FAZ making new 12 month lows below $16 (current 15.83 - 1.03).
all you need is for the ChiComs to say "no soup for you" OR the govenment to get seroius with these financial crooks and it will be back above $20 faster than you can say Henry (Pat) Paulson or B S Bernanke
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
FAZ making new 12 month lows below $16 (current 15.83 - 1.03).
all you need is for the ChiComs to say "no soup for you" OR the govenment to get seroius with these financial crooks and it will be back above $20 faster than you can say Henry (Pat) Paulson or B S Bernanke
I can't believe you guys "still" are buying faz ??/#$??
The banking sector just reported "blowout" earnings, what the hell are you looking at ??/#$??
Fidelity, which is know for it's excellent research department has just given the banking sector 2 thumbs up as a excellent sector to invest this year.
THE PRICE TO EARNINGS RATIO OF THE S&P 500 CONTINUE'S TO DROP, INDICATING EARNINGS ARE RISING FASTER THAN THE OVERALL MARKET !!!!
Things that are present in up markets throughout history are present right here and now in this market, what are you looking at ??
Yea, we're going up from here !!!!!!
The market has gone up throughout history with unemployment above todays level, oh yea it's true, and another reason "YOU MUST DO YOUR HOMEWORK" !!!
0
I can't believe you guys "still" are buying faz ??/#$??
The banking sector just reported "blowout" earnings, what the hell are you looking at ??/#$??
Fidelity, which is know for it's excellent research department has just given the banking sector 2 thumbs up as a excellent sector to invest this year.
THE PRICE TO EARNINGS RATIO OF THE S&P 500 CONTINUE'S TO DROP, INDICATING EARNINGS ARE RISING FASTER THAN THE OVERALL MARKET !!!!
Things that are present in up markets throughout history are present right here and now in this market, what are you looking at ??
Yea, we're going up from here !!!!!!
The market has gone up throughout history with unemployment above todays level, oh yea it's true, and another reason "YOU MUST DO YOUR HOMEWORK" !!!
Check out the market caps for these banks, dont focus on PPS alone.
Most of these banks are trading at higher multiples than they were prior to the crash.
BAC was floating between 40 and 50 per share for 4 years, now look at the share count for the last three years-
link
They have preferred shares which are paying out a high dividend to the tune of half the common count. Long term debt up 50% from three years ago, cash and investments are in bad shape, liabilities are way up.
If you factor in the warrants sold recently, the share count has almost doubled-
link
So does BAC or other banks deserve 2008 valuation based on their current earnings?
Goldman is near the upper range of their 5 year trading history, they sold shares and have increased their float by about 20%.
Banks are holding their balance sheets together with cheap money and their interest expense on those liabilities and borrowed investments are artificially low, that wont last forever.
I think banks are fairly valued right here based on a FULL recovery, they are priced at 3 year horizons right now with zero issues or possibility for a double dip.
0
theclaw,
Check out the market caps for these banks, dont focus on PPS alone.
Most of these banks are trading at higher multiples than they were prior to the crash.
BAC was floating between 40 and 50 per share for 4 years, now look at the share count for the last three years-
link
They have preferred shares which are paying out a high dividend to the tune of half the common count. Long term debt up 50% from three years ago, cash and investments are in bad shape, liabilities are way up.
If you factor in the warrants sold recently, the share count has almost doubled-
link
So does BAC or other banks deserve 2008 valuation based on their current earnings?
Goldman is near the upper range of their 5 year trading history, they sold shares and have increased their float by about 20%.
Banks are holding their balance sheets together with cheap money and their interest expense on those liabilities and borrowed investments are artificially low, that wont last forever.
I think banks are fairly valued right here based on a FULL recovery, they are priced at 3 year horizons right now with zero issues or possibility for a double dip.
my problem is although I agree, i think the bank stocks are as manipulated as you can get and not have everyone break down in laughter..which almost happened to a few aghast panel members trying to swallow mirth as Vikram Pandit was assuring everyone they did not benefit in borrowing costs from the perception they were completely back stopped by the US Treasury.He repeatedly maintained that nonsense......
in sum, i do not think you can apply normal balance sheet standards and stock appraisal techniques to these entities.They are as full of shit as a christmas turkey...
0
my problem is although I agree, i think the bank stocks are as manipulated as you can get and not have everyone break down in laughter..which almost happened to a few aghast panel members trying to swallow mirth as Vikram Pandit was assuring everyone they did not benefit in borrowing costs from the perception they were completely back stopped by the US Treasury.He repeatedly maintained that nonsense......
in sum, i do not think you can apply normal balance sheet standards and stock appraisal techniques to these entities.They are as full of shit as a christmas turkey...
I think of the lot of them as I do Social Security, as simply a government sponsored Ponzi scheme, or US Enron...etc etc....the fraud is on such an enormous scale, I can't credit any numbers coming from the recipients.
"Every election is sort of advanced auction of stolen goods." H.L. Mencken
0
PS
I think of the lot of them as I do Social Security, as simply a government sponsored Ponzi scheme, or US Enron...etc etc....the fraud is on such an enormous scale, I can't credit any numbers coming from the recipients.
"Every election is sort of advanced auction of stolen goods." H.L. Mencken
Mencken was a real hoot at times, but I think he borrowed and reconfigured an early Nietzsche quote for that one, and oddly for Mencken made it a bit less harsh:
everything the state says is a lie and everything it gets is stolen
0
Mencken was a real hoot at times, but I think he borrowed and reconfigured an early Nietzsche quote for that one, and oddly for Mencken made it a bit less harsh:
everything the state says is a lie and everything it gets is stolen
PS why I cannot contemplate acting on the basis of bank reporting, etc ....
On several over occasions in the past I have written about the (bankrupt) FDIC taking over insolvent banks on Friday afternoon's. This past Friday was no different. In addition to the so-called great job (loss) data, three more banks were taken over by the (bankrupt) FDIC. The reason why I bring this up is because, like before, these banks LIED to its regulators, depositors, and investors...with the approval of Congress. Remember, in order to kick the can down the road, Congress forced FASB to change accounting from real (mark-to-market) to make-it-up-as-you-go-along accounting.
As I have written before, these banks are marking UP their real estate portfolios to roughly no loss. In the make believe world of make-it-up-as-you-go-along accounting, banking execs are legally allowed to mark the portfolio to what they believe the homes will be worth in the future and if they don't go broke in the interim, then the swindle will have worked.
I am simply going to take last night's bank closures, which numbered four. One of them has no "deposit insurance fund" estimated loss available, because they didn't find someone to take the assets - they're just mailing checks. But the other three do.
* Waterford Bank, Germantown MD: $155.6 million in assets, $156.4 in insured deposits. They were "underwater" by $800,000, right? Wrong: Estimated loss, $51 million. That is, the assets of $155.6 million were overvalued by approximately 30% at the time of seizure.
* Bank of Illinois, Normal IL: $211.7 million in assets, $198.5 million in deposits. They were "underwater" by $13.2 million (which is why they were seized), right? Wrong: Estimated loss $53.7 million. That is, the the assets of $211.7 million were overvalued by more than 25% at the time of seizure.
* Sun American Bank, Boca Raton FL: $535.7 million in assets (so they claimed anyway), $443.5 million in total deposits. Heh, why did you seize them - they have more assets than liabilities? Oh wait: Estimated loss: $103.8 million, so the actual assets are worth $443.5 - $103.8, or $339.7 million. That is, the assets of $535.7 million were overvalued by a whopping 37% at the time of seizure.
This isn't new, by the way. In August of 2009 I went through Colonial Bank's failure based on BB&T's presentation to its shareholders on the "merger" - and gift it was given by the FDIC. It too showed that Colonial had been carrying assets on their books at a ridiculous 37% above where BB&T ultimately marked them as a whole.
Folks, your bank is being assessed deposit insurance premiums to pay for these losses. You are paying these losses through increased fees and interest expense on your credit cards and all other manner of borrowing.
You are paying for outrageous, pernicious and endemic balance sheet fraud. There is no conspiracy. It is right under your nose. One of these three banks, based on their balance sheet, wasn't even underwater - it was "to the good" by nearly $100 million dollars.
The balance sheet was a flat, bald-faced lie.
0
PS why I cannot contemplate acting on the basis of bank reporting, etc ....
On several over occasions in the past I have written about the (bankrupt) FDIC taking over insolvent banks on Friday afternoon's. This past Friday was no different. In addition to the so-called great job (loss) data, three more banks were taken over by the (bankrupt) FDIC. The reason why I bring this up is because, like before, these banks LIED to its regulators, depositors, and investors...with the approval of Congress. Remember, in order to kick the can down the road, Congress forced FASB to change accounting from real (mark-to-market) to make-it-up-as-you-go-along accounting.
As I have written before, these banks are marking UP their real estate portfolios to roughly no loss. In the make believe world of make-it-up-as-you-go-along accounting, banking execs are legally allowed to mark the portfolio to what they believe the homes will be worth in the future and if they don't go broke in the interim, then the swindle will have worked.
I am simply going to take last night's bank closures, which numbered four. One of them has no "deposit insurance fund" estimated loss available, because they didn't find someone to take the assets - they're just mailing checks. But the other three do.
* Waterford Bank, Germantown MD: $155.6 million in assets, $156.4 in insured deposits. They were "underwater" by $800,000, right? Wrong: Estimated loss, $51 million. That is, the assets of $155.6 million were overvalued by approximately 30% at the time of seizure.
* Bank of Illinois, Normal IL: $211.7 million in assets, $198.5 million in deposits. They were "underwater" by $13.2 million (which is why they were seized), right? Wrong: Estimated loss $53.7 million. That is, the the assets of $211.7 million were overvalued by more than 25% at the time of seizure.
* Sun American Bank, Boca Raton FL: $535.7 million in assets (so they claimed anyway), $443.5 million in total deposits. Heh, why did you seize them - they have more assets than liabilities? Oh wait: Estimated loss: $103.8 million, so the actual assets are worth $443.5 - $103.8, or $339.7 million. That is, the assets of $535.7 million were overvalued by a whopping 37% at the time of seizure.
This isn't new, by the way. In August of 2009 I went through Colonial Bank's failure based on BB&T's presentation to its shareholders on the "merger" - and gift it was given by the FDIC. It too showed that Colonial had been carrying assets on their books at a ridiculous 37% above where BB&T ultimately marked them as a whole.
Folks, your bank is being assessed deposit insurance premiums to pay for these losses. You are paying these losses through increased fees and interest expense on your credit cards and all other manner of borrowing.
You are paying for outrageous, pernicious and endemic balance sheet fraud. There is no conspiracy. It is right under your nose. One of these three banks, based on their balance sheet, wasn't even underwater - it was "to the good" by nearly $100 million dollars.
and more from the economic genius that is barney fwank....
Full Barney Frank letter:
Mr. Brian Moynihan Bank of America
Mr. Vikram Pandit Citigroup
Mr. James Dimon JP Morgan Chase
Mr. John Stumpf Wells Fargo
Dear Messrs. Moynihan, Pandit, Dimon and Stumpf:
The mortgage foreclosure crisis that began over two years ago, and which continues to be a prime contributor to our nation's current economic downturn, burdens millions of hard-working American families. Congress and the Obama Administration have worked hard to address foreclosures by enabling and encouraging loan modification s, but the private sector's response has fallen far short of the need. Many homeowners are eager to save their homes despite being "underwater," but find that lenders and servicers are unable or unwilling to make necessary modifications. These homeowners are increasingly deciding to walk away and thus foreclosures continue to mount, deepening the crisis.
To save homes on a large scale, we must move past temporary modifications in interest rates or terms and focus on permanent principal reductions that result in truly sustainable mortgages. There is no more important priority for me in our efforts to restore stability to our mortgage market.
Many investors in first-lien mortgages have indicated that they are willing to accept the fact of significant losses on those investments in order to move on and use their money for other purposes, rather than having it locked in underwater mortgages with a high and growing likelihood of foreclosure. With the interests of homeowners and investors aligned in this way, it should follow that large numbers of principal-reduction modifications could be made relatively quickly. That is not happening. According to investors, Administration officials, and other experts I have consulted, holders of second-lien mortgages are now a principal obstacle to many modifications. The problem of second-lien mortgages standing in the way of successful principal reduction modifications has reached a critical stage and requires immediate attention from your institutions.
Large numbers of these second liens have no real economic value - the first liens are well underwater, and the prospect for any real return on the seconds is negligible. Yet because accounting rules allow holders of these seconds to carry the loans at artificially high values, many refuse to acknowledge the losses and write down the loans, which would allow willing first lien holders to reduce principal and keep borrowers in their homes.
The four organizations you lead are major participants in the second-lien market. Failure to modify these debts has become a major and unnecessary obstacle to thousands of Americans being able to stay in their homes. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to take immediate steps to write down these second mortgages and allow principal reduction modifications of the underlying first liens to take place. If there are legal obstacles to your doing so, we will work with you to remove them.
I will be calling you within the week to discuss what your institutions plan to do to remove the second liens you own or control as impediments to principal reduction modifications.
0
and more from the economic genius that is barney fwank....
Full Barney Frank letter:
Mr. Brian Moynihan Bank of America
Mr. Vikram Pandit Citigroup
Mr. James Dimon JP Morgan Chase
Mr. John Stumpf Wells Fargo
Dear Messrs. Moynihan, Pandit, Dimon and Stumpf:
The mortgage foreclosure crisis that began over two years ago, and which continues to be a prime contributor to our nation's current economic downturn, burdens millions of hard-working American families. Congress and the Obama Administration have worked hard to address foreclosures by enabling and encouraging loan modification s, but the private sector's response has fallen far short of the need. Many homeowners are eager to save their homes despite being "underwater," but find that lenders and servicers are unable or unwilling to make necessary modifications. These homeowners are increasingly deciding to walk away and thus foreclosures continue to mount, deepening the crisis.
