I weep for this country.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

AIG RESPONDS TO WALL STREET JOURNAL STORY
NEW YORK, December 10, 2008 – American International Group, Inc. (AIG) has issued the following statement regarding an article that appeared today in The Wall Street Journal:
“A story in today’s Wall Street Journal incorrectly reports that AIG has a previously undisclosed obligation to counterparties of about $10 billion. The Journal’s story relates to AIG Financial Products’ multi-sector credit default swap portfolio. Included within that $71.6 billion portfolio (notional amount as of September 30) is approximately $9.8 billion of swaps that were sold as credit protection on “synthetic” securities. The swaps on these synthetic securities are also referred to as “cash settlement” or “Pay As You Go” (PAUG) swaps because they are settled in cash as and when losses are taken.
The majority of the multi-sector CDS swaps were written as “physical settlement” swaps, where AIG is required to physically buy the underlying collateralized debt obligation (CDO) bond in the event of a CDO credit event.
The $9.8 billion notional amount does not represent a loss to AIG or a debt it owes to counterparties. It represents the notional value of the maximum potential cash settlement portion of the multi-sector portfolio. Cash settlement swaps have lower liquidity risk because they are PAUG. A credit event on a physical settlement swap requires AIG to buy the total underlying CDO tranche in an amount equal to AIG’s full notional exposure whereas a PAUG contract only obliges AIG to pay losses on that tranche as and when they occur therefore reducing the cash impact.
AIG is addressing its exposure to its entire multi-sector CDS portfolio through its existing credit agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As previously announced, AIG and the Federal Reserve have funded the Maiden Lane III facility, which has negotiated agreements to settle $53.5 billion of AIG’s $71.6 billion CDS portfolio.
The notional amount attributable to the cash settlement portion of the AIG Financial Products multi-sector credit default swap portfolio has been consistently included in the total AIG Financial Products multi-sector credit default swap exposure in AIG’s SEC filings and is explained on page 117 of AIG’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008.”
# # #
American International Group, Inc. (AIG), a world leader in insurance and financial services, is the leading international insurance organization with operations in more than 130 countries and jurisdictions. AIG companies serve commercial, institutional and individual customers through the most extensive worldwide property-casualty and life insurance networks of any insurer. In addition, AIG companies are leading providers of retirement services, financial services and asset management around the world. AIG's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, as well as the stock exchanges in Ireland and Tokyo.

AIG's Speculative CDS Bets

AIG RESPONDS TO WALL STREET JOURNAL STORY
NEW YORK, December 10, 2008 – American International Group, Inc. (AIG) has issued the following statement regarding an article that appeared today in The Wall Street Journal:
“A story in today’s Wall Street Journal incorrectly reports that AIG has a previously undisclosed obligation to counterparties of about $10 billion. The Journal’s story relates to AIG Financial Products’ multi-sector credit default swap portfolio. Included within that $71.6 billion portfolio (notional amount as of September 30) is approximately $9.8 billion of swaps that were sold as credit protection on “synthetic” securities. The swaps on these synthetic securities are also referred to as “cash settlement” or “Pay As You Go” (PAUG) swaps because they are settled in cash as and when losses are taken.
The majority of the multi-sector CDS swaps were written as “physical settlement” swaps, where AIG is required to physically buy the underlying collateralized debt obligation (CDO) bond in the event of a CDO credit event.
The $9.8 billion notional amount does not represent a loss to AIG or a debt it owes to counterparties. It represents the notional value of the maximum potential cash settlement portion of the multi-sector portfolio. Cash settlement swaps have lower liquidity risk because they are PAUG. A credit event on a physical settlement swap requires AIG to buy the total underlying CDO tranche in an amount equal to AIG’s full notional exposure whereas a PAUG contract only obliges AIG to pay losses on that tranche as and when they occur therefore reducing the cash impact.
AIG is addressing its exposure to its entire multi-sector CDS portfolio through its existing credit agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As previously announced, AIG and the Federal Reserve have funded the Maiden Lane III facility, which has negotiated agreements to settle $53.5 billion of AIG’s $71.6 billion CDS portfolio.
The notional amount attributable to the cash settlement portion of the AIG Financial Products multi-sector credit default swap portfolio has been consistently included in the total AIG Financial Products multi-sector credit default swap exposure in AIG’s SEC filings and is explained on page 117 of AIG’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008.”
# # #
American International Group, Inc. (AIG), a world leader in insurance and financial services, is the leading international insurance organization with operations in more than 130 countries and jurisdictions. AIG companies serve commercial, institutional and individual customers through the most extensive worldwide property-casualty and life insurance networks of any insurer. In addition, AIG companies are leading providers of retirement services, financial services and asset management around the world. AIG's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, as well as the stock exchanges in Ireland and Tokyo.

