http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Banks-Brace-for-Costly-Fights-nytimes-2170039967.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=7&asset=&ccode=
Yeah the INVESTORS know that the banks have committed FRAUD and embezzled money from them,
But somehow NO ONE in the Government can see any crime that has been committed.
WHY?
Because they are complicit in the banks actions up to their eyeballs.
They can't even smell the aroma of the crap anymore because their noses are to far buried up the banking industries ass, with the private banking entity called the FED, being the ultimate ass Master that they will continue to allow the country to be stimulated by.
Updated Even as investors put aside their worries on Friday about the effect of the foreclosure mess on bank stocks, new signs emerged of what is likely to be a long and expensive legal battle for the financial services industry over mortgages gone bad.
Citigroup disclosed in a regulatory filing that it was being sued by several investors, including Charles Schwab and the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago, in an effort to force Citigroup to buy back soured mortgages that the investors contended did not conform to proper underwriting standards.
Meanwhile, Wells Fargo said in a filing that it "cannot estimate the possible loss or range of loss" from these cases, and Bank of America said in a filing that investors holding $375 billion worth of mortgage securities had filed similar suits.
In a separate announcement, however, Bank of America said a lawsuit brought by
Showing posts with label Wells Fargo and Co.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wells Fargo and Co.. Show all posts
Monday, November 8, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
Bank Profits Depend on Debt-Writedown ‘Abomination’ in Forecast
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a3Eg4vzAbneA
First Repo 105, now Statement 159
What part of the banks are actually real?
The part that "WE" bailed out?
Statement 159
In the first quarter, the four biggest U.S. lenders -- Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup and Wells Fargo & Co. -- produced combined profit of $13.5 billion, the most since the second quarter of 2007. That figure probably fell by 28 percent in the second quarter, based on a Bloomberg survey of analysts’ estimates. The banks are scheduled to announce results over the next two weeks, led by JPMorgan on July 15.
The second-quarter results may include gains taken under a U.S. accounting rule known as Statement 159, adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board in 2007, which allows banks to book profits when the value of their bonds falls from par. The rule expanded the daily marking of banks’ trading assets to their liabilities, under the theory that a profit would be realized if the debt were bought back at a discount.
Accounting ‘Abomination’
In practice, it’s an accounting “abomination” because fluctuations in the value of the debt don’t change the amount the banks owe, said Chris Kotowski, an analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.
“Just because Morgan’s credit spreads widened out this quarter doesn’t mean that their ultimate interest and principal payments changed one iota,” Kotowski said. “The market will back it out, both on the upside and the downside.”
First Repo 105, now Statement 159
What part of the banks are actually real?
The part that "WE" bailed out?
Statement 159
In the first quarter, the four biggest U.S. lenders -- Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup and Wells Fargo & Co. -- produced combined profit of $13.5 billion, the most since the second quarter of 2007. That figure probably fell by 28 percent in the second quarter, based on a Bloomberg survey of analysts’ estimates. The banks are scheduled to announce results over the next two weeks, led by JPMorgan on July 15.
The second-quarter results may include gains taken under a U.S. accounting rule known as Statement 159, adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board in 2007, which allows banks to book profits when the value of their bonds falls from par. The rule expanded the daily marking of banks’ trading assets to their liabilities, under the theory that a profit would be realized if the debt were bought back at a discount.
Accounting ‘Abomination’
In practice, it’s an accounting “abomination” because fluctuations in the value of the debt don’t change the amount the banks owe, said Chris Kotowski, an analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.
“Just because Morgan’s credit spreads widened out this quarter doesn’t mean that their ultimate interest and principal payments changed one iota,” Kotowski said. “The market will back it out, both on the upside and the downside.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)