Big Al45

AIG Fraud and Goldman's CDO Collateral Calls

Goldman's orchestration of this collapse is a scandal for the ages. But it won't become public until Blankfein and the other goniffs are long dead and some future historian finds incriminating documents filed far away some dingy alcove of the National Archives.

Goldman simply has too much clout and is effectively above the law.

Goldman Sachs' AIG Collateral Demands Behind Company's Implosion

Poole forgot to mention that Goldman controls the government and that the government does whatever Goldman wants. Geithner is basically their prison bitch.

BlackRock: Goldman's Q1 Profit Non-Recurring and a Result of AIG Unwinds

Well, they might be once Goldman's prop trading desk starts shorting all bank stocks again.

Unless, of course, they were smart enough to sell today.


On Apr 15 09:43 PM bones33 wrote:

> I doubt if the people who bought GS 60 days ago in the low 50's are
> concerned with their ethics.

AIG CDS: The Unwinding Begins

Hip

I hope you're right. But, to use your example, I suspect that the FED paid Bank A $.30 and then AIG paid Bank A $1.00.

Particularly if Bank A happened to be Goldman Sachs.


On Apr 07 07:05 PM HipHoption wrote:

> DCB - I'm not 100% sure, but I think what might have happened
>
> For example, Bank A purchased CDS protection from AIG on Loan XYZ.
> Loan XYZ is now worth 30 cents on the dollar. However, by construction
> the CDS on Loan XYZ has to be worth roughly 70 cents (if it has the
> same maturity as Loan XYZ). So the Fed bought the Loan for 0.30,
> and paid 0.70 for the CDS which amounts to 1.00 to Bank A making
> it whole for the package.
>
> If anyone knows for sure if this did or did not happen, please let
> me know!

Exclusive: Big Banks' Recent Profitability Due to AIG Scam?

Considering what we've elected, probably none of it could be understood by Congress.


On Mar 30 06:41 AM morph366 wrote:

> Excellent reporting - I wonder how much of trader Lou's observations
> could be documented in a manner that anyone in Congress would understand.

Why Goldman Sachs Should Return Its TARP Money

Rick

Strongly agree with your comment that that finance " isn't like an elementary-school soccer game, where nobody keeps score and everybody wins just by participating."

Unfortunately, Timmy and Uncle Ben don't agree and will do everything they can - including debasing the dollar and bankrupting the country - to protect incompetent and insolvent financial institutions that are "too big to fail."

Think this could become a major showdown between Congress (which favors letting banks repay TARP money) and the FED/Treasury (which is trying desperately to maintain the fiction that "we're all in this together.")

Today's Capitol Hill Therapy Session

Jason
Your statements are a lot more succinct and accurate than Bernanke's testimony.

The AIG Bailout: Why Was the Onus Placed on Taxpayers?

To respond to your final question - "Why do taxpayers have to bail them out?"

The answer is simple - to save Goldman Sach's worthless a$$. Hammerin Hank had his buddies' back. Its also the reason why Lehman had to fail.

AIG Needs Transparency, Now

The identity of the counterparties is not the only issue. I would like to know how many of these counterparties actually owned the assets for which they bought CDS's.

The American public would be outraged if they find out that most of AIGs book was naked CDSs' and that our billions are being spent to cover "side bets" made by hedge funds and other speculators.

Bernanke and Geithner are obviously engaged in a cover up. So much for transparency, accountability, and "change you can believe in."

I just hope somebody in Congress has the guts to make them release the identities of the counterparties. If not, its time to start a third party.

Why Capping Pay Is Likely to Work

Oh Please

The "brain dead" replacement CEOS couldn't do much worse than some of the current talent. How much brain power did it take to decide to buy Golden West, Countrywide, or Merrill Lynch. The janitor probably could have make those kinds of decisions.

Perhaps you should disclosure what kind of "regular personal contact" you have with bank CEOs. You sound like board of directors material - perhaps chair of the compensation committee. In any case, hope your "contact" didn't require kneepads.


On Feb 04 11:23 AM Think! wrote:

.
> No, they won't be "giving you a call" because you don't even begin
> to have the skill set to get the job done. I have regular personal
> contact with the Treasurers, CFOs and CEOs of most of the top 20
> banks in the U.S. You have no idea how hard these people work and
> the pressure that they are under.
>
> If you drain the talent, then these organizations will truly be brain-dead.
> That is the problem. Removing all employee incentives will produce
> corresponding behavior. Equity (how Sr. Mgt and even the rank and
> file has been receiving the majority of its compensation for the
> past few years) has been gutted.
>
> How will you recruit, manage and motivate talent? "Be glad that you
> have a job" is a very-short term motivator. If there is no upside
> offered, there will be a brain drain from the industry.
>
> That will not be good for the institutions or the country.
>
> Try to moderate the emotion and maximize the strategic thinking.

CDS Demonization Watch, Gretchen Morgenson Edition

Felix

It's been several weeks since your last post defending CDS's and I was wondering if you were ill or out of business. It's good to have you back.

Tom Armstead is right. CDS should be treated as insurance. The seller should be required to have adequate reserves and the buyer should be required to have an "insurable interest". And the definition of an "insurable interest" should be nationwide and regulated by a body that is independent of Wall Street..

Furthermore, any pre existing CDS that does not meet the new definition of "insurable interest" should be subject to "reversion" as Morgenson's article suggests. I know this is retroactive legislation, but so what. Most of these CDS purchasers were at best, gambling ,or ,at worst, manipulating the markets by using CDS' to reinforce their short postions.

Did Geithner Bail Out Goldman Sachs?

I'd be really surprised if this issue came up during the confirmation hearings. GS contributes heavily to the Democratic Party and the Dems won't risk losing this money.

Dennis Kucinich was the only person during the earlier hearings who suggested that every decision Paulson and Bernanke made was done to benefit Goldman.

Whether Goldman made specific requests for special treatment is really kind of irrelevant. They've benefited tremendously.

JPMorgan Chase: Poisoned by Bear's 5,000 Counterparties

Not the FED. He's the front runner to replace Cox at the SEC.

At least he would be able to recognize a Ponzi scheme.


On Dec 14 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:

> The Ponzi scheme begins to unwind. Coming next: Bernie Madoff to
> head the Federal Reserve Bank

How Banks Hedge Counterparty Risk

That explanation was about as clear as mud. What kind of business relationship could possibly exist between the super bowl coin flip and the price of barrel of oil.

The average business person could never understand this explanation because of the all the jargon. No wonder the bank CEOs cant understand what's on their companies balance sheets.

Do CDS' serve any business purpose or is it just an unregulated form of gambling.

Did Crony Capitalism Lead to Wachovia's $54B Bailout?

Its all good. The Citi/FDIC deal is dead.

WFC will mark down Wachovia's toxic crap and sell it to the taxpayers after the ballout is approved today. Saint Warren wouldn't have let WFC buy WB unless he knew that Congress would approve the deal.

As far as favoritism goes, that the way Wall Street has always worked (along with nepotism and family contacts.) Who knows - maybe Sheila Bair (or UMASS) was holding Wachovia bonds.