AIG's Speculative CDS Bets

You are a joke.

The Tyranny of the Shareholders

Berekely Bob: Please astound us all and inform us how AIG is like Enron? Sheep like you make me laugh. You can be led astray by pundits on capitoal hill and in the media who don't know the first thing about AIG or how business works in the real world. AIG had a liquidity crisis caused by the overnight failure of Lehman's. They needed a bridge loan, instead the Gov't bend them over a barrel and took 80% of the company, something that has not happened to other company's such as Citi. All AIG is asking is for the Gov't to relinquinsh the shares it stole without shareholder approval so that the company can raise capital and pay back the taxpayers!

The Tyranny of the Shareholders

Where do you get your information? How is AIG insolvent? You really need to check your facts before you are allowed to print. Here is a word for you, libel!

AIG's Bold Move and Why I'm Shorting the Long Bond

I apologize for the "joke" comment. It is just very upsetting to constantly hear the media and pundits bashing AIG for seminars that are a necessary part of AIG's or blaming them for giving out bonuses to prevent a mass exodus of talent. these companies will not be worth anything if the talent leaves. Insurance is built on relationships. If the media would stay out of this matter AIG would still be thriving.

AIG's Bold Move and Why I'm Shorting the Long Bond

By the way, what does "lavish retreat" mean, putting on a seminar attended by 2 AIG employees at a cost of $186 per independent broker? Way to cite Brian Ross, he certaintly had all of his facts straight when he aired that amatuer video of his. It is a joke that AIG has to apologize for every marketing event they sponsor. How are they supposed to retain business?

AIG's Bold Move and Why I'm Shorting the Long Bond

I applaud many of the comments above which state the logical position that AIG must pay bonuses to retain talent. AIG was given a loan and loan shark rates, they were not given a handout. As a result, there is no reason to make a dollar to dollar comparision on how they spend the money. As a taxpayer, I want AIG to retain top talent and maintain their position, after all we now own 80% of the company, I want that to pay off for the USA. Plus, AIG success is good for the entire nation. I don't want to see our dollars and talent go to Zurich or Italy. Congressman that have no business experience are grandstanding, I can understand that but this author is a joke!

Where's the Bailout Now?

Well I actually gave you facts, you stated opinion. Obvioulsy, they made a bad bet, or else this would be a non-issue. The bad bet was being overleveraged in one area not the investment itself. These CDOs will actually be assets when they mature. They are triple A rated mortgages with little risk of default that AIG insured. It was the failure of the banks and the fear on the streets that caused AIG to have to come up with collateral overnight, which they couldn't do. Now they are paying the price of having so many eggs in one basket. But with some help from the Gov't they can survive and the taxpayer will make out. I will check back on Jan 1 and see if your facts are correct with respect to this company.


On Nov 13 07:36 PM sailingwindward wrote:

> It is evident that you disagree with my information and have your
> own OPINION (your entitled to your own opinion, but not your own
> facts), only time will tell which one of us was right or knew what
> they where talking about, in your comments about AIG making a bad
> bet and taking too big of a risk only proves my point that AIG is
> like a compulsive gambler, who owes way too much to the bookies and
> will get killed when he fails to pay (bankruptcy), people need to
> get their money as far away from AIG as they can before they fall,
> just like Enron did.

Where's the Bailout Now?

