Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEH)

All Comments on LEH

  • commenter
    SHartwell
    Apr 30 04:58 PM
    The Worst Is Over ... Again ... And Again ... [view article]
    OK Negative Carry, what's YOUR logic? Reply
  • commenter
    Pent up
    demand
    Apr 30 04:28 PM
    The Worst Is Over ... Again ... And Again ... [view article]
    baji, I suggest you drop that envelope in a mailbox without a stamp. Too many errors of logic to deal with in this little space... Reply
  • commenter
    baji kimran
    Apr 30 04:15 PM
    The Worst Is Over ... Again ... And Again ... [view article]

    Just doing some back of the envelope calculations here.

    2 million subprime loans at an average of 300,000 / loan yields a total of 600 billion dollars at risk. (Maybe 2 million is a little low given a annual housing sale rate of 5 to 6 million.)

    For estimating purposes here say the mortgage holders suffer a 33% drop in the value of property. Mortgage holders forced to sell the property at 200,000. Total loss = 200 billion dollars. Even if there were 4 million subprime loans (which could be reasonable) the total loss = 400 billion dollars.

    However, the only way I can stretch to 1 trillion dollars is to take into consideration all mortgages, not just subprime. So to say that the subprime mortgage crisis will cause 1 trillion in losses is a wild overestimation.

    However I could see that the housing bubble (not just subprime mortgages) could cause a loss of 1 trillion. Not catastrophic given there are 100 million households.     Reply
  • commenter
    tom kern
    Apr 30 03:34 PM
    My Website
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Well, when a bank goes bankrupt, nothing is really lost. they either merge or walk away or "disolve". the consumer still needs to continue. "Bailout "to the rescue. everyone deserves a break, but it's hard to let the controllers of the tap see the forest for the trees. Reply
  • commenter
    DSX Lover
    Apr 30 08:56 AM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Banks are way to cheap right now, but you can't owe them, you can only rent them. They aren't going broke, and not all are the same, but the resets peak in June and July, they are worth the risk. Totally Agree with Papa Bear Doug Kass comments (The value of the Franchises are intact and the earnings power is there), Buy the DIPS sell the RIPS. You must owe some of these, because when housing inventory starts to decline they will be up 20-40% from where they are now and you will be late to the party.
     Reply
  • commenter
    wallawallabi
    ngbang
    Apr 30 06:19 AM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Cramer has ulterior motives. The SEC should do something about him and his merry posse of 'fast-money' bandits. Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    Apr 30 03:11 AM
    Financial Stocks: Where Will They Go Once Investors Sober Up? [view article]
    @Whisper: the difference this time is: financial stocks come from a bubble of sorts and this one ain't coming back anytime soon. So of course most will survive and will return to profitability but valuations over the last 5-8 years have been way out of whack and bubble-valuations. unlike dot-coms they were not trading at sky-high p/es but on unsustainable and phony earnings. most of these earnings were just scams with costs arising in the future that eat away almost all of those profits if not turning into outright losses. a p/e of 10 is not cheap when the actual, true, real "e" actually is only a fourth or a fifth of the stated "e" Reply
  • commenter
    Pangaea
    Apr 30 12:25 AM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Cramer, Cramer, hmm that name sounds familiar...

    Hey, waitaminnit, isn't that the guy that said "Bear Stearns (BSC) is fine, Bear Stearns is not in trouble -- don't move your money"...??
    Reply
  • commenter
    Daniel
    Jacome
    Apr 29 11:21 PM
    My Website
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Bridgewater Associates -- a top quant shop -- is very bearish on banks -- they shot out a letter to clients TODAY and it brings home the point people keep wanting to tuck under the rug: the debt creation infrastructure has been debilitated and bank's ability to generate new income isn't going to return to normalcy for SEVERAL more quarters.

    Reply
  • commenter
    fatcat
    Apr 29 06:45 PM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    poster is right all around.Speaking as a greybeard,with 35 yrs in the market, you're better off avoiding obvious dilutions like the financials.

    I wish i could count the times I've had my ass handed to me listening to guys like Cramer,especially if they are saying what I want to hear.

    I don't blame him,thats his job..but you have to understand his motivation for working at a halfass tv station..wonder if he can't make it in the market on his own??

    He spends a lot of time kissing up the ceo's of various companies spouting their horseshit and pumping their stock..once again you can't blame them...Just beware.     Reply
  • commenter
    Whisper On
    The Wind
    Apr 29 06:40 PM
    Financial Stocks: Where Will They Go Once Investors Sober Up? [view article]
    Looking back 15 years or so, when things crashed, I see where I got my inheritance. It was when my parents bought financials when they were way down, and they rode through the muddy parts, and the financials came back up, higher than before. Perhaps it was the particular stocks. Perhaps it was a glitch in the works. Maybe I just got lucky. But for now, I'll follow their example. You can all moan and groan, but since I don't need to spend the money now, the value is improving daily. I'm already ahead of the game and am starting to spread around a little. I'm tired of listening to everyone whine. Reply
  • commenter
    b_d
    Apr 29 02:33 PM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    If we wait until all eight of your points are answered, we will be here a long time........ Especially since the chance of the US righting the balance of payments will likely take decades. As you are aware, the markets usually look out 6 to 12 months and overall I think the worse is over - not that I would jump in with both feet, but some institutions are looking attractive; for example NLY. In any case I believe Cramer is talking about the larger institutions since he has repeatedly yapped about the amount of unknown write downs coming from the small to mid size banks. Reply
  • commenter
    ahough
    Apr 29 10:40 AM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Still too early to nibble at banks, small or large. I have suffered the losses on financials during the first quarter and didn't see the train coming. Pardon the metaphors... Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    Apr 29 10:12 AM
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    well, the only ones doing fine on their capital injections into banks are those who got great terms on convertibles and preferreds. those who simply bought common are doing not so well.
    nobody knows how much pain is to come down the road but from a macro perspective the consumer is trapped. so the best case scenario here is a prolonged period of a subdued economy with little power to stage a return to significant growth path. denographics, savings rates debts etc. are all pointing towards this and for all the magic tricks that tinkering with money supply and interest rates combined by increased government borrowing and spending can produce - they cannot fight these powerful factors and trends. not a crash, not a boom anytime soon. wonder how the banks will make any significant money in that kind of environment     Reply
  • commenter
    Ryan Freund
    Apr 29 10:10 AM
    My Website
    Still Too Early For Banks [view article]
    Good article. Thanks for sharing your insights. I happen to agree with everything you said! Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: