350zCommtech's Account Talk

[tsptalk]

Makes me feel a bit more confident, thanks. Hmm.. SPX 666, GE 666:suspicious:

Check out post #37 here ... http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=6685&page=4

 

[hessian]

Showing all those 6s, is difficult for me -much the same as the picture (oh,-oops that just slipped out)
Anyway, all the 6s makes me wonder, often what is support now, becomes resisitance later??? :worried:
VR!

 

[350zCommTech]

While Americans are losing jobs.

#$$%^#$ Goldman Sacks. They paid out billions in Bonuses. Remember Hank Paulson, he got a big bonus, before he became Secretary of Treasury.

Who got AIG's bailout billions?

Sat Mar 7, 2009 9:52pm EST

By Toni Reinhold
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Where, oh where, did AIG's bailout billions go? That question may reverberate even louder through the halls of government in the week ahead now that a partial list of beneficiaries has been published.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that about $50 billion of more than $173 billion that the U.S. government has poured into American International Group Inc since last fall has been paid to at least two dozen U.S. and foreign financial institutions.

The newspaper reported that some of the banks paid by AIG since the insurer started getting taxpayer funds were: Goldman Sachs Group Inc, Deutsche Bank AG, Merrill Lynch, Societe Generale, Calyon, Barclays Plc, Rabobank, Danske, HSBC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Banco Santander, Morgan Stanley, Wachovia, Bank of America, and Lloyds Banking Group.

Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs declined to comment when contacted by Reuters. Bank of America, Calyon, and Wells Fargo, which has absorbed Wachovia, could not be reached for comment.

The U.S. Federal Reserve has refused to publicize a list of AIG's derivative counterparties and what they have been paid since the bailout, riling the U.S. Senate Banking Committee.

Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Donald Kohn testified before that committee on Thursday that revealing names risked jeopardizing AIG's continuing business. Kohn said there were millions of counterparties around the globe, including pension funds and U.S. households.
He said the intention was not to protect AIG or its counterparties, but to prevent the spread of AIG's infection.
The Wall Street Journal, citing a confidential document and people familiar with the matter, reported that Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank each got about $6 billion in payments between the middle of September and December last year.
Once the world's largest insurer, AIG has been described by the United States as being too extensively intertwined with the global financial system to be allowed to fail.
The Federal Reserve first rode to AIG's rescue in September with an $85 billion credit line after losses from toxic investments, many of which were mortgage related, and collateral demands from banks, left AIG staring down bankruptcy.
Late last year, the rescue packaged was increased to $150 billion. The bailout was overhauled again a week ago to offer the insurer an additional $30 billion in equity.
AIG was first bailed out shortly after investment bank Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail and brokerage Merrill Lynch sold itself to Bank of America Corp.
Bankruptcy for AIG would have led to complications and losses for financial institutions around the world doing business with the company and policy holders that AIG insured against losses.
Representative Paul Kanjorski told Reuters on Thursday that he had been informed that a large number of AIG's counterparties were European.
"That's why we could not allow AIG to fail as we allowed Lehman to fail, because that would have precipitated the failure of the European banking system," said Kanjorski, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who chairs the House Insurance Subcommittee.
TOXIC ASSETS/TOXIC WASTE
As part of its business, AIG insured counterparties on mortgage-backed securities and other assets. The collapse of the U.S. subprime mortgage market, which triggered a global financial crisis, left the insurer and some of its policy holders facing possible ruin as the value of assets declined.
U.S. regulators failed to recognize how much risk AIG was piling on in credit-default swaps, and by the time they understood, they had no choice but to pour in billions of public dollars, Kohn and other officials told the Senate panel.
Senators were outraged by the lack of details about where the bailout money has gone.
"That we find ourselves in this situation at all is ... quite frankly, sickening," said Senator Christopher Dodd, the Democrat who chairs the committee. "The lack of transparency and accountability in this process has been rather stunning."
Eric Dinallo, superintendent of New York State's Insurance Department, railed on Friday against AIG's failed business model, likening its insuring credit-default swaps as gambling with somebody else's money.
"It's like taking insurance on your neighbor's house and even maybe contributing to blowing it up," he said at a panel sponsored by New York University's Stern School of Business.
U.S. lawmakers have said they are running out of patience with regulators' refusal to identify AIG's counterparties.
On Thursday, Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the banking committee, said: "The Fed and Treasury can be secretive for a while but not forever."

(Writing Toni Reinhold; Additional reporting by Juan Lagorio in New York; Editing by Clive McKeef)
http://www.reuters.com/article/news...08?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true

 

[budnipper1]

"Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Donald Kohn testified before that committee on Thursday that revealing names risked jeopardizing AIG's continuing business. Kohn said there were millions of counterparties around the globe..."

Lame excuses for not revealing who really got the money.

View attachment 5991


​

 

[350zCommTech]

"Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Donald Kohn testified before that committee on Thursday that revealing names risked jeopardizing AIG's continuing business. Kohn said there were millions of counterparties around the globe..."

