Bank Of America Has Failed Shareholders [View article]
Cash can be returned as a cash dividend: Many people receive these dividends in taxable accounts. Some people choose to reinvest those after-tax dividends back into the company stock.
Cash can instead be returned through share repurchases: People who would prefer a dividend can sell an offsetting number of shares. For example, when BAC eventually reports that they've bought back 10 cents per share worth of stock, the shareholders who prefer a cash dividend can sell approximately 1% of their BAC holdings.
The advantage here is that everyone wins. The people who want the cash dividend still get their cash, but they pay less tax because instead of being taxed on 100% of the dividend, they instead only pay tax on the capital gains (if any) when they sell 1% of their shares.
I call this "dividend laundering". I wish every company did this instead of paying cash dividends -- we could cut our tax burden enormously by doing this. And still get our cash if we want it!
Those of us that wish to reinvest the "dividend", can just opt not to sell any shares.
Taxes are getting bad enough as it is. Let's not complain at this gift from BAC.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
fxfx wrote: "both MBIA and BAC have their share in letting this financial crisis happen in the first place and both like(d) to walk away from as many of their obligations as possible. "
I agree with you. They both smile like a heaping pile of dung.
I wish Tom would incorporate such a balanced view in his articles. I always read his articles because when you search for news on BAC, his articles showed up under the "BAC related articles" link.
He does a good job of telling everyone that BAC's hands are bloody.
I have nothing more to add from that standpoint. I then point out that Jay Brown's hands are bloody too in order to bring some balance.
I don't think my rhetoric in describing Jay Brown has been any more severe than the author's rhetoric in describing BAC.
And Mozillo is long gone, whereas Jay Brown is still running the show.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
fxfx wrote: "Btw, whether BAC pays a billion or tow more or less to MBIA doesn't make much of a difference to BAC and its shareholders - while it makes all the difference to MBIA - employees, bondholders and shareholders. So perhaps you cool down a bit in your rant against MBIA and Jay Brown and try to objectively assess BofA's prospects. having the entire portfolio in one stock (of whatever company) is in any case a recipe for an extreme conformation bias in one's investment decisions and news assessments. "
There is another thing going on here. Once a person says they have 100% concentrated in whatever, everyone listening is going to be highly suspect (biased) to whatever they say.
This is why for example in debates Barack Obama would constantly remind the voters that Mitt Romney paid only 14% tax, had investments in Chinese companies, and was involved in private equity.
So automatically you think I'm a biased BAC shareholder motivated by some fear of a settlement being in MBIA's favor.
Okay, so let me explain. I read all of the conference call transcripts for BAC. People on this thread have been questioning whether BAC's monoline reserves are adequate. Yet if they were to read BAC's transcripts, they'll say the same thing yet in different words. Moynihan has stated multiple times that the reserves might not be enough -- he says worst case another $5 billion. To me, that means that if he gets dragged into court and loses, then he'll be on the hook for another $5billion. However based on the terms of settlements in the past (such as AGO), perhaps the reserves are adequate.
And yeah, BAC's not in the least way threated by paying MBIA in full right now. I think the stock would actually go up out of relief that it's not actually going into court.
You guys are attacking my statements by dismissing me out of hand as being concentrated in BAC.
Out of fairness, have I ever in this thread questioned the author's motivation? We all know he just sold his MBI after a big drop and is probably spitting blood and hopping mad.
But it's pointless to dismiss the person for assumed motivations. It's more civil to just hear the person out because we can still have a rational discussion if it doesn't resort to "IGNORE THIS POSTER ERICMSFT AS HE IS A BIASED XYZ (or whatever we can call him to dismiss him out of hand and refuse to listen to what he has to say)"
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
fxfx wrote: And it is plain obvious that you do have some axe to grind with Jay Brown. Let's keep that as well as moral issues aside - both MBIA and BAC have their share in letting this financial crisis happen in the first place and both like(d) to walk away from as many of their obligations as possible.
