Let's put ourselves for a minute in the position of the FDIC and the government for a minute. What could the best possible outcome be in terms of keeping everything low profile and too much bad press. It is not only the dealing with WAMU, it is also the dealing with JPM Chase. How could this ultimately affect JPM Chase and the millions of borrowers struggling with mortgage modifications and else. Should the FDIC rule in favor of WAMU while at the same time placing JPM in a precarious condition that could ultimately lead to the failure of all other efforts to save the economomy from collapsing even further and affect millions of people depending on these modifications and financial strenght of a banking institution? What if this ruling brings other bank holding companies looking for a similar outcome? I think that in order to rationalize this, is best to put yourself in the FDIC position rather than being in the WAMU corner. Could all of these favorable events ( naming of investigator, full autonomy to subpoena ) be only a smoking mirror to say "oh well, we tried" All these big banks are hanging from a thread, being profitable only artificially by negotiating modifications with a 40 year balloon clause. It is not that the problems have been solved, seems like the workout is just to defer the problem..but whatever it is, being that at the time the seizing of WAMU caused tremendous fears in the financial markets and led to financial chaos, the same could happen if the FDIC would have to retract itself from its premature decision. I don't know, but it certainly fertilizes the soil on what tons of speculation could be made and profit from of course.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
