now the full amounts have remained secret. Photographer: JB Reed/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2T in Loans
Citigroup Inc., along with Morgan Stanley and Citigroup Inc., were the biggest borrowers under seven U.S. Federal Reserve emergency-lending programs. Photographer: Robert Caplin/Bloomberg
Enlarge image The Fed’s Secret Liquidity Lifelines
The Federal Reserve provided as much as $1.2 tillion in public money to banks and other companies from August 2007 through April 2010 to head off a depression. Source: Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
Morgan Stanley, along with Citigroup Inc., and Bank of America Corp., were the biggest borrowers under seven Fed emergency-lending programs. The three banks' combined $298.2 billion in hidden Fed loans was triple what they received in publicly disclosed bailouts from the U.S. Treasury. Photographer: Peter Foley/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
Bank of America Corp., along with Morgan Stanley and Citigroup Inc. was one of the biggest borrowers under the U.S. Federal Reserve's emergency-lending programs. The three banks' combined $298.2 billion in hidden Fed loans was triple what they received in publicly disclosed bailouts from the U.S. Treasury. Photographer: Jeremy Bales/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
The Royal Bank of Scotland took $84.5 billion in loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve's emergency-lending programs. Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
UBS AG, Switzerland's biggest bank, got $77.2 billion in loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve's emergency-lending programs. Photographer: Gianluca Colla/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the fifth-biggest U.S. bank by assets. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
U.S. Federal Reserve borrowings by Societe Generale SA, France's second-biggest bank, peaked at $17.4 billion in May 2008, four months after the Paris-based lender announced a record 4.9 billion-euro ($7.2 billion) loss on unauthorizedstock-index futures bets by former trader Jerome Kerviel. Photographer: Judith White/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
U.S. Federal Reserve borrowings by Societe Generale SA, France's second-biggest bank, peaked at $17.4 billion in May 2008, four months after the Paris-based lender announced a record 4.9 billion-euro ($7.2 billion) loss on unauthorized stock-index futures bets by former trader Jerome Kerviel. Photographer: Antoine Antoniol/Bloomberg
Enlarge image Finance ‘Aristocracy’ Took $1.2 Trillion in Loans
The biggest borrowers under seven Fed emergency-lending programs were Morgan Stanley, Citigroup Inc., and Bank of America Corp.The three banks' combined $298.2 billion in hidden Fed loans was triple what they received in publicly disclosed bailouts from the U.S. Treasury. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg
Citigroup Inc. (C) and Bank of America Corp. (BAC) were the reigning champions of finance in 2006 as home prices peaked, leading the 10 biggest U.S. banks and brokerage firms to their best year ever with $104 billion of profits.
By 2008, the housing market’s collapse forced those companies to take more than six times as much, $669 billion, in emergency loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve. The loans dwarfed the $160 billion in public bailouts the top 10 got from the U.S. Treasury, yet until now the full amounts have remained secret.
Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke’s unprecedented effort to keep the economy from plunging into depression included lending banks and other companies as much as $1.2 trillion of public money, about the same amount U.S. homeowners currently owe on 6.5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages. The largest borrower, Morgan Stanley (MS), got as much as $107.3 billion, while Citigroup took $99.5 billion and Bank of America $91.4 billion, according to a Bloomberg News compilation of data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, months of litigation and an act of Congress.
“These are all whopping numbers,” said Robert Litan, a former Justice Department official who in the 1990s served on a commission probing the causes of the savings and loan crisis. “You’re talking about the aristocracy of American finance going down the tubes without the federal money.”
Foreign Borrowers
It wasn’t just American finance. Almost half of the Fed’s top 30 borrowers, measured by peak balances, were European firms. They included Edinburgh-based Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, which took $84.5 billion, the most of any non-U.S. lender, and Zurich-based UBS AG (UBSN), which got $77.2 billion. Germany’s Hypo Real Estate Holding AG borrowed $28.7 billion, an average of $21 million for each of its 1,366 employees.
The largest borrowers also included Dexia SA (DEXB), Belgium’s biggest bank by assets, and Societe Generale SA, based in Paris, whose bond-insurance prices have surged in the past month as investors speculated that the spreading sovereign debt crisis in Europe might increase their chances of default.