Why would AIG go bankrupt? All of the CDOs they insured will be due in 2010, they stopped writing in 2005. Therefore, come 2010, they will be off the risk that has caused them to put up collateral and that debt will now be an asset on the balance sheet. AIG just needs a bridge, liquidity to put up the collateral until that time. They didn't have the cash on hand because due to the failure of LEHMAN they needed to put up billions of dollars overnight. You talk about AIG like ENRON. All they did was insure a product through a small division. They made a bad bet, took too big of a risk. They weren't cooking the books, etc... They were forced to accept a different accoutning model and it ended up costing them dearly. One or two people high up made that mistake apparently. However, the government will have the last laugh, they stand to profit in a huge way in two years when these CDOs are actaully worth much more than they are now. You have no idea what you are talking about or laws yet you continue to speak. You are what is wrong with this country, just like politicians and the media.


On Nov 13 12:35 AM sailingwindward wrote:

> It sounds to me like the people at AIG have misrepresented and mislead
> the public regarding it's financial condition (Neb.Rev.Stat. §44-1525(1)(d))
> They have also made untrue, deceptive and misleading statements (
> Neb.Rev.Stat. §44-1525(2))
> I'm sure without looking too hard AIG has broken many laws in many
> states.
> I on the other hand am stating facts, AIG is like a bad gambler who
> is so far in debt with the bookies that he borrows money from his
> family (in AIGs case family is the government) but the gambler instead
> of paying his bookies off, he goes out gambles and loses the rest
> of the money, with no ability to pay, the bookies kill him, in AIGs
> case they just go bankrupt, end of story.
> Now tell me where any of this is not true.

Where's the Bailout Now?

CFO Blog: Commentary and Opinion
You are here: Home : CFO Blog
INSURANCE
Knee-jerk Populism Part II
Posted by Tim Reason | CFO.com | Europe
November 12, 2008 2:00 PM ET
After writing a blog post at work yesterday about the AIG junket that wasn't , I was fascinated, and horrified, to go home and watch all the actual TV coverage.

This total non-story made it onto just about every news outlet you can imagine, including segments throughout the day on CNN. The height of ridiculousness was that AIG CEO Ed Liddy was forced to go on Larry King Live — as the first guest — to defend this ordinary conference against charges of being an executive boondoggle. (CNN realized midway through the day what a joke this story was and began inserting some balance into its reports, but couldn't stop pumping it in advance of the Larry King show.)

The absolute nadir was the original, breathlessly reported exclusive undercover investigative report by the Phoenix ABC affiliate. If you thought it was impossible to make something as excruciatingly boring as a 3-day insurance conference sound like an orgy at the Playboy Mansion, well, just click the video.

(Way to go, ABC15 reporter Josh Bernstein. Stay tuned for his story six months from now on why the bottom suddenly fell out of the Phoenix conference business.)

Or simply click on the slideshow to see the AIG executives "sitting poolside, drinking coffee, while other people attending the conference were in meetings." Coffee? Good grief! What a debauched bunch these insurance executives are. And how odd that they don't attend training sessions describing products that they designed!

Despite the fact that these guys were meeting in suits and ties at a table, surrounded by briefcases overflowing with work folders, other media outlets quickly began reporting that they were "lounging by the pool." Speaking from personal experience, having a meeting in the pool area of a conference hotel with your work colleagues in a dark business suit and tie in the hot sun is closer to a waterboarding than a boondoggle on the spectrum of creature comforts. The only reason anyone does this at all is that they're desperate for fresh air after days of inside meetings.

As AIG has admitted, it has behaved abominably in the past. Issuing billions in credit default swaps? That's terrible risk management. AIG executives hunting quail in the English countryside? That's a boondoggle. Putting on conference for financial planners that sell your product? That's good marketing.

The inability of the media, the government, and the public to distinguish between corporate excess and ordinary business is the result of the very same financial illiteracy that got us into this mess in the first place.

Most media outlets took great glee in reporting that this supposed "executive day spa" took place at the same time AIG's original bailout was revised. But most failed to note why it was revised: the terms were so onerous that they put AIG at risk of failing anyway. That's hardly good for taxpayers.

And pouncing on this company every time it attempts to conduct normal business anywhere other than an IHOP (as one CNN anchor suggested) is also a great way to make sure the bailout fails and we taxpayers never see that money again.

Why Feds Shouldn't Regulate Insurance, Nor Own Insurers

CFO Blog: Commentary and Opinion
You are here: Home : CFO Blog
INSURANCE
Knee-jerk Populism Part II
Posted by Tim Reason | CFO.com | Europe
November 12, 2008 2:00 PM ET
After writing a blog post at work yesterday about the AIG junket that wasn't , I was fascinated, and horrified, to go home and watch all the actual TV coverage.

This total non-story made it onto just about every news outlet you can imagine, including segments throughout the day on CNN. The height of ridiculousness was that AIG CEO Ed Liddy was forced to go on Larry King Live — as the first guest — to defend this ordinary conference against charges of being an executive boondoggle. (CNN realized midway through the day what a joke this story was and began inserting some balance into its reports, but couldn't stop pumping it in advance of the Larry King show.)

The absolute nadir was the original, breathlessly reported exclusive undercover investigative report by the Phoenix ABC affiliate. If you thought it was impossible to make something as excruciatingly boring as a 3-day insurance conference sound like an orgy at the Playboy Mansion, well, just click the video.

(Way to go, ABC15 reporter Josh Bernstein. Stay tuned for his story six months from now on why the bottom suddenly fell out of the Phoenix conference business.)

Or simply click on the slideshow to see the AIG executives "sitting poolside, drinking coffee, while other people attending the conference were in meetings." Coffee? Good grief! What a debauched bunch these insurance executives are. And how odd that they don't attend training sessions describing products that they designed!

Despite the fact that these guys were meeting in suits and ties at a table, surrounded by briefcases overflowing with work folders, other media outlets quickly began reporting that they were "lounging by the pool." Speaking from personal experience, having a meeting in the pool area of a conference hotel with your work colleagues in a dark business suit and tie in the hot sun is closer to a waterboarding than a boondoggle on the spectrum of creature comforts. The only reason anyone does this at all is that they're desperate for fresh air after days of inside meetings.

As AIG has admitted, it has behaved abominably in the past. Issuing billions in credit default swaps? That's terrible risk management. AIG executives hunting quail in the English countryside? That's a boondoggle. Putting on conference for financial planners that sell your product? That's good marketing.

The inability of the media, the government, and the public to distinguish between corporate excess and ordinary business is the result of the very same financial illiteracy that got us into this mess in the first place.

Most media outlets took great glee in reporting that this supposed "executive day spa" took place at the same time AIG's original bailout was revised. But most failed to note why it was revised: the terms were so onerous that they put AIG at risk of failing anyway. That's hardly good for taxpayers.

And pouncing on this company every time it attempts to conduct normal business anywhere other than an IHOP (as one CNN anchor suggested) is also a great way to make sure the bailout fails and we taxpayers never see that money again.

Where's the Bailout Now?

Monday 1929:

What is your name?

Where's the Bailout Now?

Heck: It is even illegal in Nebraska:

These statements, advertisements, implications or innuendos about the solvency or condition of other companies may be a violation of:


Neb.Rev.Stat. §44-1525(1)(d) concerning misleading or misrepresenting the financial condition of any insurer;
Neb.Rev.Stat. §44-1525(2) concerning untrue, deceptive or misleading advertisements or statements; and
Neb.Rev.Stat. §44-1525(3) concerning derogatory, false or maliciously critical statements about the financial condition of an insurance company.
Increased replacement activity attempting to capitalize on public hysteria over the financial condition of insurers is particularly suspect and will be scrutinized by the Department of Insurance.

Where's the Bailout Now?

Salingwindward:

I would recommend that you consult with an attorney. It is illegal to make false statements regarding the solvency of an insurance company in most states. Since you are using the internet to make these statements you are definitely violating the statutes in New York where AIG is domiciled.