levin70's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/214597/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/174370-how-to-slow-down-foreclosures?source=feed#comment-768177 768177
What's the resolution for borrowers who are unemployed? Do you really think that allowing the borrower to live without paying a mortgage is in the best interest of the bank? Do you think that maintaining collateral is all that important if you never move on it? The better solution is to move the foreclosure process along much quicker, to require banks to put up for auction their properties with no minimum bid. This would result in a clearance of the overhang of current and future inventory and would result in a lot of people being able to afford homes who were smart and did not get more house than they could afford.]]> Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:17:53 -0500
What's the resolution for borrowers who are unemployed? Do you really think that allowing the borrower to live without paying a mortgage is in the best interest of the bank? Do you think that maintaining collateral is all that important if you never move on it? The better solution is to move the foreclosure process along much quicker, to require banks to put up for auction their properties with no minimum bid. This would result in a clearance of the overhang of current and future inventory and would result in a lot of people being able to afford homes who were smart and did not get more house than they could afford.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/174082-goldman-s-human-face?source=feed#comment-768162 768162
Regards]]> Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:05:24 -0500
Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/170530-richmond-fed-gses-encourage-mortgage-defaults?source=feed#comment-748733 748733
The real issue isn't with availability of mortgage funds for california vs another recourse state, say the state where I live, Illinois. The issue is why is a california borrower able to get as low a rate, given all other details being the same, with the rate that I can get in Illinois?

The intervention in the market place that causes the mis-pricing of these risks is what a large portion of the problem is.

Regards]]> Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:11:03 -0500
The real issue isn't with availability of mortgage funds for california vs another recourse state, say the state where I live, Illinois. The issue is why is a california borrower able to get as low a rate, given all other details being the same, with the rate that I can get in Illinois?

The intervention in the market place that causes the mis-pricing of these risks is what a large portion of the problem is.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/163373-why-airline-mergers-don-t-work-scale-is-not-a-blessing?source=feed#comment-691118 691118
Regards]]> Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:06:18 -0400
Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/161691-time-for-the-feds-to-finally-get-tough-with-troubled-bank-giants?source=feed#comment-679085 679085 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:31:08 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/161279-social-security-here-s-how-to-extend-the-fund-s-life?source=feed#comment-676560 676560 Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:46:21 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/32348?source=feed#comment-672607 672607
And if you think you can do better, please go at it and let barney frank and friends who brought you this mess via FNM and FRE write the accounting rules]]> Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:20:13 -0400
And if you think you can do better, please go at it and let barney frank and friends who brought you this mess via FNM and FRE write the accounting rules]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/160371-david-merkel-on-life-settlements?source=feed#comment-666853 666853
Regards]]> Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:17:18 -0400
Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/157545-how-is-china-s-export-driven-economy-booming?source=feed#comment-642545 642545
And wht happends when all those non-performing loans come due in china? What recognition is there then? Will the central planners allow the Peoples banc to fail? Is it too big to fail in China? And where did all that loan money go? Into real estate? Into the shanghai market? Reminiscint of Japan isn't in 1988 isn't it. What happends when those markets tank and the collateral behind those loans disappears?

And how exactly is china growing at 8% when exports which account for 60% are down 23% yoy? No, china doesn't cook their books, of course not

Please try harder]]> Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:31:06 -0400
And wht happends when all those non-performing loans come due in china? What recognition is there then? Will the central planners allow the Peoples banc to fail? Is it too big to fail in China? And where did all that loan money go? Into real estate? Into the shanghai market? Reminiscint of Japan isn't in 1988 isn't it. What happends when those markets tank and the collateral behind those loans disappears?

And how exactly is china growing at 8% when exports which account for 60% are down 23% yoy? No, china doesn't cook their books, of course not

Please try harder]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/156786-how-did-vermont-avoid-the-mortgage-meltdown?source=feed#comment-637120 637120
A number of years ago the banks in Illinois tried to put through a program where based on your income and financial wherewithal, it would require that you particpate in a series of classes on helping understand the basic finance principles behind purchasing a house with a mortgage if the mortgage product was anything other than a 30 yr fixed 80 LTV product. The banks used zip codes to target where to push the program. Of course the liberal chicago establishment couldn't have that as using zip codes to try to "educate" low income families was in their words code for racist discrimination against those borrowers.