The $1.2 trillion peak on Dec. 5, 2008 -- the combined outstanding balance under the seven programs tallied by Bloomberg -- was almost three times the size of the U.S. federal budget deficit that year and more than the total earnings of all federally insured banks in the U.S. for the decade through 2010, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Peak Balance
The balance was more than 25 times the Fed’s pre-crisis lending peak of $46 billion on Sept. 12, 2001, the day after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon. Denominated in $1 bills, the $1.2 trillion would fill 539 Olympic-size swimming pools.
The Fed has said it had “no credit losses” on any of the emergency programs, and a report by Federal Reserve Bank of New York staffers in February said the central bank netted $13 billion in interest and fee income from the programs from August 2007 through December 2009.
“We designed our broad-based emergency programs to both effectively stem the crisis and minimize the financial risks to the U.S. taxpayer,” said James Clouse, deputy director of the Fed’s division of monetary affairs in Washington. “Nearly all of our emergency-lending programs have been closed. We have incurred no losses and expect no losses.”
While the 18-month U.S. recession that ended in June 2009 after a 5.1 percent contraction in gross domestic product was nowhere near the four-year, 27 percent decline between August 1929 and March 1933, banks and the economy remain stressed.
Odds of Recession
The odds of another recession have climbed during the past six months, according to five of nine economists on the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an academic panel that dates recessions.
Bank of America’s bond-insurance prices last week surged to a rate of $342,040 a year for coverage on $10 million of debt, above where Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEHMQ)’s bond insurance was priced at the start of the week before the firm collapsed. Citigroup’s shares are trading below the split-adjusted price of $28 that they hit on the day the bank’s Fed loans peaked in January 2009. The U.S. unemployment rate was at 9.1 percent in July, compared with 4.7 percent in November 2007, before the recession began.
Homeowners are more than 30 days past due on their mortgage payments on 4.38 million properties in the U.S., and 2.16 million more properties are in foreclosure, representing a combined $1.27 trillion of unpaid principal, estimates Jacksonville, Florida-based Lender Processing Services Inc.
Liquidity Requirements
“Why in hell does the Federal Reserve seem to be able to find the way to help these entities that are gigantic?” U.S. Representative Walter B. Jones, a Republican from North Carolina, said at a June 1 congressional hearing in Washington on Fed lending disclosure. “They get help when the average businessperson down in eastern North Carolina, and probably across America, they can’t even go to a bank they’ve been banking with for 15 or 20 years and get a loan.”
The sheer size of the Fed loans bolsters the case for minimum liquidity requirements that global regulators last year agreed to impose on banks for the first time, said Litan, now a vice president at the Kansas City, Missouri-based Kauffman Foundation, which supports entrepreneurship research. Liquidity refers to the daily funds a bank needs to operate, including cash to cover depositor withdrawals.
The rules, which mandate that banks keep enough cash and easily liquidated assets on hand to survive a 30-day crisis, don’t take effect until 2015. Another proposed requirement for lenders to keep “stable funding” for a one-year horizon was postponed until at least 2018 after banks showed they’d have to raise as much as $6 trillion in new long-term debt to comply.
‘Stark Illustration’
Regulators are “not going to go far enough to prevent this from happening again,” said Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund and now an economics professor at Harvard University.
Reforms undertaken since the crisis might not insulate U.S. markets and financial institutions from the sovereign budget and debt crises facing Greece, Ireland and Portugal, according to the U.S. Financial Stability Oversight Council, a 10-member body created by the Dodd-Frank Act and led by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
“The recent financial crisis provides a stark illustration of how quickly confidence can erode and financial contagion can spread,” the council said in its July 26 report.
Any new rescues by the U.S. central bank would be governed by transparency laws adopted in 2010 that require the Fed to disclose borrowers after two years.
21,000 Transactions
Fed officials argued for more than two years that releasing the identities of borrowers and the terms of their loans would stigmatize banks, damaging stock prices or leading to depositor runs. A group of the biggest commercial banks last year asked the U.S. Supreme Court to keep at least some Fed borrowings secret. In March, the high court declined to hear that appeal, and the central bank made an unprecedented release of records.
Data gleaned from 29,346 pages of documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and from other Fed databases of more than 21,000 transactions make clear for the first time how deeply the world’s largest banks depended on the U.S. central bank to stave off cash shortfalls. Even as the firms asserted in news releases or earnings calls that they had ample cash, they drew Fed funding in secret, avoiding the stigma of weakness.
Morgan Stanley Borrowing
Two weeks after Lehman’s bankruptcy in September 2008, Morgan Stanley countered concerns that it might be next to go by announcing it had “strong capital and liquidity positions.” The statement, in a Sept. 29, 2008, press release about a $9 billion investment from Tokyo-based Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., said nothing about Morgan Stanley’s Fed loans.
That was the same day as the firm’s $107.3 billion peak in borrowing from the central bank, which was the source of almost all of Morgan Stanley’s available cash, according to the lending data and documents released more than two years later by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. The amount was almost three times the company’s total profits over the past decade, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
Mark Lake, a spokesman for New York-based Morgan Stanley, said the crisis caused the industry to “fundamentally re- evaluate” the way it manages its cash.
“We have taken the lessons we learned from that period and applied them to our liquidity-management program to protect both our franchise and our clients going forward,” Lake said. He declined to say what changes the bank had made.
Acceptable Collateral
In most cases, the Fed demanded collateral for its loans -- Treasuries or corporate bonds and mortgage bonds that could be seized and sold if the money wasn’t repaid. That meant the central bank’s main risk was that collateral pledged by banks that collapsed would be worth less than the amount borrowed.
As the crisis deepened, the Fed relaxed its standards for acceptable collateral. Typically, the central bank accepts only bonds with the highest credit grades, such as U.S. Treasuries. By late 2008, it was accepting “junk” bonds, those rated below investment grade. It even took stocks, which are first to get wiped out in a liquidation.
Morgan Stanley borrowed $61.3 billion from one Fed program in September 2008, pledging a total of $66.5 billion of collateral, according to Fed documents. Securities pledged included $21.5 billion of stocks, $6.68 billion of bonds with a junk credit rating and $19.5 billion of assets with an “unknown rating,” according to the documents. About 25 percent of the collateral was foreign-denominated.
‘Willingness to Lend’
“What you’re looking at is a willingness to lend against just about anything,” said Robert Eisenbeis, a former research director at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and now chief monetary economist in Atlanta for Sarasota, Florida-based Cumberland Advisors Inc.
The lack of private-market alternatives for lending shows how skeptical trading partners and depositors were about the value of the banks’ capital and collateral, Eisenbeis said.
“The markets were just plain shut,” said Tanya Azarchs, former head of bank research at Standard & Poor’s and now an independent consultant in Briarcliff Manor, New York. “If you needed liquidity, there was only one place to go.”
Even banks that survived the crisis without government capital injections tapped the Fed through programs that promised confidentiality. London-based Barclays Plc (BARC) borrowed $64.9 billion and Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank AG (DBK) got $66 billion. Sarah MacDonald, a spokeswoman for Barclays, and John Gallagher, a spokesman for Deutsche Bank, declined to comment.
Below-Market Rates
While the Fed’s last-resort lending programs generally charge above-market interest rates to deter routine borrowing, that practice sometimes flipped during the crisis. On Oct. 20, 2008, for example, the central bank agreed to make $113.3 billion of 28-day loans through its Term Auction Facility at a rate of 1.1 percent, according to a press release at the time.
The rate was less than a third of the 3.8 percent that banks were charging each other to make one-month loans on that day. Bank of America and Wachovia Corp. each got $15 billion of the 1.1 percent TAF loans, followed by Royal Bank of Scotland’s RBS Citizens NA unit with $10 billion, Fed data show.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), the New York-based lender that touted its “fortress balance sheet” at least 16 times in press releases and conference calls from October 2007 through February 2010, took as much as $48 billion in February 2009 from TAF. The facility, set up in December 2007, was a temporary alternative to the discount window, the central bank’s 97-year-old primary lending program to help banks in a cash squeeze.
‘Larger Than TARP’
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), which in 2007 was the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history, borrowed $69 billion from the Fed on Dec. 31, 2008. Among the programs New York-based Goldman Sachs tapped after the Lehman bankruptcy was the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, or PDCF, designed to lend money to brokerage firms ineligible for the Fed’s bank-lending programs.
Michael Duvally, a spokesman for Goldman Sachs, declined to comment.
The Fed’s liquidity lifelines may increase the chances that banks engage in excessive risk-taking with borrowed money, Rogoff said. Such a phenomenon, known as moral hazard, occurs if banks assume the Fed will be there when they need it, he said. The size of bank borrowings “certainly shows the Fed bailout was in many ways much larger than TARP,” Rogoff said.
TARP is the Treasury Department’s Troubled Asset Relief Program, a $700 billion bank-bailout fund that provided capital injections of $45 billion each to Citigroup and Bank of America, and $10 billion to Morgan Stanley. Because most of the Treasury’s investments were made in the form of preferred stock, they were considered riskier than the Fed’s loans, a type of senior debt.
Dodd-Frank Requirement
In December, in response to the Dodd-Frank Act, the Fed released 18 databases detailing its temporary emergency-lending programs.
Congress required the disclosure after the Fed rejected requests in 2008 from the late Bloomberg News reporter Mark Pittman and other media companies that sought details of its loans under the Freedom of Information Act. After fighting to keep the data secret, the central bank released unprecedented information about its discount window and other programs under court order in March 2011.
Bloomberg News combined Fed databases made available in December and July with the discount-window records released in March to produce daily totals for banks across all the programs, including the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, Commercial Paper Funding Facility, discount window, PDCF, TAF, Term Securities Lending Facility and single-tranche open market operations. The programs supplied loans from August 2007 through April 2010.
Rolling Crisis
The result is a timeline illustrating how the credit crisis rolled from one bank to another as financial contagion spread.
Fed borrowings by Societe Generale (GLE), France’s second-biggest bank, peaked at $17.4 billion in May 2008, four months after the Paris-based lender announced a record 4.9 billion-euro ($7.2 billion) loss on unauthorized stock-index futures bets by former trader Jerome Kerviel.
Morgan Stanley’s top borrowing came four months later, after Lehman’s bankruptcy. Citigroup crested in January 2009, as did 43 other banks, the largest number of peak borrowings for any month during the crisis. Bank of America’s heaviest borrowings came two months after that.
Sixteen banks, including Plano, Texas-based Beal Financial Corp. and Jacksonville, Florida-based EverBank Financial Corp., didn’t hit their peaks until February or March 2010.
“At no point was there a material risk to the Fed or the taxpayer, as the loan required collateralization,” said Reshma Fernandes, a spokeswoman for EverBank, which borrowed as much as $250 million.
Using Subsidiaries
Banks maximized their borrowings by using subsidiaries to tap Fed programs at the same time. In March 2009, Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America drew $78 billion from one facility through two banking units and $11.8 billion more from two other programs through its broker-dealer, Bank of America Securities LLC.
Banks also shifted balances among Fed programs. Many preferred the TAF because it carried less of the stigma associated with the discount window, often seen as the last resort for lenders in distress, according to a January 2011 paper by researchers at the New York Fed.
After the Lehman bankruptcy, hedge funds began pulling their cash out of Morgan Stanley, fearing it might be the next to collapse, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission said in a January report, citing interviews with former Chief Executive Officer John Mack and then-Treasurer David Wong.
Borrowings Surge
Morgan Stanley’s borrowings from the PDCF surged to $61.3 billion on Sept. 29 from zero on Sept. 14. At the same time, its loans from the Term Securities Lending Facility, or TSLF, rose to $36 billion from $3.5 billion. Morgan Stanley treasury reports released by the FCIC show the firm had $99.8 billion of liquidity on Sept. 29, a figure that included Fed borrowings.
“The cash flow was all drying up,” said Roger Lister, a former Fed economist who’s now head of financial-institutions coverage at credit-rating firm DBRS Inc. in New York. “Did they have enough resources to cope with it? The answer would be yes, but they needed the Fed.”
While Morgan Stanley’s Fed demands were the most acute, Citigroup was the most chronic borrower among the largest U.S. banks. The New York-based company borrowed $10 million from the TAF on the program’s first day in December 2007 and had more than $25 billion outstanding under all programs by May 2008, according to Bloomberg data. By Nov. 21, when Citigroup began talks with the government to get a $20 billion capital injection on top of the $25 billion received a month earlier, its Fed borrowings had doubled to about $50 billion.
Tapping Six Programs
Over the next two months the amount almost doubled again. On Jan. 20, as the stock sank below $3 for the first time in 16 years amid investor concerns that the lender’s capital cushion might be inadequate, Citigroup was tapping six Fed programs at once. Its total borrowings amounted to more than twice the federal Department of Education’s 2011 budget.
Citigroup was in debt to the Fed on seven out of every 10 days from August 2007 through April 2010, the most frequent U.S. borrower among the 100 biggest publicly traded firms by pre- crisis market valuation. On average, the bank had a daily balance at the Fed of almost $20 billion.
“Citibank basically was sustained by the Fed for a very long time,” said Richard Herring, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia who has studied financial crises.
Jon Diat, a Citigroup spokesman, said the bank made use of programs that “achieved the goal of instilling confidence in the markets.”
‘Help Motivate Others’
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said in a letter to shareholders last year that his bank avoided many government programs. It did use TAF, Dimon said in the letter, “but this was done at the request of the Federal Reserve to help motivate others to use the system.”
The bank, the second-largest in the U.S. by assets, first tapped the TAF in May 2008, six months after the program debuted, and then zeroed out its borrowings in September 2008. The next month, it started using TAF again.
On Feb. 26, 2009, more than a year after TAF’s creation, JPMorgan’s borrowings under the program climbed to $48 billion. On that day, the overall TAF balance for all banks hit its peak, $493.2 billion. Two weeks later, the figure began declining.
“Our prior comment is accurate,” said Howard Opinsky, a spokesman for JPMorgan.
‘The Cheapest Source’
Herring, the University of Pennsylvania professor, said some banks may have used the program to maximize profits by borrowing “from the cheapest source, because this was supposed to be secret and never revealed.”
Whether banks needed the Fed’s money for survival or used it because it offered advantageous rates, the central bank’s lender-of-last-resort role amounts to a free insurance policy for banks guaranteeing the arrival of funds in a disaster, Herring said.
An IMF report last October said regulators should consider charging banks for the right to access central bank funds.
“The extent of official intervention is clear evidence that systemic liquidity risks were under-recognized and mispriced by both the private and public sectors,” the IMF said in a separate report in April.
Access to Fed backup support “leads you to subject yourself to greater risks,” Herring said. “If it’s not there, you’re not going to take the risks that would put you in trouble and require you to have access to that kind of funding.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Bradley Keoun in New York at bkeoun@bloomberg.net; Phil Kuntz in New York at Pkuntz1@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: David Scheer in New York at dscheer@bloomberg.net.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-21/wall-street-aristocracy-got-1-2-trillion-in-fed-s-secret-loans.html
MrchntDeth, KUDOS!
I wanted to respond but YOUR post just hit the nail right on the head and I couldn't agree with you more.
GYS
holdemTim, precisely.
Sheila Bair was weak and befuddled to say the least and listened to JPM who wanted WAMU since 2004!
That's what we get to have so-called "Professors economics" who have NO inkling as to real business or real-life making experience.
On paper Communism sounded absolutely perfect, but in real life - it failed miserably.
SAD!
GYS
WC, thanks for your explanation, even though I do not really fully understand the "courts" and their "machinations/preferences" at this point and it has been exhausting for me so far.
rgds,
GYS
WC, thanks again.
BUT how do we go to District Court?
YOU mean until JMW deems it to be appropriate to pointing/saying/moving us to the different court it's a non- issue!
What a kangaroo court this is and has been!
I'm getting sick already.
GYS
WC, thanks for your reply, however you are "skirting" around the 3.1a issue so far with the "scrivener's error", NEVER to be rectified as of yet!
We are talking 3+ years now.
I really don't care which court this is in as of this point, BUT MW court (DEL) allowed this and should be crucified for this omission IMO.
GYS
knick,
YEP, you got it but what is there for us in the meantime?
IMO Bulldog S+G!, don't forget. He's built his reputation around it.
So far, I'm not worried, but the 3.1a which was "purposely purged" by WGM/Rosenfart, even their associate/partner Marcia Goldstein affirmed it in earlier goings on!
Maybe she should be called on the carpet as well to testify?
Will look into this for sure.
GYS
Voodoo, thanks for the link .....it's going to be distributed in Europe!
GYS
knick, IMO
the FC should have been, but then I'm not an attorney, just using my common sense having been in business a loooong time before.
GYS
WC, what really get's me incensed is that we are only talking about the IT issue, they seem to be the benefactors for sure, also having made tons of monies trading!
I know you said it's the Debtors/WGM.
BUT what about the 3.1a (scrivener's error my foot! why wasn't this corrected a loooong time ago?)
Illegal transfer by FDICK and subsequent sale of WMI (holding Co's assets) by JPIG!
Nobody seems to be talking about this anymore.
Comment?
GYS
Q: and help who has the article/links regarding the SEC shredding documents.
TIA,
GYS
FWIW, all markets down again today, starting with ASIA, Australia and the European markets. The DAX (Germany) didn't hold the 5500 mark and is already closer to 5400 at this moment.
Therefore I expect a blood-bath in the US today.
Sorry for not being the bearer of GOOD NEWS!
Back to reading this board now since yesterday.
GYS
radiumsoup, I'm a conservative as well, coming here from the ole' country many moons ago, I disagree with your "labeling" of the SEC = downrigh fraudulent (remember the Porno's they watched, WHILE ON THE WATCH? and that goes back many years too!
Even though I appreciate your P.O.V. I vehemently disagree with your view of the SEC!
IMO, needs to be abolished/taken down in it's current form, PERIOD!
GYS
PS: have taken some steps already.
wamuvoodoo, didn't you hear the word "CHANGE" over and over again?
We certainly have had it now = redistribution of "wealth" from the middle/working class to give the rich = banks, Unions, GM , AIG, Fanny+ Freddy etc...
GYS
radiumsoup, the SEC, please don't make me laugh now,,, they are as crooked as the come = IMO NEEDS to be abolished and another WHOLE NEW one to take it's place without the influence of our so-called BIG BANKS! who are running our US government anyways, Sadly!
GYS
PS: your original idea is definitely A+!
radiumsoup, brilliant idea, KUDOS!
But how can we implement this?
Change the law is one aspect,,,, but as to the SEC - I'm sure you read the article how they shred evidence against perpetrators since the early '90's.
I'm not an attorney, even though I did have much experience with them during "my business" life, some excellent and honest, others more than questionable to be sure.
GYS
radiumsoup, NO, definitely not.
I know what you are saying, but 7 countries in the EU region stopped the "legal" short sales as of now. As to the naked ones is anybodies guess since there are many "off-shore countries" to allow this, actually encourage these.
How to stop this is any ones guess. Maybe prohibit by law to do business with them?
Nah, the HF's and banks (their trading desks) and others will circumvent this with fake Co's, Names, entities etc....
GYS
dm57, FWIW, the banking crisis is worldwide. Some countries (EU) now charging their executives with fraud and "clawback of bonuses" paid previously.
AND I'm also sure that HF's /Short-sellers create rumors in order to profit from "the uncertainties". Short-sales are now prohibited in 7 of the EU countries. I wonder why not in the US???? They obviously are thriving there.
Read the report that the SEC shredded documents pointing with evidence to such scamming Co's and entities - WOW!
What has our country become?
As to the US, they have been printing monies for the past years quite heavily (stand alone currency and therefore not accountable to any other one in comparison to the Euro in Euro-land!). Yes, we have seen inflation already and I expect more to come.
GYS
WC, got your PM but don't have the capability to send one to you.
I guess you didn't read my request then. NOT asking for your opinion here either, just wanted to know the facts of what DATA in the US came out and if good/bad.
They were talking about it in Germany/news earlier and then saw the DOW tanking.
TIA
GYS
WC, then so sorry to have bothered you!
GYS
WC, thanks for your reply from yesterday.
I did pose a question to "anyone" about 1 hr ago...... maybe you could be kind enough to answer me = short synopsis to be sure and TIA, since none replied as of yet.
What reports (US) came out today and what was the outcome,,,,,, I see the US markets tanking which dragged the European markets down as well (Wonder what tomorrow brings?)
again TIA
GYS
Q for anyone. What reports and which ones came out today in the US and outcome? since the DOW seems to be crashing?
European markets followed suit.
TIA
GYS
WC, so what exactly are you saying, that UQ are toast?
IMO, given S+G is just rearing to go and can and will prove fraud of the highest degree.
I or one will be willing to wait this out.
GYS
gophilipgo, yiekes if true.
Links please as I need to see/read this for myself.
TIA
MW has time to post on twitter and facebook but not time to thoroughly read up on what's presented/facts, probably by her staff and give her a synopsis of what's being presented (maybe a slanted view and compromised already?)
DUNNO,
But highly unusual as well as suspect IMO.
