weekender

Mostly by accident because you are completely clueless about finance, but you have a point. College loan debt securities exist and are considered by most as pretty speculative right now. Bubble talk is starting to be said about them. They will not bring down a major bank like the mortgage securities because they are not as common or as widely held. For those who care or know the difference, they are Asset Backed Securities and private. Not gov't backed securities as they once were. Most likely because they preferred to be less regulated. Which adds to their risk. So my point is they exist and are probably in trouble but will not bring down a major bank. So unless your long them, no need to worry much. just my 2cents and worth about that. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Here is the article saying what I just said: It includes no longer having to report to SEC So you allegation is wrong. Here you go. It could mean something to some people. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/100-banks-end-reporting-to-sec-under-new-law/2013/01/30/bf15226e-6b00-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html you do not understand the article you are quoting. and that does not disprove my comment. they no longer have to file their financials with the SEC because its expensive and serves no benefit. they are still regulated by the gov't in reference to running their business. the financials are disclosed for shareholders or potential shareholders. My point stands that it means nothing to me. the banks are regulated by the gov't and the SEC regulates securities. the fact they no longer have to go through the hassle of filing with SEC is of no consequence to me. they still offer them to anyone who cares to ask. my bank is small and private. we get request for our financials every day. its very normal and common. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

You have obviously never spent much time in Texas. Although we don't have any 10k mountains, we have some 7k mountains and the whole state is far from flat. It is an exceptionally diverse state in terms of people and geography. I've been fortunate enough to travel alot outside the States in my life. I always describe myself as American when asked. people from Texas when asked, always reply they are Texan. i have never met people who have so much pride in where they live. every Texan in my business seems like a representative for the Texas tourist board. There must be something to that. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. " it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly. I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

funny, most of my friends consider this blogger to be a bit out there. a bit on the fringe of reality. Definitely fun to read but he has a tendency to make wild assumptions to make his points. it part of my lunchtime reading along with TMZ for a reference of how serious i take him. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Cruiser: I joined the army 'cause my father and my brother were in the army. I thought I'd better join before I got drafted. Sergeant Hulka: Son, there ain't no draft no more. Cruiser: There was one? "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Nailed it, right there. And if, for some reason, the standards are changed, they'd damn well better be changed for both men and women. And those women who are noticeably impacted by menstruation (i.e. who don't function well when they're on their period?). Yeah, that makes you less qualified for infantry. Wendy P. I was in the Army Infantry. i was a 5'7'' 160lb Citadel grad. I was a very fit young man and it was tough. i admit i struggled at times with the loads. I doubt few women could meet the same standards. my fear is they will lower them for politics. if they do that, i dont want women in combat. i would have no problem serving with a women who met the same standards as me, though. none. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

i understand its relative, that is why i asked him for clarity. IMO it is rare. there are billions and billions of transaction a day in this country. I would be willing to bet very few are part of a scheme involving competing sellers or buyers. also, IMO, not because of the law but because of human nature. competitors do not normally cooperate with each other. its not natural "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

you mentioned it happens with some regularity. how often do you believe businesses get together to fix prices? i would say quite rarely. its hard enough to get your own employees to agree on things, i could not imagine the difficulty of calling my competition and trying to get them to agree to fix prices. purposely setting prices on select items to drive your competition out of business i can agree probably happens with some regularity. two business owners or managers working together just doesnt seem realistic to me. Based on my experience anyway. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Not Indonesian? Isn't it lovely when posters reveal themselves like this? i know i feel vindicated. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Still, $90 for a canopy is not bad. Best post ever! "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

You've not achieved diddly. You answered junk was not rated AAA when it was, which is unbelievable. I like those terms: "Written Down" What does that mean?: writing down the debt to a lesser value than what it was before the write down. More financial wizardry. OK today the debts a billion. Tomorrow lets make it 500 million. That should do it. OH, the idea of of buying and selling debt is one of our problems the reason the Araba way of finance is much better. And the reason Arab banks didn't fail. Every piece of paper is tied to a tangable asset where as Wall Streets way every piece or paper is tied to another piece of paper that you might not be sure any value. Gold is no longer a standard, some guy's paper is the standard. ON THIS END NOTE, and since I'm a really good guy who doesn't have to continually state as you do, that I'm a sane person, I'm going to give you something. It should cap off exactly your world. --------------------------------------------------------- Genuine Authorized Certificate ONE BILLION BONDS Par value. $1.00 each Made payable to Weekender for being such a sane informative person, and very engaging with all his banking expertise. Signed by issuer: OHCHUTE ___________________________________________ Mr. Sanity, Just print it out along with all your words as all will grow in value over time. BTW its insured, and you'll have no problem selling it to one of your banking buddies. Just let me know if you want me to send over the BOND INSURANCE COVERAGE document. OH and BTW, the Bonds are rated AAA. IF you need the rating certificate, let me know. I have that one here too I can send you which will help you sell my generous gift for a profit. And OH btw way, Steel Workers Union is ripe to be sold bonds. Give them a call. Hank over there will buy the billion from you for 1.2b so hey time to party. You're a funny banker. Have a great day. you have done an excellent job of exposing my financial ignorance and insanity. this last post doesnt at all make you look slightly off or ignorant of general accounting principles. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

>"What did the banks do with that or in their fantasy world of imginary concepts? Did they just push the ERASE button and recaluculate their balance sheets to get rid of the debt as we've not heard about toxic debt for a long time now and I suspect your financial buddies are happy the public has forgotten THOSE PAPERS, what ever you might call them now THAT THOSE PAPERS HAVE DISAPPEARED." I only responded to you earlier so i could expose that you do not know what your talking about. That was my goal and it has been achieved. at this point im just picking on you so we can end this discussion. For anyone still reading this thread and curious about the truth. the debt still exist and is slowly being sold off or written down. The banks report their losses on this debt in charges when they file their 10Q and K's. It has not gone anywhere except down, reported and reflected on their balance sheets. All the major banks are public, anyone reading this can go to the net and pull down their financials and see the debt listed. no conspiracies or hidden numbers. Just people who do not know what they are talking about. (Or am i in on it???, couldnt help myself) lastly, to be very clear. I am well aware of what caused the last crisis. I lived it first hand while employed at an IB. I dont deny the banks, as well as others, made huge mistakes that cost billions and hurt many. I will never believe, because im sane, that there was a conspiracy or scam perpetrated by bunch of evil doers. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

It is curious your attention to detail, and words used to talk about the same item. OK since you disagree with the use of "front end paper" I'll retract the use of front-end-paper and stick with Mortgages instead. Although the question for you is still tabled, I believe a discussion about financial terms is necessary. I find it particualar interesting that the FINANCIAL INDUSTRY is the only INDUSTRY that can label its own papers. They can call their papers JUNK and that's OK. But somehow according to you if I use FRONT END PAPER, as a means to describe mortgages, FRONT END PAPER that CountryWIDE was printing at such a fast rate their printing pressess melted, to aid the mortgage back security guys efforts, that's not OK. In using the term FRONT END PAPER, I was being polite in my description of labeling papers used to start the scam. I was considering using: DOG CRAP, which is what those papers amounted to in discussing your glorious papers. Now answer the question or we shall surely see what is dog crap and what is a plate of your finest food. As I'm not dishing any canine fare. you seem upset that i refuse to discuss your imaginary financial instruments. Its customary in a conversation to use common terms and not create your own. I am sorry i do not understand your comments about labeling paper. it could be because i do not understand finance or because your post is nonsense. either way i will try to respond. in the fixed income industry the debt is labeled according to its perceived risk. Junk is a generic term for low rated instruments. C rated and below is normally referred to as junk. i cannot say they are the only industry to label their paper because i do not understand what you mean by that. it makes no sense. i dont think you understand what the term "label" even means. the bottom line is no, i will not subscribe to your theory that their was a grand scheme for admen to push front end paper they labeled AAA but knew was junk and it collapsed the economy. i cannot because i am an intelligent sane person who actually knows what im talking about and does not believe in farcical conspiracy theories. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

>" I too am discussing finance and if "mortgages" or front end paper "terms" to a broad scheme that resulted in our financial collapse is unknown to you then, there's not much sense discussion the matter with you." i pulled this sentence out to make a point. this is our problem. You have created an imaginary instrument called "front end paper" then claim its definition is mortgages. You then additionally claim that they are part of a scheme that collapsed our markets. That is no truth to that claim so its unfair to accuse me of avoiding the topic. its not possible for me, someone who understands fixed income instruments and the financial markets, to discuss your imaginary ones. That does not make me a coward for avoiding this argument. This makes me a rational sane person. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Spoken like a banker, now that the banker chooses to actually discusss the matter. Witholding information is just as culpable as lying. The guy who orginated the mortgage and loan knowing that mortgagee couldn't pay and then selling the note to someone else without letting them know the mortgage was bogus is in my opinion fraud. There was much withhold of info, not only bank to bank but internally with employees who were kept in the dark purposely. I have always been discussing finance. you were the one discussing something that only exist in your head. made up products sold by fictional characters was the thesis of your rants. its humorous how now you try to act as though im the one getting on board with the topic. The rest of your post is just your normal nonsense and merits no response from someone who actually understands the topic. another failed attempt to summarize a situation you have no knowledge on nor the ability to understand, from what i gathered by your use of fictitious terms and characters. I'm still trying to figure out "front end paper" and "adverts". That is complete gibberish. if you have friends in the justice dept they have done a horrible job of explaining their job to you. I'm guessing these friends are a fantasy that only exist in the same imaginary world "adverts" push "front end paper". Hopefully you spent some time googling real terms so at a minimum you can pretend better to understand the topic. I was wrong, you don't want to discuss the matter. You are not reading or understanding. Front end paper= the mortgages that were pooled into mortgage back securities. Also, Kallend posted similar information about the the rating of securities. Why do you resort to BS when discussing the matter? You started off by attacking my spelling, avoiding the issue. Now you're coming up with much BS to do the same. Your words don't give you much creditability. I too am discussing finance and if "mortgages" or front end paper "terms" to a broad scheme that resulted in our financial collapse is unknown to you then, there's not much sense discussion the matter with you. But being the kind person I am, I'll give you one last change to help yourself out from under how horrible you are looking right now with YOUR TYPING. Lets see if you can handle one aspect. Since you are in banking, can you please tell us if it was OK S&P rated junk AAA when they knew it was junk? That is if you believe that to be true. And should you fail to answer the question and avoid answering it via circuitous language, will most definitely show you are trolling. We curiously await your response. The queston is isolated from prose to help you answer the question: Was OK S&P rated junk AAA when they knew it was junk? You cannot make up your own terms like "front end paper" and "admen", then accuse me of avoiding the discussion. I cannot intelligently discuss your imaginary financial instruments. to answer your question. if anyone at S&P purposely rated something higher than they believed for financial gain or any reason, then they should be held accountable. I have been clear on this topic since my first post. Criminals should be convicted. Because you said it happened does not make it so. I feel you do not understand that. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

This makes no sense. it reminds me of the Adam Sandler movie where the moderator comments that we are all dumber by having heard it. I'm sure someone can find the link for you. Bernie was a money manager but not employed by a bank. If he had been, he would have been caught much much sooner since they are regulated MORE not less. It should be common knowledge to someone who has friends in the justice dept that money managers and hedge funds have less restrictions. That was the problem, he was outside of most bank regulators supervision. That was my point and it went right over your head. you seem to think the opposite because as i stated repeatedly, you have no understanding of this topic. you also seem to lack the ability to be embarrassed. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Spoken like a banker, now that the banker chooses to actually discusss the matter. Witholding information is just as culpable as lying. The guy who orginated the mortgage and loan knowing that mortgagee couldn't pay and then selling the note to someone else without letting them know the mortgage was bogus is in my opinion fraud. There was much withhold of info, not only bank to bank but internally with employees who were kept in the dark purposely. I have always been discussing finance. you were the one discussing something that only exist in your head. made up products sold by fictional characters was the thesis of your rants. its humorous how now you try to act as though im the one getting on board with the topic. The rest of your post is just your normal nonsense and merits no response from someone who actually understands the topic. another failed attempt to summarize a situation you have no knowledge on nor the ability to understand, from what i gathered by your use of fictitious terms and characters. I'm still trying to figure out "front end paper" and "adverts". That is complete gibberish. if you have friends in the justice dept they have done a horrible job of explaining their job to you. I'm guessing these friends are a fantasy that only exist in the same imaginary world "adverts" push "front end paper". Hopefully you spent some time googling real terms so at a minimum you can pretend better to understand the topic. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