Anyone wanna guess that maybe by doing this illinois and especially chicago areas could have saved themselves a whole lot of heartache?

I of course prefer this solution to outright banning of products. Properly educate people and let them decide. If they try and fail, so be it, but to completely ban those products is something I cannot ascribe to. And this is really important. When they fail, they fail. No bailouts. No matter how much you think its in everyones interest. They made an educated decision and it did not work out. Failure is the option.

Regards]]> Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:15:05 -0400
A number of years ago the banks in Illinois tried to put through a program where based on your income and financial wherewithal, it would require that you particpate in a series of classes on helping understand the basic finance principles behind purchasing a house with a mortgage if the mortgage product was anything other than a 30 yr fixed 80 LTV product. The banks used zip codes to target where to push the program. Of course the liberal chicago establishment couldn't have that as using zip codes to try to "educate" low income families was in their words code for racist discrimination against those borrowers.

Anyone wanna guess that maybe by doing this illinois and especially chicago areas could have saved themselves a whole lot of heartache?

I of course prefer this solution to outright banning of products. Properly educate people and let them decide. If they try and fail, so be it, but to completely ban those products is something I cannot ascribe to. And this is really important. When they fail, they fail. No bailouts. No matter how much you think its in everyones interest. They made an educated decision and it did not work out. Failure is the option.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/157038-who-really-understands-housing?source=feed#comment-636984 636984
Those who are motivated sellers are well aware of current trends. They are much better with their opinions about home values than they are on macro-economic issues.

I beg to disagree significantly with this statement. Many sellers who are not in the market at the lowest price points are clearly delusional about where the market is. Go to zillow and do a search for the number of listings with DOM above 180. It's a telling statistic. Even more so is to have an REA do it where they back into the true original DOM, where small changes in the listing are not recorded as refreshes or where the REA removes the listing for 1 week to get a new DOM.

I would also disagree with the statement that shadow inventory works both ways. If there really was more demand why aren't sales higher than they were in 2005? Prices are 20-40% lower - any shadow buyers would have jumped already and did and are hurting because they jumped already. With homeownership still above 68% there isn't alot of pent up demand. The only real demand is at the $125k and below mark and people looking to trade down but can't because they can't move their McMansion for anywhere near what they are on the hook for on the first, second and sometimes third mortgages

Regards]]> Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:14:42 -0400
Those who are motivated sellers are well aware of current trends. They are much better with their opinions about home values than they are on macro-economic issues.

I beg to disagree significantly with this statement. Many sellers who are not in the market at the lowest price points are clearly delusional about where the market is. Go to zillow and do a search for the number of listings with DOM above 180. It's a telling statistic. Even more so is to have an REA do it where they back into the true original DOM, where small changes in the listing are not recorded as refreshes or where the REA removes the listing for 1 week to get a new DOM.

I would also disagree with the statement that shadow inventory works both ways. If there really was more demand why aren't sales higher than they were in 2005? Prices are 20-40% lower - any shadow buyers would have jumped already and did and are hurting because they jumped already. With homeownership still above 68% there isn't alot of pent up demand. The only real demand is at the $125k and below mark and people looking to trade down but can't because they can't move their McMansion for anywhere near what they are on the hook for on the first, second and sometimes third mortgages

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/156832-social-security-time-to-uncap-fica?source=feed#comment-635247 635247
How about this. Reduce benefits before increasing taxes. People didn't pay enough for their benefits so reduce them. None of this would have been a problem if the system would have been defined as a "defined contribution" system instead of using a "defined benefit".

And there is no reason to tax people who don't get the benefits to pay for people who did not earn their benefits. We have plenty of that already.

Or how about this - make it voluntary. If you want higher taxes to pay for benefits other people didn't earn, please give the treasury your money. I however would prefer to keep that which I earn.

Regards]]> Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:10:37 -0400
How about this. Reduce benefits before increasing taxes. People didn't pay enough for their benefits so reduce them. None of this would have been a problem if the system would have been defined as a "defined contribution" system instead of using a "defined benefit".

And there is no reason to tax people who don't get the benefits to pay for people who did not earn their benefits. We have plenty of that already.

Or how about this - make it voluntary. If you want higher taxes to pay for benefits other people didn't earn, please give the treasury your money. I however would prefer to keep that which I earn.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/30511?source=feed#comment-628623 628623
An example would be a prime CA borrower who has never missed a payment that bought in 2006, and is still gainfully employed. Fair value of that loan today would encompasse the fact that more than likely the homeowner is underwater, that CA real estate is in the tank and everything else putting a value around 70 cents on the dollar. Not the same under traditional loan reserve accounting.

But here's the question. Let's say you get your wish and banks have to mark held to maturity loans to market and thus on June 30 write down the loan to 70 cents and take the hit. They are still cash flowing 100% on that loan and 2 years later, when the recession effects have worn off to some extent and that same loan now has a fair value of 95% of par - are you going to whine like a little girl that banks are unfairly massaging their earnings?

My guess is that you will totally forget that they had to write the loan down to 70 cents because you whined about it then. Like a little girl.

Regards]]> Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:48:21 -0400
An example would be a prime CA borrower who has never missed a payment that bought in 2006, and is still gainfully employed. Fair value of that loan today would encompasse the fact that more than likely the homeowner is underwater, that CA real estate is in the tank and everything else putting a value around 70 cents on the dollar. Not the same under traditional loan reserve accounting.

But here's the question. Let's say you get your wish and banks have to mark held to maturity loans to market and thus on June 30 write down the loan to 70 cents and take the hit. They are still cash flowing 100% on that loan and 2 years later, when the recession effects have worn off to some extent and that same loan now has a fair value of 95% of par - are you going to whine like a little girl that banks are unfairly massaging their earnings?

My guess is that you will totally forget that they had to write the loan down to 70 cents because you whined about it then. Like a little girl.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/155133-incompetent-bank-regulation-hits-customers-hard?source=feed#comment-624285 624285
If you don't like it raise some capital and start your own bank and don't do any of these nasty things that other banks do. Nothing is stopping anyone from doing this.

Don't be surprised if no one wants to invest along with you though.]]> Mon, 10 Aug 2009 22:48:37 -0400
If you don't like it raise some capital and start your own bank and don't do any of these nasty things that other banks do. Nothing is stopping anyone from doing this.

Don't be surprised if no one wants to invest along with you though.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/153556-huron-consulting-s-spectacular-blow-up?source=feed#comment-615334 615334
In regards to PWC - they aren't clairvoyant. To expect them to find out about private transactions between the selling stockholders and certain employees is beyond the scope of any typical FS audit.

Regards]]> Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:47:18 -0400
In regards to PWC - they aren't clairvoyant. To expect them to find out about private transactions between the selling stockholders and certain employees is beyond the scope of any typical FS audit.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/153701-has-housing-bottomed-yet?source=feed#comment-615318 615318
Depends on the market segment you are talking about. For houses within 2x and 3x median income, generally between $100K and $150K, there is some solidity to the concept that prices and sales have firmed to the point where the bottom, if not here already is definately forming. Go anywhere near $500K and up, and the answer is definately NO. Whereas inventory (outside of pending foreclosures) is trending down nicely at the $100K to $150K level, its still ballooning at $500K and up.

Hope this helps]]> Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:38:00 -0400
Depends on the market segment you are talking about. For houses within 2x and 3x median income, generally between $100K and $150K, there is some solidity to the concept that prices and sales have firmed to the point where the bottom, if not here already is definately forming. Go anywhere near $500K and up, and the answer is definately NO. Whereas inventory (outside of pending foreclosures) is trending down nicely at the $100K to $150K level, its still ballooning at $500K and up.

