IndyMac Bancorp Failure: Sen. Schumer vs. OTS 16 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
IndyMac Bancorp’s (IMB) $32B takeover by the FDIC is the largest since the $40B takeover of Continental Illinois in 1984. The FDIC will operate the bank as IndyMac Federal Bank until a buyer can be found. I took a small stake in IMB recently at very low prices. I gambled that they would survive if they could retain a large part of their deposit base, while shrinking their balance sheet.
Readers know by now that I lost my bet. Why I lost is now an active debate between Senator Schumer and John Reich, director of the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS). IMB had been losing uninsured deposits at a slow steady pace for months, but an accelerated “run on the bank” started after Schumer publicized a letter to FDIC’s Chairwomen Bair written on June 26, 2008. Schumer requested that regulator watch IMB closely to minimize taxpayer loses.
Schumer’s letter served no purpose because the FDIC and OTS were already closely monitoring IMB. The letter was only for public consumption, to create publicity for Schumer. The New York Times “Regulators Seize Mortgage Lender” reports Reich saying IMB’s deposits were actually increasing before the letter was published, after which withdraws averaging $100M a day started ($1.3B total).
Reich complained that Schumer contributed to an already distressed situation. Reich said he was “troubled by any interference in the regulatory process." This is not the first time Schumer shouted 'fire' in a crowded theater. Schumer tried unsuccessfully to break up the Countrywide (CFC) – Bank of America (BAC) merger. I cannot know whether IMB would have held on without Schumer’s incitement, but it sure did not help.
Friday Schumer took the opposite stance, trying to promote confidence in Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE). But it was not confidence in the companies themselves, it was confidence that the government would step in as savior (if necessary). Unfortunately, nothing Schumer is doing adds confidence in the US financial system. Perhaps he should stop trying to promote his “brand” and just keep quiet.
(Additional source was Dow Jones Newswires, Tom Barkley, July 11, 2008 18:54 ET)
Notices: “FDIC Information for IndyMac Bank, F.S.B., Pasadena, CA”, “Failed Bank Information”
Disclosures: Author is long BAC, FNM, FRE and IMB.
Related Articles
|


























This article has 16 comments:
I agree with you entirely. Schumer had no business publicizing his letter. While we can not be certain whether IndyMac would have survived eventually, Schumer's letter caused it death. The only purpose served by the letter seems to have been publicity for himself at the expense of others.
I find it hard to believe that a sitting Senator would not realize the effect his public statements would have on any depository institution. The only reason I can imagine he would publicize such statements about an FDIC insured depository would be to embarass the sitting president and create a greater sense of doom and gloom. Given other public statements made in the past by Senator Schumer, it is well within the realm of possibility, in my opinion, that his political posturing has cost the FDIC a very substantial amount of money that the rest of us will wind up paying in the form of higher FDIC assessments over the next several years.
Even if he wanted to be out in front, he could have maintained the confidentiality of his concerns in communicating with the regulators. Then, if IndyMac failed, he could have released his letters as proof he was on task.
Shame on you Senator!
let Congress know we expect them to be accountable and use Senator Schumer as an example.
I thought legislators were to legislate. If he did not like what the OTS and FDIC were doing, float a bill.
www.nytimes.com/2007/0...
"Large Investor decided to pay a few bucks to a Senator in New York to force the issue."(Prospect Mortgage Backed By Sterling Fund--Private Equity Acquired The Mortgage Branches from Indymac before FDIC takeover)
www.housingwire.com/20...
"And do remember that there are many investment bankers located in New York, making them pretty influential constituents of Sen. Schumer."
www.pasadenastarnews.c...
"In a Sunday news conference, he said everything in his letter was already known to the public."
If it was already known to the public, what is the reason for his public letter? It is contradict to what he said previouly :"I just bring private message to the public. Do not kill the messanger." What a great liar from time to time!
www.cnn.com/2008/POLIT...
These financial institutions like IMB that went hog-wild for the big mortgage bucks when times were good are all a house of cards these days, and everybody knows it. Blaming Schumer for acknowledging the obvious is just shooting the messenger.
There are many banks out there sitting on a portfolio of bad loans. There is no need to put out the fire with oil. The sudden collapse of IMB is a direct cause of Chuck’s loose tongue. And yes, it “is” all about politics. Should that Senator be a Republican, we would have had endless investigations called by Schumer himself and his other cronies on the hill.