Yes, I do have "some" axe to grind with Jay Brown. Read the latest letter where he claims that BAC is threatening his MBIA Insurance Corp policyholders, and further read the section where he claims that Countrywide/BAC is responsible for the financial crisis.
He doesn't say, "Granted, we're trying to wall off the parent company from the subsidiary". Or, "sure, we are still trying to wall off the assets of National".
Further, he doesn't say: "True, we had our role in the crisis too by willingly wrapping these things even though it was common knowledge that anyone with a pulse could get a loan from Countrywide".
I don't like how he wants to lay all of the blame on somebody else and bear none of the cost himself.
Yes, legally he can do that if the contract says he can. Morally, it's shameful.
I would like the man if he could accept his fair share of blame here.
When you point your finger, Jay Brown, there are three fingers pointing back at you. Go ahead, point your finger at the wall and now look at your hand -- count the three fingers pointing at you.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
For example, JMNYC posted a comment that had a tone not the least bit rude towards Tom.
Tom's response: Do you understand the meaning of the adjective "speculative," as applied to investments? Or "binary," as applied to outcomes?
He's totally rude. He chases every dissenter away through these condescending ad hominems. That leaves you with a discussion that isn't open and honest -- it becomes just the people that Tom doesn't piss off.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Why don't you contribute something instead of being a troll.
Maybe you should read all of the comments -- you'll notice that this was never a discussion. It's a slandering platform, and whenever you try to correct the inaccuracies you are dismissed as a secret agent hired by BAC. It's not just me, Tom accuses everyone of being a hired gun.
Can Jerry Springer really be to blame if the discussion isn't civil. He runs the show, he is in control of decorum. Set an example so that it can be civil. Don't attack any and all comers with a dissenting viewpoint.
He is downright nasty to anyone who isn't a yes man. Count the ad hominem attacks.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
That's assuming that MBI doesn't still have a move that it can make to insure that the parent company can endure years of appeals (or however long it will take). I invite anyone to state what that would be, because it clearly helps to determine if MBI is a safe buy. We are here to invest, right?
Without such a countering move, the threat of MBIA taking Countrywide to court and fighting through the appeals becomes relatively much more hollow. The threat only holds water if it's actually a better outcome for MBIA (which it might not be if the common doesn't survive without serious wounding).
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Tom there is nothing in your article informing the reader of what MBI's options are FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, given this latest move from BAC.
You pat yourself on the back claiming it is "clearly stated", is it really?
Let me state again, GIVEN THIS LATEST MOVE BY BAC, what is their negotiating position?
Prior to this move, their negotiating position appeared to improve -- ringfence the parent company from MBIA Insurance Corp. This would it seem allow them to pursue the case against Countrywide without harming the value of the common stock.
BAC has now made it much more expensive to carry it out. They would have to incur more than $100m of additional debt issuance at the parent and at higher interest rates. Guessing, maybe 8%. That's what I presume it would cost to call in those bonds that BAC is offering to buy.
So pursuing Countrywide in court is suddenly not quite as attractive as it was prior to BAC's latest move.
Now it's somewhat like mutual destruction. BAC likely won't gain from court, but certainly MBIA will now gain less than they thought they were going to gain.
So if they think they'll have the same legal outcome, yet they'll possibly suffer a lot of dilution to MBI common on the way, are they still willing to take this all the way through the appeals process with Countrywide.
Thus, what is the negotiating position of MBI now? What are they most likely to do in light of this?
It's certainly not as black and white anymore for them as it was the day before BAC moved to block.
It makes a settlement somewhat more attractive, if not a lot more attractive to MBI.
It might now be in the best interst of BOTH parties, not just one.
It's not merely an academic point. I figure if somebody here has a good idea of what moves MBI can now make to pursue the case without destroying the common, perhaps they can pipe up.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
No "the critic" didn't read the "strategy review".
Your disclosure of being long MBI, AGO is posted at the top and that's where I read it.
You are touchy when there is a dissenting opinion. You need a thicker skin if you are going to write scathing biased editorials -- you can't paint everyone who disagrees with your opinion as a secret agent out to get you.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
The author writes:
" I'm waiting for better risk/reward profile before I redeploy my funds into MBI. " What does that mean in light of his disclosure that he is long MBI?
Bank Of America Has Failed Shareholders [View article]
Many people receive these dividends in taxable accounts. Some people choose to reinvest those after-tax dividends back into the company stock.
Cash can instead be returned through share repurchases:
People who would prefer a dividend can sell an offsetting number of shares. For example, when BAC eventually reports that they've bought back 10 cents per share worth of stock, the shareholders who prefer a cash dividend can sell approximately 1% of their BAC holdings.
The advantage here is that everyone wins. The people who want the cash dividend still get their cash, but they pay less tax because instead of being taxed on 100% of the dividend, they instead only pay tax on the capital gains (if any) when they sell 1% of their shares.
I call this "dividend laundering". I wish every company did this instead of paying cash dividends -- we could cut our tax burden enormously by doing this. And still get our cash if we want it!
Those of us that wish to reinvest the "dividend", can just opt not to sell any shares.
Taxes are getting bad enough as it is. Let's not complain at this gift from BAC.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Then you post a glib remark with a cute high school girly "LOL" attacked to it.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
"both MBIA and BAC have their share in letting this financial crisis happen in the first place and both like(d) to walk away from as many of their obligations as possible. "
I agree with you. They both smile like a heaping pile of dung.
I wish Tom would incorporate such a balanced view in his articles. I always read his articles because when you search for news on BAC, his articles showed up under the "BAC related articles" link.
He does a good job of telling everyone that BAC's hands are bloody.
I have nothing more to add from that standpoint. I then point out that Jay Brown's hands are bloody too in order to bring some balance.
I don't think my rhetoric in describing Jay Brown has been any more severe than the author's rhetoric in describing BAC.
And Mozillo is long gone, whereas Jay Brown is still running the show.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
"Btw, whether BAC pays a billion or tow more or less to MBIA doesn't make much of a difference to BAC and its shareholders - while it makes all the difference to MBIA - employees, bondholders and shareholders. So perhaps you cool down a bit in your rant against MBIA and Jay Brown and try to objectively assess BofA's prospects. having the entire portfolio in one stock (of whatever company) is in any case a recipe for an extreme conformation bias in one's investment decisions and news assessments. "
There is another thing going on here. Once a person says they have 100% concentrated in whatever, everyone listening is going to be highly suspect (biased) to whatever they say.
This is why for example in debates Barack Obama would constantly remind the voters that Mitt Romney paid only 14% tax, had investments in Chinese companies, and was involved in private equity.
So automatically you think I'm a biased BAC shareholder motivated by some fear of a settlement being in MBIA's favor.
Okay, so let me explain. I read all of the conference call transcripts for BAC. People on this thread have been questioning whether BAC's monoline reserves are adequate. Yet if they were to read BAC's transcripts, they'll say the same thing yet in different words. Moynihan has stated multiple times that the reserves might not be enough -- he says worst case another $5 billion. To me, that means that if he gets dragged into court and loses, then he'll be on the hook for another $5billion. However based on the terms of settlements in the past (such as AGO), perhaps the reserves are adequate.
And yeah, BAC's not in the least way threated by paying MBIA in full right now. I think the stock would actually go up out of relief that it's not actually going into court.
You guys are attacking my statements by dismissing me out of hand as being concentrated in BAC.
Out of fairness, have I ever in this thread questioned the author's motivation? We all know he just sold his MBI after a big drop and is probably spitting blood and hopping mad.
But it's pointless to dismiss the person for assumed motivations. It's more civil to just hear the person out because we can still have a rational discussion if it doesn't resort to "IGNORE THIS POSTER ERICMSFT AS HE IS A BIASED XYZ (or whatever we can call him to dismiss him out of hand and refuse to listen to what he has to say)"
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
And it is plain obvious that you do have some axe to grind with Jay Brown. Let's keep that as well as moral issues aside - both MBIA and BAC have their share in letting this financial crisis happen in the first place and both like(d) to walk away from as many of their obligations as possible.