To save homes on a large scale, we must move past temporary modifications in interest rates or terms and focus on permanent principal reductions that result in truly sustainable mortgages. There is no more important priority for me in our efforts to restore stability to our mortgage market.
Many investors in first-lien mortgages have indicated that they are willing to accept the fact of significant losses on those investments in order to move on and use their money for other purposes, rather than having it locked in underwater mortgages with a high and growing likelihood of foreclosure. With the interests of homeowners and investors aligned in this way, it should follow that large numbers of principal-reduction modifications could be made relatively quickly. That is not happening. According to investors, Administration officials, and other experts I have consulted, holders of second-lien mortgages are now a principal obstacle to many modifications. The problem of second-lien mortgages standing in the way of successful principal reduction modifications has reached a critical stage and requires immediate attention from your institutions.
Large numbers of these second liens have no real economic value - the first liens are well underwater, and the prospect for any real return on the seconds is negligible. Yet because accounting rules allow holders of these seconds to carry the loans at artificially high values, many refuse to acknowledge the losses and write down the loans, which would allow willing first lien holders to reduce principal and keep borrowers in their homes.
The four organizations you lead are major participants in the second-lien market. Failure to modify these debts has become a major and unnecessary obstacle to thousands of Americans being able to stay in their homes. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to take immediate steps to write down these second mortgages and allow principal reduction modifications of the underlying first liens to take place. If there are legal obstacles to your doing so, we will work with you to remove them.
I will be calling you within the week to discuss what your institutions plan to do to remove the second liens you own or control as impediments to principal reduction modifications.
Unfortunately at the time they changed FASB rules in the near term (it wont be permanent for sure) the swift collapse of the mortgage market for securities made it illiquid and the spreads were a mile wide..old FASB rule would be to market the asset at the BID or the buyer ready to buy price..with an illiquid market that wasnt representive of fair value, rather it was a sellers market with no buyers in sight and the FASB rule of mark to market assumes a reasonable market, liquid and spreads normal for market conditions.
I think it is probably time to consider changing back, but I have to agree with the decision when they made it..these stupid moronic banks were getting margin calls every single day due to the knife falling markets and the irrational spreads on those assets.
0
Vermeer,
Unfortunately at the time they changed FASB rules in the near term (it wont be permanent for sure) the swift collapse of the mortgage market for securities made it illiquid and the spreads were a mile wide..old FASB rule would be to market the asset at the BID or the buyer ready to buy price..with an illiquid market that wasnt representive of fair value, rather it was a sellers market with no buyers in sight and the FASB rule of mark to market assumes a reasonable market, liquid and spreads normal for market conditions.
I think it is probably time to consider changing back, but I have to agree with the decision when they made it..these stupid moronic banks were getting margin calls every single day due to the knife falling markets and the irrational spreads on those assets.
with you as far as it goes, and understand the panic filled circumstances that initiated the changes...but at some point there will have to be a real admission of toxic waste of those "assets"
estimating things on the basis of what some entity "believes" the assets will be worth at some point in the future makes me queasy to say the least... and just makes me stay away from the sector, as i simply don't believe what they are reporting (or rather, have no way of really knowing). Wild times to be sure...unfortunately, i think they are going to get even wilder.
0
wall
with you as far as it goes, and understand the panic filled circumstances that initiated the changes...but at some point there will have to be a real admission of toxic waste of those "assets"
estimating things on the basis of what some entity "believes" the assets will be worth at some point in the future makes me queasy to say the least... and just makes me stay away from the sector, as i simply don't believe what they are reporting (or rather, have no way of really knowing). Wild times to be sure...unfortunately, i think they are going to get even wilder.
FAZ down below $15 wednesday march 10th with an interday and 12 month low of 14.78 (so far). C with an interday high over $4. IF they can get THAT dog to run, then it's death for the FAZ
0
FAZ down below $15 wednesday march 10th with an interday and 12 month low of 14.78 (so far). C with an interday high over $4. IF they can get THAT dog to run, then it's death for the FAZ
Lotta heavy hedgies taking big positions in C...makes sense to me, in that if the Fed is determined it needs that to be at price X, that is where it will eventually be.
Even Vikram can make money with that backing....0% money, sure no problem...how do you lose money with that????
0
Lotta heavy hedgies taking big positions in C...makes sense to me, in that if the Fed is determined it needs that to be at price X, that is where it will eventually be.
Even Vikram can make money with that backing....0% money, sure no problem...how do you lose money with that????
gotta wonder at the sanity of anyone who thought the Fed was going to raise interest rates..what a non story...amazing what passes for news on a slow news day
0
gotta wonder at the sanity of anyone who thought the Fed was going to raise interest rates..what a non story...amazing what passes for news on a slow news day
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.