Hope this helps]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/29606?source=feed#comment-612868 612868
Regards]]> Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:23:42 -0400
Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/153166-more-on-capital-ratios-of-u-s-banks?source=feed#comment-612646 612646
My only comment to your comment is that the big 19 banks don't really hold much commercial exposure. The real exposure and real danger is to the medium and larger regionals. While they didn't play the residential subprime game, they most certainly played the commercial subprime game. And that is where they are hurting.

Regards

On Aug 02 09:45 PM Zachary Scheidt wrote:

> One of the biggest dangers to the capitalization rates (and ultimately
> to the banks survival) is the commercial real estate market. Many
> loans to developers and builders on the commercial side have not
> taken the hit that residential mortgages have. But the losses could
> simply be the next step of this ugly economic cycle.
>
> If losses begin to mount on the commercial real estate portfolios
> the capitalization rates could evaporate and it wouldn't surprise
> me to see TARP #2 (or #3). This would be very troublesome for not
> only the banking industry but for the overall economy (and ultimately
> the broader equities market). Risk control is still necessary although
> the current market would lull many investors to a false sense of
> security.
>
> Zach
> zachstocks.com]]> Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:36:42 -0400
My only comment to your comment is that the big 19 banks don't really hold much commercial exposure. The real exposure and real danger is to the medium and larger regionals. While they didn't play the residential subprime game, they most certainly played the commercial subprime game. And that is where they are hurting.

Regards

On Aug 02 09:45 PM Zachary Scheidt wrote:

> One of the biggest dangers to the capitalization rates (and ultimately
> to the banks survival) is the commercial real estate market. Many
> loans to developers and builders on the commercial side have not
> taken the hit that residential mortgages have. But the losses could
> simply be the next step of this ugly economic cycle.
>
> If losses begin to mount on the commercial real estate portfolios
> the capitalization rates could evaporate and it wouldn't surprise
> me to see TARP #2 (or #3). This would be very troublesome for not
> only the banking industry but for the overall economy (and ultimately
> the broader equities market). Risk control is still necessary although
> the current market would lull many investors to a false sense of
> security.
>
> Zach
> zachstocks.com]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/153166-more-on-capital-ratios-of-u-s-banks?source=feed#comment-612105 612105
If we include the exchange by C for its trust preferreds into common, we note that its TCE doubles from the first quarter measure. If we also include the asset sales by Citi, its TCE comes out almost triple what it was as of Q1.

This would raise the TCE of the Top 4 from the article presented 4.4% percent to over 6% (its a simple average weighting so if one increases by 3x its not hard to move the average)

This shouldn't imply in any way that I believe those to be adequate measures - for smaller banks a TCE between 6-7% is just fine really. But for banks that have grown to well over a Trillion in assets, the risk model should be adjusted (severly I might add, in such as way as some might consider it a penalty in fact) such that systemic protection is at a paramount

Regards]]> Sun, 02 Aug 2009 19:12:13 -0400
If we include the exchange by C for its trust preferreds into common, we note that its TCE doubles from the first quarter measure. If we also include the asset sales by Citi, its TCE comes out almost triple what it was as of Q1.

This would raise the TCE of the Top 4 from the article presented 4.4% percent to over 6% (its a simple average weighting so if one increases by 3x its not hard to move the average)

This shouldn't imply in any way that I believe those to be adequate measures - for smaller banks a TCE between 6-7% is just fine really. But for banks that have grown to well over a Trillion in assets, the risk model should be adjusted (severly I might add, in such as way as some might consider it a penalty in fact) such that systemic protection is at a paramount

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/152596-the-downside-of-profits?source=feed#comment-609978 609978
For everyone here reccomending that the gov't take over heath care, raise your Federal tax rate to 86%. You want it, you pay for it.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

Last time I checked having the US gov't take over all health care decision making in the US wasn't part of the reason for the US gov't

Nuff said]]> Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:45:26 -0400
For everyone here reccomending that the gov't take over heath care, raise your Federal tax rate to 86%. You want it, you pay for it.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

Last time I checked having the US gov't take over all health care decision making in the US wasn't part of the reason for the US gov't

Nuff said]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/152121-blue-dogging-health-care?source=feed#comment-606975 606975
There is a reason that private companies spend on G&A. They spend significant sums on fraud detection and prevention. They happen to do a much, much better job at it than medicare does. Not only that, but you introduce a medicare type system that mandates reimbursement at lower rates than what the system charges those in private policies, and those private policies go away. What's the problem with that - well then, 20% of the hospitals and 20% of the doctors go away with them. They don't want to make less than what they are making now and having to work twice as hard to get reimbursed 300 days later than private paying suppliers.

Imagine a gov't run program to devlier healthcare that turns into the DMV.

Yeah, because thats exactly what I want.]]> Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:01:16 -0400
There is a reason that private companies spend on G&A. They spend significant sums on fraud detection and prevention. They happen to do a much, much better job at it than medicare does. Not only that, but you introduce a medicare type system that mandates reimbursement at lower rates than what the system charges those in private policies, and those private policies go away. What's the problem with that - well then, 20% of the hospitals and 20% of the doctors go away with them. They don't want to make less than what they are making now and having to work twice as hard to get reimbursed 300 days later than private paying suppliers.

Imagine a gov't run program to devlier healthcare that turns into the DMV.

Yeah, because thats exactly what I want.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/152130-one-big-problem-with-private-health-insurance?source=feed#comment-606964 606964
You make a generalization of how the entire system is a failure based on one specific problem area. Also, you seem to suggest that recisission is only problematic for those that purchase individual polcies, wheras more than 80% of private healthcare is delivered through employer or other group type polcieis.

Btw - since public heath care systems are so much better - what is the survival rate in britain for breast cancer vs that in the US?

Try harder]]> Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:54:18 -0400
You make a generalization of how the entire system is a failure based on one specific problem area. Also, you seem to suggest that recisission is only problematic for those that purchase individual polcies, wheras more than 80% of private healthcare is delivered through employer or other group type polcieis.

Btw - since public heath care systems are so much better - what is the survival rate in britain for breast cancer vs that in the US?

Try harder]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/151310-united-airlines-shows-how-not-to-run-a-business?source=feed#comment-603931 603931

On Jul 27 12:10 PM DonFurio wrote:

> I could talk all day about this, but United suffers from several
> problems. Some of their main hubs for connections are Chicago and
> Denver, and that is huge pain for travel due to weather half of the
> year, and just general congestion for Chicago year round. Customer
> service is an issue, as I've noticed that way more of their customer
> service has been outsourced compared to other US domestic carriers.
>
>
> The guy in the article should not have waited so long and, yea bc
> of union work rules, it's not technically their job description to
> lift carry-ons.
>
> I think that the Union work rules combined with years of mismanagement
> have led to United's current woes. I actually do think they are worse
> than American, Us Airways, Continental and Delta.]]> Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:09:17 -0400

On Jul 27 12:10 PM DonFurio wrote:

> I could talk all day about this, but United suffers from several
> problems. Some of their main hubs for connections are Chicago and
> Denver, and that is huge pain for travel due to weather half of the
> year, and just general congestion for Chicago year round. Customer
> service is an issue, as I've noticed that way more of their customer
> service has been outsourced compared to other US domestic carriers.
>
>
> The guy in the article should not have waited so long and, yea bc
> of union work rules, it's not technically their job description to
> lift carry-ons.
>
> I think that the Union work rules combined with years of mismanagement
> have led to United's current woes. I actually do think they are worse
> than American, Us Airways, Continental and Delta.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/151310-united-airlines-shows-how-not-to-run-a-business?source=feed#comment-603615 603615
It's absolutely glaring that you have never been in a management position in a mostly union run business.

Union businesses are all about high fixed costs and how you manage volume given those high fixed costs. In addition, its about managing a situation that you are not entirely in control of. Union rules dictate what managers can and can't do, and they are there to protect the union workforce, even when its detrimental to the Company and thus the Union itself. When your revenue drops even 1 or 2 perecent, it can be devastating, having it drop more than 10%, well then it becomes all about who can i let go today to reduce my fixed cost footprint. Because you can't change things, the union work rules prohibit the kind of flexibility you need in that kind of environment. Thus, it becomes about reducing union headcount, because that is pretty much your only tool available. A pretty small toolkit. And one that tends to crush morale. But, unfortunately, thats the only tool available to the managers at UA.

If APPLE had an entirely union workforce and had to manufacture its products in the US under union rules, I don;t think you would be singing the same tune.

Regards]]> Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:25:42 -0400
It's absolutely glaring that you have never been in a management position in a mostly union run business.

Union businesses are all about high fixed costs and how you manage volume given those high fixed costs. In addition, its about managing a situation that you are not entirely in control of. Union rules dictate what managers can and can't do, and they are there to protect the union workforce, even when its detrimental to the Company and thus the Union itself. When your revenue drops even 1 or 2 perecent, it can be devastating, having it drop more than 10%, well then it becomes all about who can i let go today to reduce my fixed cost footprint. Because you can't change things, the union work rules prohibit the kind of flexibility you need in that kind of environment. Thus, it becomes about reducing union headcount, because that is pretty much your only tool available. A pretty small toolkit. And one that tends to crush morale. But, unfortunately, thats the only tool available to the managers at UA.

If APPLE had an entirely union workforce and had to manufacture its products in the US under union rules, I don;t think you would be singing the same tune.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/150920-the-mac-vs-pc-debate-was-never-clearer?source=feed#comment-602063 602063
This is the difference between PC and MAC users. MAC users are stupid and lazy while high end PC users are the kids making billions on new internet and technology startups



On Jul 24 05:52 PM enkidu21 wrote:

> Here's a common and misguided theme emanating from the Apple haters:
> ]]> Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:35:19 -0400
This is the difference between PC and MAC users. MAC users are stupid and lazy while high end PC users are the kids making billions on new internet and technology startups



On Jul 24 05:52 PM enkidu21 wrote:

> Here's a common and misguided theme emanating from the Apple haters:
> ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/150920-the-mac-vs-pc-debate-was-never-clearer?source=feed#comment-601252 601252
The OP and the author of the study make the fundemental flaw in the analysis of this fact. High-end PC buyers don't shop at best buy. They don't.

High end pc buyers shop for components, and build the systems themselves. A few will buy from alienware (dell) or a few highend models from HP or others, but for the most part, sales of high end PC's just are not storefront driven

I can build an exactly comparable pc system for under $1300 that Apple sells for $2499. That's all markup for nothing more than marketing. Great for APPLE, bad for the consumer that buys that MAC.

So when you trumpet that MAC is great because of the brand image, be aware that that is all it is. The machine itself is nothing special.

Regards]]> Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:02:42 -0400
The OP and the author of the study make the fundemental flaw in the analysis of this fact. High-end PC buyers don't shop at best buy. They don't.

High end pc buyers shop for components, and build the systems themselves. A few will buy from alienware (dell) or a few highend models from HP or others, but for the most part, sales of high end PC's just are not storefront driven

I can build an exactly comparable pc system for under $1300 that Apple sells for $2499. That's all markup for nothing more than marketing. Great for APPLE, bad for the consumer that buys that MAC.

So when you trumpet that MAC is great because of the brand image, be aware that that is all it is. The machine itself is nothing special.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/149904-the-treasury-s-tarp-cop-out?source=feed#comment-595591 595591
If you have $5,000 in cash, put $5,000 more in your checking account from a loan and then spend $3,000 please tell me exactly how much of the $5,000 loan you have spent?