Yes, I do have "some" axe to grind with Jay Brown. Read the latest letter where he claims that BAC is threatening his MBIA Insurance Corp policyholders, and further read the section where he claims that Countrywide/BAC is responsible for the financial crisis.
He doesn't say, "Granted, we're trying to wall off the parent company from the subsidiary". Or, "sure, we are still trying to wall off the assets of National".
Further, he doesn't say: "True, we had our role in the crisis too by willingly wrapping these things even though it was common knowledge that anyone with a pulse could get a loan from Countrywide".
I don't like how he wants to lay all of the blame on somebody else and bear none of the cost himself.
Yes, legally he can do that if the contract says he can. Morally, it's shameful.
I would like the man if he could accept his fair share of blame here.
When you point your finger, Jay Brown, there are three fingers pointing back at you. Go ahead, point your finger at the wall and now look at your hand -- count the three fingers pointing at you.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Tom's response:
Do you understand the meaning of the adjective "speculative," as applied to investments? Or "binary," as applied to outcomes?
He's totally rude. He chases every dissenter away through these condescending ad hominems. That leaves you with a discussion that isn't open and honest -- it becomes just the people that Tom doesn't piss off.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Maybe you should read all of the comments -- you'll notice that this was never a discussion. It's a slandering platform, and whenever you try to correct the inaccuracies you are dismissed as a secret agent hired by BAC. It's not just me, Tom accuses everyone of being a hired gun.
Can Jerry Springer really be to blame if the discussion isn't civil. He runs the show, he is in control of decorum. Set an example so that it can be civil. Don't attack any and all comers with a dissenting viewpoint.
He is downright nasty to anyone who isn't a yes man. Count the ad hominem attacks.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Boy, I hope I don't have to explain that any further.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
I've got to say Tom, if you don't want to attract dissent you should clean up your rhetoric.
You come across as biased as it gets.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Without such a countering move, the threat of MBIA taking Countrywide to court and fighting through the appeals becomes relatively much more hollow. The threat only holds water if it's actually a better outcome for MBIA (which it might not be if the common doesn't survive without serious wounding).
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
You pat yourself on the back claiming it is "clearly stated", is it really?
Let me state again, GIVEN THIS LATEST MOVE BY BAC, what is their negotiating position?
Prior to this move, their negotiating position appeared to improve -- ringfence the parent company from MBIA Insurance Corp. This would it seem allow them to pursue the case against Countrywide without harming the value of the common stock.
BAC has now made it much more expensive to carry it out. They would have to incur more than $100m of additional debt issuance at the parent and at higher interest rates. Guessing, maybe 8%. That's what I presume it would cost to call in those bonds that BAC is offering to buy.
So pursuing Countrywide in court is suddenly not quite as attractive as it was prior to BAC's latest move.
Now it's somewhat like mutual destruction. BAC likely won't gain from court, but certainly MBIA will now gain less than they thought they were going to gain.
So if they think they'll have the same legal outcome, yet they'll possibly suffer a lot of dilution to MBI common on the way, are they still willing to take this all the way through the appeals process with Countrywide.
Thus, what is the negotiating position of MBI now? What are they most likely to do in light of this?
It's certainly not as black and white anymore for them as it was the day before BAC moved to block.
It makes a settlement somewhat more attractive, if not a lot more attractive to MBI.
It might now be in the best interst of BOTH parties, not just one.
It's not merely an academic point. I figure if somebody here has a good idea of what moves MBI can now make to pursue the case without destroying the common, perhaps they can pipe up.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
Your disclosure of being long MBI, AGO is posted at the top and that's where I read it.
You are touchy when there is a dissenting opinion. You need a thicker skin if you are going to write scathing biased editorials -- you can't paint everyone who disagrees with your opinion as a secret agent out to get you.
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]
" I'm waiting for better risk/reward profile before I redeploy my funds into MBI.
"
What does that mean in light of his disclosure that he is long MBI?
Typo? Did he mean to write RDN?
MBIA's Battle With Bank Of America Intensifies [View article]