i'm on my way to meet some people from drinks. sorry, not running from my comments but i doubt i will reply till tomm. i say this because im aware alot of people want to beat me up and they will have to wait to tomm. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

S&P (along with Moodys and Fitch) certainly gave AAA ratings to junk. And then they claimed 1st amendment rights as a reason they should not be held accountable. Maybe not outright fraud but certainly reprehensible, yet the financial services industry appears to find it acceptable. They claim they can only use the data given to them by the inv banks. The inv banks claim they can only use the data given to them by the commercial bank or mortgage originator who in turn blames the buyers. Huge mess and the truth is no one is really lying. the system was broken. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

yes, i mentioned that yesterday when it hit the tape. i imagine CNN didnt mention Starr or Hank G because they do not understand the topic much. They are in the business of selling add time and dont really care either. CNBC is much better but still pretty lame. Bloomberg TV is really the best. Boring to most and no ratings but the best actual news. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

i know debt instruments much better than most. What i fail to understand is your posts because you use fictitious terms like "front end paper". No reasonable person should be expected to understand an argument based on something that only exist in your head. you cannot create your own terms and expect to make an intelligent argument. another example is trying to explain to me "adverts selling mortgages could be considered the front end." that is complete jibberish to anyone with knowledge on the topic. you might as well have mentioned the flux capacitor because that is about as real as your described financial instruments. I'm going to reit(thats real jargon for reiterate, feel free to use it later so at least you have one real banking term), i cannot actually have a discussion with you about a topic you do not understand. It is not fair to me. Google some of the instruments you are trying to describe and maybe you can put together a coherent thought. otherwise, you look foolish trying to show how i do not understand the topic because i do not understand your fabricated terms. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

I seem to recall an article about a bloke who noticed that Bernie Madoff's fund consistently posted brilliant returns, as in, every time without fail. So he looked into it in a bit more detail, became very suspicious, wrote a few letters to the FBI and SEC and received back some responses thanking him for his time. And then several years later it all came crashing down and everyone found out Madoff was one of the biggest fraudsters in the history of money. Bernie did not run a bank. he was not guilty of bank fraud. he was a money manager. the FBI and SEC dropped the ball and should have been more shamed. he was caught by Finra, an organization i have mentioned numerous times should regulate everything. Or at least be emulated by the others. nobody messes with them "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

So because banks provide essential financial services then the way banks do business is therefore above reproach? Nonsense. Doctors provide essential services that you'd miss if they were gone... but if a doctor turned up to surgery smashed off his tits and amputated your leg instead of removing your appendix then you'd sue the fuck out of him and everyone else in the hospital who let it happen. i never implied they were above reproach. He made a comment and i asked for clarity. i DID remind him of what bankers do because i sensed where he was going. He did not let me down either. I am a strong advocate for bank regulation. I strongly support the prosecution of criminals, including bankers. Bank fraud damages the business i am in. My posts have never implied otherwise. What i do comment on when someone makes a fictional tirade about crimes that did not occur. i call that out so others dont repeat it. "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante

Your post makes no sense to me. I'm sorry, perhaps you know something i do not. I suppose its possible you know more about banking than me. if i had to guess, based on your fictional term, "front end paper" i'm not the one who is lacking knowledge on what happened to this country. I am at a huge disadvantage in this discussion because i am saddled with the burden of knowledge on the topic. you on the other hand, can make up terms and theories and expect me to make a coherent response to them. its just not possible. i only respond to people like you for the edification of other readers. so they see how clueless people like you are in finance and do not repeat your comments. i dont want them to feel as embarrassed as you should be right now "The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante