Dec. 20 (Bloomberg) -- The risk of MBIA Inc. defaulting on its bonds rose after the company disclosed it had insured $8.1 billion of a complex security linked to repackaged subprime mortgages.
Credit-default swaps tied to Armonk, New York-based MBIA's bonds soared 115 basis points to 595 basis points, the widest on record, according to CMA Datavision in London. The contracts are used to speculate on the company's ability to repay its debt or hedge against the risk it doesn't.
God, grant me the capital to accept the things I cannot change; the reserves to change the things I can; and the Fed Auction when all that blows up. Amen.
If economics had been made half this interesting and humorous in college, I would have majored in it.
"The stigma that banks had previously assigned to borrowing from the Fed under conditions of duress appeared to have diminished, Joseph Brusuelas, chief United States economist at IdeaGlobal, wrote in a note."
God forbid they disclose their situation to shareholders.
this shows just how many banks are stressed out there in US mkts.
this also indicates just how much mistrust they each have to lending to each other at the FFR which turns out to be remarkably lower than the 4.65% TAF.
They're worried about stigmatizing banks? Hey, it's social promotion for the monied class. If it works well for schoolkids, it should work well for the people who have my money.
Some of the animals at the trough are more equal than others.
Anonymous borrowing at below market rates? Do they sell fur coats out of the back of a truck as their legitimate job? "Timmy, don't tell your classmates I work for the Fed, tell them something more respectable like I'm a drug dealer."
tries to combat that stigma by offering banks the opportunity to borrow directly from the central bank in an anonymous forum and at a lower-than-usual interest rate.
I'll bang the drum on this again - I keep looking for evidence that the anonymous aspect of the TAF as being any different from the one offered by the use of the discount window. Both are anonymous, both are susceptible to guesswork - people will look at which regional Fed had a "run on the bank" and guess at the institution - both are susceptible to bank inhouse examiner reporting.
I'd love to solve this puzzle - I keep hearing about the stigma to the discount window - but everywhere I look its only guesswork that stigmatizes you - like imagining what that hint of a dark splodge is on the butt of some low slung hip-hugging jeans wearing tart.
Banks don't show up at the window to avoid being indentified. But if "all" (i.e., 93) the banks show up at the auction, can't we deduce that they're all showing up at the window anyway?
Of course, there are more than 93 banks, but this suggests a high "probability of stigma" for banks in general.
Yahoo says MBIA's book value is only 5.4 billion. MBIA reveals it's insured 8.1 billion of the toxic of the toxic (market values as low as 15% of par, can't say what index is appropriate from the article) and their risk goes up only 115 basis points? Am I alone in reading this one revelation as "MBIA's probably bankrupt" even if they were above water before?
Yeah, it does seem kind of like methadone for the banks, doesn't it? We're going to cure you, but we don't want you to have to go through withdrawal, so we'll just get rid of that "penalty rate" thingy.
"Mathadone"? Substitute smack for the economics crowd? There's a better joke lurking in there, but I haven't had enough coffee to spot it.
Of course, there are more than 93 banks, but this suggests a high "probability of stigma" for banks in general.
The way I read the NYT piece, is that 93 banks placed bids. The total sum of the bids was 3x the amount offered. So some of the 93 banks bid too low, and did not succeed in getting funds (that apparently they wanted/needed). Somewhere out there, there are banks that still want some extra capital. Presumption here is that the 'hungriest' among them just got fed (today).
If someone had sufficient guesses about who the winners might have been, the 12/31 FDIC Call report might show something (but that is at least 2 weeks away, plus time for the banks to send in the numbers).
Presumption here is that the 'hungriest' among them just got fed (today).
I hope so. I fear that Bank Doe 52 might just have been scratching its nose, and bam! the hammer came down. I'd hate to go back to my BOD and explain that . . .
Banks have typically feared negative reactions from investors when borrowing directly from the Fed, which some interpret as a sign of weakness.
So what I'm wondering is, why aren't we believing the conventional wisdom? Are they trying to present "new economy" thinking, where just because it was true for the last 200 years, it's magically different because this time THEY are the ones doing it?
The really funny thing is, the people borrowing from the Fed are paying a HIGHER interest rate than if they had borrowed from... haha... another bank. Obviously the banks aren't viewing the other banks as good risks. Probably because they are assuming the other bank's financials are as bad as their own.
in a strange coincidence, the ad on the top of the page today tells me that it can help me with my "problem" with painkillers and/or heroin addiction in the anonymity of a doctor's office.
