1. That Congress plans to stick the following in the rescue bill:
a. "Salary cap for executives of $400k for any co that dumps their toxics in the rescue fund. Don't know yet for how long a period."
b. "Homeowners will able to tap their 401k and IRA's tax free to pay their mortgage."
2. Dick Fuld was seen spotting Charlie Gasparino at Gold's Gym. (Tipster, please. Those who track such things know that Gaspar vowed to never work out with DF again, after The Gorilla failed to call him back.)
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 4:38PM
Fine. Salary of $400k. Bonus of $12mm cash plus restricted stock and options. Deal.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 4:53PM
400k plus the first $10m in bonus can be donated to the DNC or RNC.
Posted by Anal_yst , Sep 23, 2008 4:55PM
they better hope client's cant withdraw their retirement plans, that'd seriously deplete assets under management like whoa, and uh, then what?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 4:56PM
Anyone have Gold's Gym Associate numbers?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 4:58PM
Why does Maria B look like such a haggard bitch nowardays?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 4:59PM
Why does Maria B look like such a haggard bitch nowadays?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:00PM
poop chute riots
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:07PM
Fine. Salary of $400k. Bonus of $12mm cash plus restricted stock and options. Deal.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:10PM
man, how does T-pain get his voice to sound like that?? Excelsior!
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:11PM
man, how does T-pain get his voice to sound like that? Excelsior!
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:12PM
I think 1(a) is actually going to be part of the law. Johnny Walnuts McCain is on a bender these days, railing about greed and corruption, and he WON'T STAND FOR THIS!
Now, get off my lawn, you lousy kids.
Posted by StupidEquityGuy , Sep 23, 2008 5:14PM
Harbinger Capital Partners Fund, run by Philip Falcone, has given up most of the 42 percent gain it posted in the first half of the year amid losses on energy and commodity stocks, according to two investors.
The hedge fund declined 12 percent this month, leaving it up about 2 percent for the year through Sept. 19, said the investors, who asked not to be identified because the information is private. Harbinger Capital Partners, based in New York, manages $26 billion across its funds.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=az_1X6EFGmKQ&refer=home
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:17PM
Hate to open up this Pandoras box (not that I am against box opening), but wouldn't a VAT on non-core products make sense right about now?
note: core is a gallon of milk, not a litre of grey goose.
[It certainly would make people spend more responsibility and 'evens' the playing field. It would make resposible spenders and taxpayers a little less irate and alleviate calls for for salary caps etc. Also it would be a politically palatable solution.]
-C
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:18PM
Change "salary cap" to "total annual compensation cap" and change "executive" to "any employee or agent". That ought to do it. No agreement = No bailout. No agreement = IRS investigator visits. No agreement = criminal investigator visits.
Hell, maybe they should get the investigator visits anyway.
The Guy from Delaware
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:19PM
Phil needs to call Mack and the 8 and tell them thank you for saving me from this fucking hell.
SPODE
Posted by Anal_yst , Sep 23, 2008 5:20PM
@ C
I challenge your assertion that a bottle of vodka isn't a core product. If you were to say "A 7x+ marked-up bottle of Goose at Tenjune", fine, that'd be one thing, just do not for one second try to keep me away from walking (stumbling) into the local liquor store and drowning away my sorrows and such.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:21PM
@13 - Grey Goose is most certainly core. You're going to foment another Whiskey Rebellion with that kind of talk.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:26PM
You have been fleeced on the way up, on the way down, and now at the bottom.
Let me ask you this: if mortage is the core of the crisis, why they do not sell it to me or you at DOUBLE the current trading price.
Read what they do not want you to know! Start at article below.
http://financialtraders.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-can-i-you-buy-back-my-your-mortgage.html
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:27PM
Genius@#13...
Do I understand you correctly?
A new Value-Added Tax (VAT) "would make responsible spenders and taxpayers a little less irate and alleviate calls for for salary caps etc."
New Tax = Less Irate? Where did you learn this idea? Please tell us.
The Guy from Delaware
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:31PM
@Anal_yst and 17
True, far be it from me to judge a vice vs. a vital.
How about core=milk bottle, non-core=bottle service.
As for whiskey and such:
“I should never have switched from Scotch to Martini’s”--Bogarts last words.
-C
Posted by Anal_yst , Sep 23, 2008 5:31PM
@ 18
Your post is retarded, are you serious? A good part of the reason why many of the assets describe are "valued" at only ~$0.20/dollar is because of 1) lots of leverage, and 2) mark-to-market accounting.
If you'd like to chop up the massively-complex structured credits into individual loans, well, good luck to you sir.
Your idea did have promise, I'll give you that, less a little thing we like to call reality. If it were that easy, everyone would be doing it, and then, voila! the mortgages wouldn't be worth 20 cents on the dollar anymore. Thats what we call arbitrage btw, write that down.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:32PM
How about a tax cut? that would unlock all those frozen assets faster than anything Congress could do.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:39PM
Eliminate CRA's
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:42PM
@22
I should have been a little clearer. The VAT tax would be nominally offset by tax a decrease in other taxes. Ideally a tax credit for home owners/buyers (benefiting home ownership thus increasing housing value).
@tgfd see above, and take more metamcuil, so seem awfully backed up most of the time.
-C
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:42PM
@21
ok i wrote it down now what?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:42PM
22- Good of you to join us here, Grover. Care to explain how a tax cut solves the problem of shitty, illiquid assets held at between 10 and 30 times leverage?
