Remember no one "fails" a stress test. You just fail to avoid needing massive cash injections. So, when the Wall Street Journal announces that Citi is going to need $10 billion, "as the government continues negotiations with banks over the results of its so-called stress tests," that is absolutely not in any way a "failure." And you shouldn't read anything into the fact that the results of the "stress tests" are negotiable. Nothing at all.
And you conspiracy theorists should see absolutely nothing at all wrong with the fact that clicking on the link on the front page of the Wall Street Journal gets you a "page not available" error.
Posted by Investorcluzo , May 02, 2009 9:54AM
is this the poster child/sacrificial lamb to "prove" the stress test was "stressful". seems to me that a 4% TCE is going to be quite a tall order for c, bac, and wfc - despite having 2 years to get there. given that they have moved back the announcement of results, I would guess that there will be a few more "leaks" of the fails. but I'm still not convinced that this test is all that rigorous...
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:03AM
What's wrong DB? The C shorts are about to get obliterated!
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:03AM
What's wrong DB? The C shorts are about to get obliterated!
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:03AM
What's wrong DB? The C shorts are about to get obliterated!
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:17AM
I am the CEO of one of the top 19 American banks. What is solvency?
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:20AM
I am the CEO of a hedge fund. What is a bank?
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:37AM
"Alex- I'll take "What will Public Opinion let me Give Them...for $10B please"- Tim G.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 10:54AM
Back up now:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124118983425877399.html
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 11:54AM
Were the stress tests the same for every bank? There have been guests in the media saying that different banks had different stress tests. They claimed, if you got a harder stress tests it was because you were designated to fail. When you see this once you ignore it but when you see it on different networks, said by different guests and on different blog posts, it makes you wonder.
Posted by NotNasser , May 02, 2009 11:59AM
"There have been guests in the media saying that different banks had different stress tests."
What is a "guest in the media"? You mean a guest on a talk show? Or an unattribured quote in a newspaper story?
Quote starts with "q," BTW. Guest starts with "g." They look a lot alike, but bend in opposite directions. But we live in a free country where letters can engage in opposite marriage.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 12:26PM
"Lauria: Let me tell you it’s no fun standing on this side of the fence opposing the President of the United States. In fact, let me just say, people have asked me who I represent. That’s a moving target. I can tell you for sure that I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday. One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House Press Corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence."
http://tinyurl.com/cvkexa
http://tinyurl.com/d9r9xt
http://tinyurl.com/dcpje4
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 12:32PM
Maybe all the CEO's and CFO's ought to get together and see if they all had the same stress test. This would eliminate the "unattributed sources in the papers" and the cable guests who intimate this and keep moving on without being challenged by their interviewers.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 12:44PM
http://tinyurl.com/csn5d6
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 1:16PM
What's a mere 10 Billion among cronies?
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 1:22PM
Please remove post #13.
He is from Cincinnati and therefore anything he has to say is irrelevant.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 1:27PM
The video starts out with dribble about why fox wasn't called on at the presser, however, if you continue listening there is a lot of discussion about the subject at hand.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 2:36PM
http://tinyurl.com/cmm9g6
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 4:00PM
Hmmm taking over car companies, firing ceos, bitching out shareholder for not losing money, and now they are filtering the press...
I dont think he wants to be socialist I think Obama wants to be King.
The funny thing is he ran on transparency.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 4:49PM
@16 Why wasnt fox called on? Well thats quite clear its too right wing. Its not fair and balanced like BET or that question on what Obama finds most enchanting about his position as POTUS.
Important stuff like how Obama's children are handling the awful economy wouldnt get heard by the world if we didnt have those kinds of tough hardball quetsions.
Fox would ask extranious questions like how you call for spend cutting by every area of govt and then spend $500,000 on photo ops for an airplane! Fox may want to know how Obama is looking out for the american worker while allowing unions to do open voting...I can keep going but frankly Fox should have its own press conference.
What a pile of shit.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 8:25PM
I agree with 19. Fox is a pile of shit.
Posted by guest , May 02, 2009 11:21PM
The entire media with the exception of the blogosphere can be considered "a pile of shit". That is the problem.
Posted by Finnegan , May 03, 2009 11:29AM
@18
And how does taking a minority stake in a car company that taxpayers are bailing out represent "taking over"? What's the alternative?
Either the government can do something, or nothing, (and will be damned either way)and there is always great merit to the government doing nothing and letting things fall into the proper toilet.
But once it becomes necessary to take action, and the government is acting on behalf of taxpayers, then the hand will be a little heavy, and there will be requirements.
But let's cut the hyperbole and stop acting like variations on these things have not happened before, or are not happening elsewhere in the world. It's called trying to fix the problem.
Posted by guest , May 03, 2009 12:10PM
"Trying to fix the problem" by creating more problems. Not working within the frame work of the Constitution and the Rule of Law." Promising transparency and then giving less transparency than the previous administration if that is even possible. Not communicating with the people and trusting that they will do what is asked of them. Priceless.
Posted by guest , May 03, 2009 1:23PM
Blah blah blah.
Posted by guest , May 03, 2009 1:38PM
Hahahhahahahhah #24, know how you feel.
Posted by guest , May 03, 2009 8:25PM
They don't have a good bathroom to do coke in.
Posted by guest , May 04, 2009 4:43PM
All the links on WSJ were broken over the weekend for a few hours.
Maybe Madoff stole them.