The really funny thing is, the people borrowing from the Fed are paying a HIGHER interest rate than if they had borrowed from... haha... another bank. Obviously the banks aren't viewing the other banks as good risks. Probably because they are assuming the other bank's financials are as bad as their own.
JSG |
JSG
no, the banks are borrowing from the Fed at a LOWER interest rate than they could get from other banks. the FFR doesn't apply anymore, its LIBOR that counts.
So, we're at this party with a punch bowl, jello shots, methadone and all the IBs have lamp-shades over their heads to protect their anonymity. The hosts are AA and the Witness Protection Program. Let's get at tomorrow early. I think the sound track includes Mama Told Me Not to Come (I vote for Randy Newman's version) and Warren Zevon's Carmelita. "Schrodinger's Assets" are sitting on the mantle piece, fading in and out leaving only the grin as a constant.
Is 93 alot? Well for every roach you see, you're supposed to assume that there are 10 more that you don't....
But do those 93 NEED the money? Well There's ar REASON that we want a stigma attached to the discount window. Otherwise it's "free* money?" why heck, I'll sign up.
when you arbitrage below-market rates some of it is free.
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
I would assume the same thing that happens to all those Inland Empire option-ARM holders - the lender takes control of the assets used as collateral for the loan.
What's that, you say? In both cases, those assets are (a) probably worth less than the value of the loan to begin with and (b) depreciating further by the day?
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
Yup, the fed would take the collateral - they have a haircut/overcollaterization built in too, in case the value of the collateral drops so on the surface its all ok.
In reality there will be HELL to pay. There will be a STIGMA alright - on the Fed ! for being such dopes as to dealing with a party that goes BK in 28 or so days - the outcry in Congress will be deafening.
From a biz perspective, if I am a bank and I can borrow at below market rates, anonymously, why wouldn't I? There seems to be no risk to the bank and it gets access to cheaper funds - whether that is a good idea is another story ...
Earning a penny at a time
Paying back a buck at a time
Accepting credit crunch as the pathway to prosperity;
Taking, as Goldman did, this subprime as it is, not as Merrill Lynch would have it;
Trusting that Paulson will make all things right
If I all surrender to his rescue plan;
That I may be reasonably happy in a mild recession
and supremely happy with a half point rate cut.
Forever in the leverage.
Amen.
What's stopping banks from using this below market loan to turn around and loan it out at a higher rate for a similar duration? Are they not willing to loan to anyone on a short-term basis?
"God, grant me the capital to accept the things I cannot change; the reserves to change the things I can; and the Fed Auction when all that blows up. Amen."
Can someone translate this in English and tell me what is it that she is trying to say . Thanks.
Now that Alcoholics Anonymous has been used in a post concerning banks and the credit crunch, Moody's is considering dropping the organization from AA to just A or BBB+.
Someone, anyone going to tell us how the Fed won't be able to push out money?
-Journeyman</i>
John Hussman will explain it for you and suggest what to look for in this week's slosh report. If the results of today's auction are the same as Monday's, then there has been a net reduction of last week's outstanding balance at the discount window/TAF, i.e., TAF gets good press at the same time as the Fed reduces exposure.
I'm guessing the Fed is fishing again to try to figure out where the "market rate" for money is right now. The last couple of times they did it there was a rate drop the next meeting.
Does tee me off a bit. Never let it run over on the way up. I'm guessing that the FFR is a ceiling and not a floor.
If you want what we have, and are willing to go to any lengths to get it, then you are ready to take certain steps. Here are the steps we took, which are recommended as a path to fiscal survivability:
Admitted we were nearly insolvent, and that our ledgers had become unmanageable.
Came to believe that a bagholder greater than ourselves could restore us to solvency.
Made a decision to turn our risk and our debt over to the care of foreign nationals.
Made a searching and fearless fiscal inventory of our assets.
Admitted to God, to our shareholders, and to the Wall Street Journal the relatively benign nature of our shortcomings.
Were entirely ready to have a bagholder remove our debt.
Humbly asked the knifecatcher to make us whole.
Made a list of all our Tier 3 assets, and became willing to offload them all.