Posted by AJ , Sep 23, 2008 5:47PM
Every time I think that McCain is an idiot and maybe I should vote for Obama, I stumble across something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKCkeF6LXVc
Seriously, what the f? Is it really that bad if I just don't vote? They're both awful.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:51PM
Warren buying $5 B of GS prefs....
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 5:57PM
lots of laughs from #18! but be careful - the trollers from Yahoo Finance might actually believe what you write.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:00PM
And goldman to issue $2B of common stock.
So short selling ban not so much about short sellers. Really just giving financial companies 2 weeks to rasie as much capital as possible.
ps - so which day does the FDIC take over WM?
Posted by MostOffensive , Sep 23, 2008 6:03PM
@15 best comment of the day...
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:03PM
How much GS stock does Jim Cramer still have?
Here he is trying to convince the American people that Paulson's plan is about foreclosures. He is actually saying he is "the only one telling the truth". Oh, geez, is there no honor anymore?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:06PM
I thought the big problem right now is the potential implosion of the CDS market. If one bank fails, and another, and another, the CDS counterparties will fall like dominos and the entire financial system will crumble.
Who cares about subprime/mortgage assets? Those are passe.
Posted by diablo , Sep 23, 2008 6:09PM
I was going to write a joke about this bailout plan but after reading it again felt that the plan is the joke. And is on us.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:11PM
remember when JC wrote here and DB routinely scooped the MSM... those days appear to be long gone.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:11PM
@18 Loans are paid off all the time. Accelerating prepayments would ironically only exacerbate the problems under almost all cascading deal structures.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:16PM
@26...a reduction in marginal rates, or cap gains, will drive up the demand for dollar liquidity.Lotsa dollars are sitting in banks doing fuck all but spinning around.Such a cut unlocks assets and gives growth a nice bit of juice...like it always has whenever, and wherever, it is tried.Tax cuts are a beautiful thing, skippy.It would do wonders by driving gold down and mortgages up....but, you can always stick with what hasn't worked so far.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:34PM
Are drafts of the rescue plan posted anywhere? I'd like them to be a little more descriptive than saying things like "we'll buy assets at current internal marks".
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 6:35PM
Are drafts of the rescue plan posted anywhere? I'd like them to be a little more descriptive than saying things like "we'll buy assets at current internal marks".
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 8:29PM
The compensation thing looks like its happening. Barney Frank says people who would not participate in program due to salary cap are un-American.
WaMu...cue up "It's a Wonderful Life."
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 8:34PM
As a member of the Great Unwashed in Terms of Markets/Finance, I have some questions for you all. Also, promise I'm not a Yahoo! nut. I'm a lawyer who is deeply disappointed in MysTTTal and Lat.
Anyway......
If the purpose of the $700 billion is to allow for constant purchases of bad assets held by FIs at "hold to maturity prices," as opposed to actual/current market value, wouldn't that allow other FIs who are not sellers to mark up their assets to the now existing market (i.e. the bullshit inflated prices)?
If that is true, then what incentive is there for vigorous competition in the reverse auction process? If I can mark up my assets based on company X hosing the government by selling crappy MBS to them at 100 cents on the dollar, don't I win regardless of whether or not I lose the reverse auction process? Better yet, is there any incentive at all for the potential sellers in the reverse auction process to compete against each other if we all win by having the government overpay for as little as possible?
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 9:57PM
$400,000 total compensation cap.
Pwned.
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 10:29PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sWPYRxb26Q
Obama to Wall St: Bailout not a welfare program for Ceos.
Sorry tards but the money you will make now as a Investment Banking executive won't even be enough to pay for the gas on your private jet.
Posted by TechAnalyst , Sep 23, 2008 11:06PM
@41 - i'm not certain, but i think that in a reverse auction the buyer (i.e. the super siv) offers a price they are willing to pay and the banks then are able to tender whatever assets they wish to. so regardless of what the banks have them marked-to, the siv can offer whatever it feels is an appropriate price. that said...not knowing the mechanics of how the process will work or how punitive Treasury will want structure the transactions, i have no idea what types of prices will be paid.
also, under fas 157 (i think), an asset that has already been marked-down-to-market cannot be marked back up. the marked-down assets must sit on the balance sheet until disposal, at which time the bank can recognize a gain/loss on sale of assets. i think the treatment is different if the asset was classified as "available for sale" when initially written down (in which case it didn't hit the P&L but rather OCI).
i'm not certain about this howerver, i'm neither a bank analyst nor an accountant - just a simple buy side guy...
Posted by guest , Sep 23, 2008 11:15PM
Thanks Techanalyst....
I'm # 41...and a litigator. My comments were based on what I know, which is clearly more limited than what you know.
Posted by TechAnalyst , Sep 23, 2008 11:35PM
41 - i wasn't trying to be a smartass - merely wanted to help in others' understanding of the situation and dispell inaccuracies. there is a common misconception on the street that these assets can be marked back up if/when a market finally materializes for them. under 157 they cannot...unless of course the sec invalidates it or offers a reprieve for certain companies.
if you're interested in the topic take a look at the iasb's thoughts on fair value accounting. i think they issued a paper in late '06 on the topic. you'll note some "interesting" differences between ifrs and fas 157...
Posted by guest , Sep 24, 2008 12:04AM
@46....
41 and 45 here. Please don't think I was suggesting that you were being a smartass. I was deadly serious in pointing out that you know more than I do. I reread what I wrote and I can see why you thought there was snark there. No snark was intended.
I do appreciate the thoughts and suggestions about searching for more items to read.
That said, FAS157 would seem to suggest that only direct participants benefit, right?