Lame excuses for not revealing who really got the money.

​

Lets just print up $50 trillion, so we can bailout the whole world by Monday.
​

 

[Uptrend]

Lets just print up $50 trillion, so we can bailout the whole world by Monday.
[/indent]

How about sending each american taxpayer making < than 1 million/year: 1 million. That should re-inflate things.

 

[budnipper1]

Lets just print up $50 trillion, so we can bailout the whole world by Monday.
[/indent]

Paraphrasing: "If it's dead...bury it!"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us/politics/09talkshows.html?hp
​

 

[350zCommTech]

Good start so far tonight.

View attachment 5996

A break of the green trend line would mean big payday for folks in the market, especially for I funders. A failure to break could be a signal to get out. I believe a test of 84 is coming, but I don't know if it will be this week. The EUR/USD also supports my theory as it's sitting just above strong support and has a potential to really move up.

What I really think will happen in the short term is that the dollar will bounce up along the green trendline for a little bit before falling through. While the dollar bounces up along the green line, the market could be declining.

Remember, this is just my speculation, based on how I read the markets. And I'm just an amature.

 

[350zCommTech]

We have the best government Goldman Sachs can buy.

Is Geithner Taking Goldman Sachs’ Word That Toxic Assets Are Actually Worth Something?

As more details emerge about the Treasury Department’s plan for dealing with the toxic assets currently plaguing our banking system, it’s becoming clear that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is betting the house on a rather large assumption. He seems to believe that the problem with the assets is not that they are actually relatively worthless, but that they have an “artificially depressed value” that will return as soon as a market for them is created. As Paul Krugman explained:

omehow, top officials in the Obama administration and at the Federal Reserve have convinced themselves that troubled assets, often referred to these days as “toxic waste,” are really worth much more than anyone is actually willing to pay for them — and that if these assets were properly priced, all our troubles would go away
​

Geithner has posited that the toxic assets have a “basic inherent economic value” that is absent because of “the absence of financing and credit.” Unfortunately, today’s market valuations may reflect actual prices, which would throw a serious wrench into everything about the administration’s plan.

As Financial Times reported, JP Morgan and Wachovia have been picking apart some assets, to see what the underlying loans and mortgages are actually worth, and the outlook is pretty bleak. The recovery rates on some of the junk “have been a mere 5 per cent” and even the best of it is worth 35-40 cents on the dollar.

So where is Geithner getting his theory from? Well, Goldman Sachs — upon hearing the first details of Geithner’s plan — organized a roundtable, and attendees claim they “received the invitation after the speech and decided to attend because of the speech.” Meanwhile, Simon Johnson at the Baseline Scenario wrote that Geithner’s plan is “essentially the same plan that Goldman Sachs has been shopping around for the past month or so.” Was Geithner’s plan crafted along Goldman’s guidelines? (Goldman has since denied that the meeting was organized as a result of Geithner’s speech.)

Any way you cut it, Geithner is counting on the assets being artificially depressed, which exposes taxpayers to a serious loss if he’s wrong; under the plan investors who buy toxic assets would be able “just walk away if prices fell substantially.” Now, maybe Geithner knows something we don’t. But right now, the conventional wisdom is that the assets are pretty much garbage, and Geithner is taking Goldman Sachs’ word in order to avoid talk of nationalizing the banks.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/03/06/geithner-goldman-sachs/

 

[McDuck]

Nikkei falls 0.8 pct as automakers skid on GM worry
at Reuters (Sun 10:10pm)

 

[mojo]

Is Geithner Taking Goldman Sachs’ Word That Toxic Assets Are Actually Worth Something?

As more details emerge about the Treasury Department’s plan for dealing with the toxic assets currently plaguing our banking system, it’s becoming clear that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is betting the house on a rather large assumption. He seems to believe that the problem with the assets is not that they are actually relatively worthless, but that they have an “artificially depressed value” that will return as soon as a market for them is created. As Paul Krugman explained:

omehow, top officials in the Obama administration and at the Federal Reserve have convinced themselves that troubled assets, often referred to these days as “toxic waste,” are really worth much more than anyone is actually willing to pay for them — and that if these assets were properly priced, all our troubles would go away
​

Geithner has posited that the toxic assets have a “basic inherent economic value” that is absent because of “the absence of financing and credit.” Unfortunately, today’s market valuations may reflect actual prices, which would throw a serious wrench into everything about the administration’s plan.

As Financial Times reported, JP Morgan and Wachovia have been picking apart some assets, to see what the underlying loans and mortgages are actually worth, and the outlook is pretty bleak. The recovery rates on some of the junk “have been a mere 5 per cent” and even the best of it is worth 35-40 cents on the dollar.