It really isn't that easy and the smart people in the room know it. And as for new lending - who exactly has their hands out for new loans? People who don't meet the definition of a quality borrower. The problem is those quality borrowers aren't asking for loans. So the banks could easily lend out more money - the problem is that they would turn into write-offs six months down the road. Not the way to run a quality bank.

Regards]]> Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:36:16 -0400
If you have $5,000 in cash, put $5,000 more in your checking account from a loan and then spend $3,000 please tell me exactly how much of the $5,000 loan you have spent?

It really isn't that easy and the smart people in the room know it. And as for new lending - who exactly has their hands out for new loans? People who don't meet the definition of a quality borrower. The problem is those quality borrowers aren't asking for loans. So the banks could easily lend out more money - the problem is that they would turn into write-offs six months down the road. Not the way to run a quality bank.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/148257-california-s-pension-education-costs-out-of-control?source=feed#comment-591207 591207
So adding up all those salary, benefits and lifetime guaranteed employment, there is no wonder that there is an outcry from everyone other than teachers about them being underpaid.


On Jul 12 09:35 AM look closer wrote:

> Teachers are already some of the lowest paid workers in govt service,
> now you want to wipe out their pensions, yea GREAT!!! now we'll have
> to outsource for teachers too. God help the kids, this article was
> written by an idiot.]]> Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:46:21 -0400
So adding up all those salary, benefits and lifetime guaranteed employment, there is no wonder that there is an outcry from everyone other than teachers about them being underpaid.


On Jul 12 09:35 AM look closer wrote:

> Teachers are already some of the lowest paid workers in govt service,
> now you want to wipe out their pensions, yea GREAT!!! now we'll have
> to outsource for teachers too. God help the kids, this article was
> written by an idiot.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/147296-i-was-wrong-about-gm-bankruptcy?source=feed#comment-579351 579351
I've seen this bandied about so many times, but I have yet to see anyone, including the OP, back up this statement with facts.

And as for GM shedding its liabilities, the only liabilities shed were those of the bondholders. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UAW took no cuts in pay or benefits, so GM is still as unprofitable making cars today as it was before bankruptcy. The only difference is a reduction in total losses for $2 billion per year in reduced interest expense. But what;s the real difference between 6 billion annual loss and 8 billion, it;s still losing money on every car it builds.

Regards]]> Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:24:58 -0400
I've seen this bandied about so many times, but I have yet to see anyone, including the OP, back up this statement with facts.

And as for GM shedding its liabilities, the only liabilities shed were those of the bondholders. Correct me if I am wrong, but the UAW took no cuts in pay or benefits, so GM is still as unprofitable making cars today as it was before bankruptcy. The only difference is a reduction in total losses for $2 billion per year in reduced interest expense. But what;s the real difference between 6 billion annual loss and 8 billion, it;s still losing money on every car it builds.

Regards]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/144782-three-tarp-banks-already-classified-as-deadbeats-uh-oh?source=feed#comment-559306 559306
What about mis-management at the three banks in question? Why is that not listed as a possibility? It may not be that the world is falling apart for small and regional banks, it could be that for the three banks in question, that they have made bad lending decisions and now see the fruit of their mis-management come home to roost.

You've jumped to a conclusion that small and regional banks are in trouble (all of them) based on the results of three small banks.

Thats the equivalent of me picking three pink sheet stocks that I think will go down 20% and saying that I thought the entire US stock mareket would have to go down also as a result. Its simply not a valid argument.

Regards]]> Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:53:45 -0400
What about mis-management at the three banks in question? Why is that not listed as a possibility? It may not be that the world is falling apart for small and regional banks, it could be that for the three banks in question, that they have made bad lending decisions and now see the fruit of their mis-management come home to roost.

You've jumped to a conclusion that small and regional banks are in trouble (all of them) based on the results of three small banks.

Thats the equivalent of me picking three pink sheet stocks that I think will go down 20% and saying that I thought the entire US stock mareket would have to go down also as a result. Its simply not a valid argument.

Regards]]>