CloroxCowboy

Revisiting the MBS Debate (Which We Should Already Be Past)

On Jun 10 09:24 PM Crocodilian wrote:

> My guess is that the banks got stuck with "slower-moving" inventory
> as the price of putting these deals together. That is, they didn't
> carry the inventory because they _wanted_ it, they carried it because
> these were the parts that they were having a hard time selling.

Your guess is correct.

Revisiting the MBS Debate (Which We Should Already Be Past)

Your analysis is spot-on. I was also involved in this industry, trading loan pools for a sub-prime lender from '05 to '07 and I remember many of the same comments. Our "executives" knew plain and simple that the paper we sold was crap. To be a sales or underwriting manager at that company meant that you spent 90% of your day pressing the manual override button on loans that were kicked from our automated system. There was always some justification to push a loan through.

One of the most interesting meetings I remember was when I saw that our latest operating costs were hovering around 2%. This was mid-2007 and by that time our net revenue from sales to the secondary market was about 1.75%... You might be able to guess the company motto? "Outrun it with volume!" All we had to do was keep selling more loans each month than the month before, and we could make the dream last forever. Luckily, I found a new job soon thereafter.

But as you say, none of this is new. People still defending these business practices are probably also Holocaust deniers and would buy every stock Jim Cramer mutters about in his sleep.

Will the Stress Test Seal Ken Lewis's Fate?

Good riddance! Let's get the next batch of slimeballs in there so we can start this merry-go-round up again...

Welcome to Desolation Row

GOOD!! This is punishment for the earlier stupidity of these firms, and it is 100% justified. Yes I know it will send ripple effects through the economy. GOOD!! That is punishment for the stupidity of Americans living beyond their means, and it is 100% justified. The absolute beauty of the financial markets is their ability to dole out rewards and punishments based on greed. As the (in)famous Michael Douglas quote goes, "...Greed works. Greed clarifies and cuts through and captures the essence of evolutionary spirit..." Successful operators in the financial markets will always be those with a healthy ruthlessness based on greed. (I'm not talking about illegal activity here, just smart investing) Sympathy and charity have no place in a market economy and only end up costing me, the responsible investor, more money in taxes. A responsible investor was 90% out of equities by Oct 07. I say that because it was easy enough at that time to see the writing on the wall, and with the correct motivation *greed* the responsible investor was interested in preserving his capital to later take advantage of the poor schmucks who were about to be crushed underfoot. If you can't relate to greed then you should step out of the game before you yourself are crushed. If you think what I'm saying is evil, you are not cut out to trade objects of value. Put your money in a mutual fund until retirement and stop whining.

"I wonder if any speculators have shorted the liquid on the way down. That would be horrible and they should return their profits to the government." This statement is asinine. Look up greed and learn how it is essential to price correction (and every action in the market). Of course oil is being shorted, as it should be. That's how overblown prices are brought back to sane levels. No sane person is out there trading for the good of the government or the American people. End rant.