Guess, this is what a tenured Judge does/is allowed to do?
GYS
FWIW, just looked at the tape from today's trading activity and some "larger" than usual trades.
IMO, MM's and there are plenty of new ones at the table/trough are facilitating some short-covering!
GYS
dragon52, great charts but in effect worthless since we are WAMUQ and the MM's, HF's and traders have taken their pound of flesh so far and will continue to do so, until????
Almost 12:30pm (16th) European time = 3:30am CA time and finally read all the filings and postings.
S+G is definitely worth their monies, unlike some others - LOL.
I never had any doubts as to their capability and WOW to what I read!
Just checked FF: http://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/DE/index.aspx?pageID=35&ISIN=US9393221034
and something is afoot here.
However the DAX is dropping again (-2%) due to the fact that the German GDP experienced a downturn over the past months.,,,,,+ plus the Q of issuing EURO-BONDS is still up in the air. Germany the major "brake" in this debate and rightly so. Why should they fund other EU-Countries, while "they" are working hard,,,, for lack of oversight/ overspending or downright fraud in others.
'Nough said!
I surely hope that we/the US will not go the same route!
IMO, should MW rule for the POR and the GSA, she is equally tainted by this process and I'll make sure that "she'll get her due".
But reading these filings over the past hours gives me hope that we'll be winning and in the drivers-seat shortly.
Kudos to S+G!
GYS
PS: Where is the filing/written argument by B. Rosenfart, defending his position?
Desperado90, hate to inform you BUT so did all the other rating agencies from Moody's on down + B. Frank and C. Todd who had the oversight via the government and failed miserably in their duty, HUH?
Will they be investigated by the SEC now too?
GYS
NASCOW, did you expect anything less?
Wasn't it Frank who still crowed in June '08 that all is well with Fanny and Freddy and 2 months later they were insolvent, HUH?
I truly fear for the US unless we change course ASAP.
M. Bachman might just be the candidate?
GYS
jhdf51, no truer words spoken = AMEN!
GYS
BigBang, IMO politically motivated or told so by the administration since the were the only ones to downgrade the US to AA+ from AAA. All the others refrained from doing so, even though the writing is on the wall to be sure.
GYS
MrMojoRising, I do feel for you!
Needs to change ASAP for our country and what it was founded on to survive.
GYS
PS: thanks for your services + YOUR families so far to our country, the US, some of them have forgotten?
Large Green, I agree. Why HIM being "chummy" in MW court room and HER not ruling on anything "important/$$" and push it off, so to speak
Paid off/paid for, by you know WHO, with an "absent eye" from the GOV!
Makes me absolutely sick!
But then ONN, European countries "short-sales" curbed/ disallowed = 7 and all and Law now!
Where is the SEC I wonder,,,,,, looking the other way?
GYS
Lawrence 147, but neither should WE/WMI be responsible for the WGM/Rosenfarts outrageous billings = never was a friend of equity to start with but devious to the core,,,, as well as the A+M billings = they are in "la-la" land = don't know/don't remember", a lay-person sees this!
Is this the program this current administration stated about "CHANGE". Yeah, transfer monies "equally"= HUH, steal what you can from the hardworking middle class to enrich some in the top echelon!
Both of them more then a sham to milk BK's over many years and not only ours. Guess we got wiser and need to change the law + claw-back of these fees!
>>I am of the opinion there is just a little tortuous interference involved here as well and that the Estate should not be responsible for any of their legal fees.<<
GYS
rockie101 + AUSTIN, give this already up, will you?
His staff was more than capable to address issues previously.
Steven Susman with his brother is directing the case!
IMO, he'll be there when necessary, full guns blazing at all the perpetrators.
So far MW, won't give this up, YET!
GYS
Royal Dude, I somewhat agree with you.
Given the many "rulings" this judge could have made over the past 3 years it appears that she's either gotten spoken to/ too chummy with Rosenfart and therefore will hold onto this case as long as permitted and not passing it on to the Colliers court.
Enjoyed the glory so far? DUNNO.
Maybe she just needed to "dot the "i's, and cross the "t's" first so that NO wrong-doing will ever be attributed to her/her court afterwards.
But I'm fairly sure that S+G knows the game and are prepared!
GYS
Beth, Ilene, DanBB and others,
Please read my appreciation previously posted but, I guess doesn't get there!
GYS
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66129785