Offloaded all such assets, except when to do so would jeopardize reinsurers or certain other stockholders.
Continued to take fiscal inventory, and when we were in the red, leaked it to the press only in dribs and drabs.
Sought through lobbying and kickbacks to improve our market position, asking only for regulation that would hinder our competitors, and the power to cut it off.
Having had a market awakening as a result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to the other equities firms, and to reinflate another asset bubble.
From a biz perspective, if I am a bank and I can borrow at below market rates, anonymously, why wouldn't I?
Because you may be anonymous when you make a bid, but if you are successful, then it may show up on your CALL report as funds borrowed. The folks that were bottom fishing (and bid low) may actually remain anonymous (unless FDIC decides they should be closed up). Interesting dichotomy here between the winners and the losers.
Great thread. And see, if you pull on it, the whole thing unravels.
"Thank you very much. We few will take the free, new cash, while all of you take the loss of purchasing power."
These elite money shufflers, while preaching about the benefits and rigors of free market capitalism for the rest of us on the one hand, are the greatest covert socialists of human history.
But everyone keeps telling me the punch bowl is still there at the party. Now I'm REALLY confused.
And a 'good morning' to you, too!
Nothing to see here...
MBIA Bond Risk Soars on $8.1 Billion Subprime CDO Disclosure
By Shannon D. Harrington and Christine Richard
Dec. 20 (Bloomberg) -- The risk of MBIA Inc. defaulting on its bonds rose after the company disclosed it had insured $8.1 billion of a complex security linked to repackaged subprime mortgages.
Credit-default swaps tied to Armonk, New York-based MBIA's bonds soared 115 basis points to 595 basis points, the widest on record, according to CMA Datavision in London. The contracts are used to speculate on the company's ability to repay its debt or hedge against the risk it doesn't.
[snip]
Hello, my name's Bear, and I'm a mort-aholic. I really don't have a problem, but my probation officer is making me come to these meetings.
Too bad there isn't a title track from "Everybody Else Is Doing It, So Why Can't We?"
I love the whole "the discount window has a stigma, so if we just call it something else it will be all good" idea.
It's a little goofy that a country with a negative savings rate has to keep on coming up with new ways to incentivize people to borrow.
We may, just may, be at the last gasp of the Stein observation "Things that can't go on forever, don't."
God, grant me the capital to accept the things I cannot change; the reserves to change the things I can; and the Fed Auction when all that blows up. Amen.
If economics had been made half this interesting and humorous in college, I would have majored in it.
Hello, my name is Bull and I have a problem with leverage...
Hello, Bull!
Iceman
Second that.
bacon dreamz master spell checker official stamp of approval
Amen.
Hello, my name is Mort Gage.
I used to be a broker, now I'm just broke.
Brother, can ya' spare $4.50 for a double skim caramel latte? I'm kinda' down on my luck...
I'm not sure whether the fact that this post cracks me up is more of an indicator of Tanta's great sense of humor or my lack of one.
An instant Tanta classic!
The TAFFY is like a confession at the rectory where the banks can fess up without being seen in the process.
Bless us Chairman Bernanke, for we have sinned!
But how will these guys identify each other at parties without blowing their cover? "Hey, are you a friend of Dr. Ben?"
"The stigma that banks had previously assigned to borrowing from the Fed under conditions of duress appeared to have diminished, Joseph Brusuelas, chief United States economist at IdeaGlobal, wrote in a note."
God forbid they disclose their situation to shareholders.
While combating inflation, liquidity and now stigmas, Bush has asked the Fed to combat insurgents in Iraq.
Tanta,
How does this auction work? Do they start at the "below-Fed-rate" and keep raising rate bids? And this will never go public, right?
Step two "came to believe that a power greater than myself could restore me to solvency"...
Hello my name is Sallie Mae and I have a problem with student loans. And I have a boss who swears in conference calls.
They're worried about stigmatizing banks? Hey, it's social promotion for the monied class. If it works well for schoolkids, it should work well for the people who have my money.
what a way to start the day, it's too early to be that funny. I am watching the opening of Apocalypse Now in my head....all those helicopters.
Some of the animals at the trough are more equal than others.
Anonymous borrowing at below market rates? Do they sell fur coats out of the back of a truck as their legitimate job? "Timmy, don't tell your classmates I work for the Fed, tell them something more respectable like I'm a drug dealer."
An unusual analogy. Kinda like an AA group sponsering a kegger, with free jello shots.
Funny, but odd...
Cheers,
Welfare for me, but not for thee.
sterl this is for you:
FRB TAF: $20 Billion
ECB injection: $500 billion
SLM 'Skilling' moment: PRICELESS!
The banks are all subprime, now, too!
tries to combat that stigma by offering banks the opportunity to borrow directly from the central bank in an anonymous forum and at a lower-than-usual interest rate.
I'll bang the drum on this again - I keep looking for evidence that the anonymous aspect of the TAF as being any different from the one offered by the use of the discount window. Both are anonymous, both are susceptible to guesswork - people will look at which regional Fed had a "run on the bank" and guess at the institution - both are susceptible to bank inhouse examiner reporting.
I'd love to solve this puzzle - I keep hearing about the stigma to the discount window - but everywhere I look its only guesswork that stigmatizes you - like imagining what that hint of a dark splodge is on the butt of some low slung hip-hugging jeans wearing tart.
-K
I just took up smoking, Its helping.
Amen Ma'am
Steps 8-10 are gonna be a bitch.
For you non-12-steppers out there:
For a criminal organization, I imagine anonymity would really come in handy - not that there's anything criminal going on here...
I love the whole "the discount window has a stigma, so if we just call it something else it will be all good" idea.
Maybe they should run these auctions on eBay with "Bidder's ID Private". They could get a wider audience.
Banks don't show up at the window to avoid being indentified. But if "all" (i.e., 93) the banks show up at the auction, can't we deduce that they're all showing up at the window anyway?
Of course, there are more than 93 banks, but this suggests a high "probability of stigma" for banks in general.
Yahoo says MBIA's book value is only 5.4 billion. MBIA reveals it's insured 8.1 billion of the toxic of the toxic (market values as low as 15% of par, can't say what index is appropriate from the article) and their risk goes up only 115 basis points? Am I alone in reading this one revelation as "MBIA's probably bankrupt" even if they were above water before?
Is it public information what the interest rate is for these auctions? Could the rate be 0-.25%?
Huh you can do this anonymously...I think I am going to create my own bank...I can see it now..
Borkafatty's Savings and Loans
Schrödinger's Bank. Everything is fine as long as you don't peek inside.
Anonymous borrowing at below market rates?
Yeah, it does seem kind of like methadone for the banks, doesn't it? We're going to cure you, but we don't want you to have to go through withdrawal, so we'll just get rid of that "penalty rate" thingy.
"Mathadone"? Substitute smack for the economics crowd? There's a better joke lurking in there, but I haven't had enough coffee to spot it.
At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if the borrowers were anonymous to the Fed.
"Um, Ben? Hi. Seems like that anonymous auction idea had one little flaw...."
Of course, there are more than 93 banks, but this suggests a high "probability of stigma" for banks in general.
The way I read the NYT piece, is that 93 banks placed bids. The total sum of the bids was 3x the amount offered. So some of the 93 banks bid too low, and did not succeed in getting funds (that apparently they wanted/needed). Somewhere out there, there are banks that still want some extra capital. Presumption here is that the 'hungriest' among them just got fed (today).
If someone had sufficient guesses about who the winners might have been, the 12/31 FDIC Call report might show something (but that is at least 2 weeks away, plus time for the banks to send in the numbers).
RC,
Excellent! Props to you, I think we should now refer to all Level 3 assets as 'Schrodinger's Assets' (sorry, no umlauts)!
Presumption here is that the 'hungriest' among them just got fed (today).
I hope so. I fear that Bank Doe 52 might just have been scratching its nose, and bam! the hammer came down. I'd hate to go back to my BOD and explain that . . .
Banks have typically feared negative reactions from investors when borrowing directly from the Fed, which some interpret as a sign of weakness.
So what I'm wondering is, why aren't we believing the conventional wisdom? Are they trying to present "new economy" thinking, where just because it was true for the last 200 years, it's magically different because this time THEY are the ones doing it?
The really funny thing is, the people borrowing from the Fed are paying a HIGHER interest rate than if they had borrowed from... haha... another bank. Obviously the banks aren't viewing the other banks as good risks. Probably because they are assuming the other bank's financials are as bad as their own.
Is 93 cockroaches a lot?
Is 93 cockroaches a lot?
An infestation.
in a strange coincidence, the ad on the top of the page today tells me that it can help me with my "problem" with painkillers and/or heroin addiction in the anonymity of a doctor's office.
The really funny thing is, the people borrowing from the Fed are paying a HIGHER interest rate than if they had borrowed from... haha... another bank. Obviously the banks aren't viewing the other banks as good risks. Probably because they are assuming the other bank's financials are as bad as their own.
JSG |
JSG
no, the banks are borrowing from the Fed at a LOWER interest rate than they could get from other banks. the FFR doesn't apply anymore, its LIBOR that counts.
Amen.
Even with today's Fed auction the Fed still had a net expirations drain today:
The Slosh Report
TOMA at well below Fed rate of 4.25:
Temporary Open Market Operations - Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Effective Fed Funds rate well below 4.25:
Federal Funds Rate Data - Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Note slight drop in Libor.
And, finally, take a look at loss of ABCP this past week:
Commercial Paper Outstanding
A whole new connotation for "Friends of Bill" -nice
Someone, anyone going to tell us how the Fed won't be able to push out money?
The money will be sent to you in an unmarked brown bag...
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
So, we're at this party with a punch bowl, jello shots, methadone and all the IBs have lamp-shades over their heads to protect their anonymity. The hosts are AA and the Witness Protection Program. Let's get at tomorrow early. I think the sound track includes Mama Told Me Not to Come (I vote for Randy Newman's version) and Warren Zevon's Carmelita. "Schrodinger's Assets" are sitting on the mantle piece, fading in and out leaving only the grin as a constant.
Is 93 alot? Well for every roach you see, you're supposed to assume that there are 10 more that you don't....
But do those 93 NEED the money? Well There's ar REASON that we want a stigma attached to the discount window. Otherwise it's "free* money?" why heck, I'll sign up.
The money will be sent to you in an unmarked brown bag...
Make it large bills....they hide easier and take up less room in the mattress.
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
I would assume the same thing that happens to all those Inland Empire option-ARM holders - the lender takes control of the assets used as collateral for the loan.
What's that, you say? In both cases, those assets are (a) probably worth less than the value of the loan to begin with and (b) depreciating further by the day?
Err ... umm ... can we get back to you on this?
Just curious.
Of those 93 banks---how many of their officers received bonuses this year?
Inquiring minds want to know!!
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
People like FFDIC come in and steal your ruler.
Very nice word play, Tanta; thanks!
I thought honesty was always the best policy? Sunlight is the best disinfectant and all.
So much for transparency. To me this is a sign things are far worse than imagined.
Looks like the fed wants "contolled burn".
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
Yup, the fed would take the collateral - they have a haircut/overcollaterization built in too, in case the value of the collateral drops so on the surface its all ok.
In reality there will be HELL to pay. There will be a STIGMA alright - on the Fed ! for being such dopes as to dealing with a party that goes BK in 28 or so days - the outcry in Congress will be deafening.
-K
the outcry in Congress will be deafening.
Now thats funny!..Congress has been asleep at the wheel for the last 8 years..we have no congress just yes Men & Women..
Thank you sir may I have another.
So we are headed into bizarro world where HUD holds mortgages and the Fed owns houses?
Jeezus, how many on this board are friends of Bill? Explains everything.
If, say 30 of the 93 banks borrow, isn't there a good chance one will not repay?
Borkafatty, I think Congress was asleep 9 years ago as well.
"People like FFDIC come in and steal your ruler."
Can I keep my blue mechanical pencil?
"Mathadone"? Substitute smack for the economics crowd? There's a better joke lurking in there, but I haven't had enough coffee to spot it.
Methaloan?
Misean:
" Kinda like an AA group sponsoring a kegger "
Except for one thing: The banks involved can't maintain an AA credit rating.
Zing!
I used to be a CDOaholic now I'm a Fedaholic. - The Gang of 93
From a biz perspective, if I am a bank and I can borrow at below market rates, anonymously, why wouldn't I? There seems to be no risk to the bank and it gets access to cheaper funds - whether that is a good idea is another story ...
Earning a penny at a time
Paying back a buck at a time
Accepting credit crunch as the pathway to prosperity;
Taking, as Goldman did, this subprime as it is, not as Merrill Lynch would have it;
Trusting that Paulson will make all things right
If I all surrender to his rescue plan;
That I may be reasonably happy in a mild recession
and supremely happy with a half point rate cut.
Forever in the leverage.
Amen.
What's stopping banks from using this below market loan to turn around and loan it out at a higher rate for a similar duration? Are they not willing to loan to anyone on a short-term basis?
"God, grant me the capital to accept the things I cannot change; the reserves to change the things I can; and the Fed Auction when all that blows up. Amen."
Can someone translate this in English and tell me what is it that she is trying to say . Thanks.
Now that Alcoholics Anonymous has been used in a post concerning banks and the credit crunch, Moody's is considering dropping the organization from AA to just A or BBB+.
wawawa
She is playing with words in the serenity player, which is often recited at the end of each Alcoholic Anonymous meeting.
Stupid question: What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
lama | 12.20.07 - 10:46 am | #
FFDIC gets called back to work...
Can I keep my blue mechanical pencil?
lama | 12.20.07 - 11:22 am | #
What? A red Swingline isn't good enough?
The Fed is conducting its business like a bookie.
"93 banks, isn't that wonderful"
Jeff Beck, Wall Street
This is like distributing credit cards at a Debtors Anonymous meeting.
Free needles for the next liquidity injection. Prevent the transmission of SIV.
Someone, anyone going to tell us how the Fed won't be able to push out money?
-Journeyman</i>
John Hussman will explain it for you and suggest what to look for in this week's slosh report. If the results of today's auction are the same as Monday's, then there has been a net reduction of last week's outstanding balance at the discount window/TAF, i.e., TAF gets good press at the same time as the Fed reduces exposure.
Hussman Funds - Weekly Market Comment: A Little Acid Test for Fed "Liquidity" - December 17, 2007
bacon dreamz...mmmm....bacon:
Methaloan?
What? You were injecting liquidity and acquired SIV? You should have gone to the Methaloan Clinic and exchanged your used assets.
Effective Fed Funds rate well below 4.25
I'm guessing the Fed is fishing again to try to figure out where the "market rate" for money is right now. The last couple of times they did it there was a rate drop the next meeting.
Does tee me off a bit. Never let it run over on the way up. I'm guessing that the FFR is a ceiling and not a floor.
If you want what we have, and are willing to go to any lengths to get it, then you are ready to take certain steps. Here are the steps we took, which are recommended as a path to fiscal survivability:
What happens if a bank borrows from the Fed and cannot repay?
lama | 12.20.07 - 10:46 am | #
tha's easy
the fed loans em more money!
From a biz perspective, if I am a bank and I can borrow at below market rates, anonymously, why wouldn't I?
Because you may be anonymous when you make a bid, but if you are successful, then it may show up on your CALL report as funds borrowed. The folks that were bottom fishing (and bid low) may actually remain anonymous (unless FDIC decides they should be closed up). Interesting dichotomy here between the winners and the losers.
Perhaps instead,
God, grant me the capital to bear the losses I cannot conceal, the gall to hide the ones I can, and the wisdom to know the difference...
"Term Ordinarily 28-day; may differ reflecting holiday scheduling issues
Collateral Any collateral eligible to secure discount window loans. Reserve Banks standard valuation and
haircut procedures apply. "
Since these are one month loans, if banks dump their AAA junk (AAA CDO's), they will have one benefit:
They can close the year with the fed holding the dubious assets.
BUT:
Since these are only for a month, if they get downgraded, they have to repost collateral at the end of the month.
http://www.frbdiscountwindow.org/discountmargins.pdf
Therefore, wouldn't they have an incentive to put up things that may be hard to sell but are simply having liquidity problems.
Otherwise they only get through the end of the year and maybe a financial reporting benefit with respect to 12/31 financial statements.
Anything downgraded in the next month won't buy them much.
What am I missing here?
This was one of the greatest comment threads.
Great thread. And see, if you pull on it, the whole thing unravels.
"Thank you very much. We few will take the free, new cash, while all of you take the loss of purchasing power."
These elite money shufflers, while preaching about the benefits and rigors of free market capitalism for the rest of us on the one hand, are the greatest covert socialists of human history.
Fabulous scam. Phenomenal misdirection. Utterly brilliant.
Tanta, you kill me.
Best. Thread. Ever.
And Tanta, you should feel proud - you kicked it off!