So where is Geithner getting his theory from? Well, Goldman Sachs — upon hearing the first details of Geithner’s plan — organized a roundtable, and attendees claim they “received the invitation after the speech and decided to attend because of the speech.” Meanwhile, Simon Johnson at the Baseline Scenario wrote that Geithner’s plan is “essentially the same plan that Goldman Sachs has been shopping around for the past month or so.” Was Geithner’s plan crafted along Goldman’s guidelines? (Goldman has since denied that the meeting was organized as a result of Geithner’s speech.)

Any way you cut it, Geithner is counting on the assets being artificially depressed, which exposes taxpayers to a serious loss if he’s wrong; under the plan investors who buy toxic assets would be able “just walk away if prices fell substantially.” Now, maybe Geithner knows something we don’t. But right now, the conventional wisdom is that the assets are pretty much garbage, and Geithner is taking Goldman Sachs’ word in order to avoid talk of nationalizing the banks.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/20...goldman-sachs/


It sounds to me like they are desperate to return to their fantasy land. It's not happening. People have already seen what's behind the curtain.

 

[mojo]

All this suspend mark to market stuff is just another attempt to put the Genie back in the bottle. OK so probably like you said before it will possibly produce a short rally followed by a bigger fall. Nothing long term imo. All they have is leveraged trash right now imo.

A bunch of looting criminals.

 

[Guest2]

All this suspend mark to market stuff is just another attempt to put the Genie back in the bottle. OK so probably like you said before it will possibly produce a short rally followed by a bigger fall. Nothing long term imo. All they have is leveraged trash right now imo.

A bunch of looting criminals.

I don't think anyone is expecting a new Bull Market to begin anytime soon.
The temporary rally would be nice to see, as long as I don't over play it and
get caught in the spiral. I'm happy that the rumors about the Mark to Market
include 12-18 months trial & error scenarios, as opposed to perminent
ill conceived rules that keep making things worse or slow the healing
process. Oh yes, there's no doubt about them being a Bunch of Looting
Criminals.

 

[mojo]

I don't think anyone is expecting a new Bull Market to begin anytime soon.
The temporary rally would be nice to see, as long as I don't over play it and
get caught in the spiral. I'm happy that the rumors about the Mark to Market
include 12-18 months trial & error scenarios, as opposed to perminent
ill conceived rules that keep making things worse or slow the healing
process. Oh yes, there's no doubt about them being a Bunch of Looting
Criminals.

Well I'm all in right now so I'm hoping to get in on that temporary rally.

Low S&P 500s soon imo. Hopefully not this week though

 

[350zCommTech]

All this suspend mark to market stuff is just another attempt to put the Genie back in the bottle. OK so probably like you said before it will possibly produce a short rally followed by a bigger fall. Nothing long term imo. All they have is leveraged trash right now imo.

A bunch of looting criminals.

I don't think anyone is expecting a new Bull Market to begin anytime soon.
The temporary rally would be nice to see, as long as I don't over play it and
get caught in the spiral. I'm happy that the rumors about the Mark to Market
include 12-18 months trial & error scenarios, as opposed to perminent
ill conceived rules that keep making things worse or slow the healing
process. Oh yes, there's no doubt about them being a Bunch of Looting
Criminals.

It's all smoke and mirrors. Ask yourself these question: How will suspending MtoM make non-performing loans become performing? How will MtoM make home prices go back up to 2006-2007 levels? Do you think private capital will return because all of a sudden, everybody's balance sheet has improved over night?

Coolhand posted a great video tonight. Basically, the game is over.

 

[mojo]

I watched the Celente video Coolhand posted. Coolhand doesn't normally post that kind of content. I posted a couple of Celente videos on 3/3. He's been pretty accurate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XioU...w.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=5517&page=2

 

[Guest2]

It's all smoke and mirrors. Ask yourself these question: How will suspending MtoM make non-performing loans become performing? How will MtoM make home prices go back up to 2006-2007 levels? Do you think private capital will return because all of a sudden, everybody's balance sheet has improved over night?

Coolhand posted a great video tonight. Basically, the game is over.

No 350, I don't think the problems we're facing will be solved by a
temporary fix, nor will they be fixed overnight. But when prices are
so reasonable (for now),,,,,,,,,,,, I'm hoping that MtoM turns into a
catalyst and gives the market a reason to buy in the short term. I
have no doubt that any boost will fade quickly and we'll be at worse
levels then we're at now. If the financials start to rally before this
meeting ends, we might even see a "sell on the news" sceario. But
I like what I saw at Friday's end and can only hope for the best
come morning.

 

[350zCommTech]

No 350, I don't think the problems we're facing will be solved by a
temporary fix, nor will they be fixed overnight. But when prices are
so reasonable (for now),,,,,,,,,,,, I'm hoping that MtoM turns into a
catalyst and gives the market a reason to buy in the short term. I
have no doubt that any boost will fade quickly and we'll be at worse
levels then we're at now. If the financials start to rally before this
meeting ends, we might even see a "sell on the news" sceario. But
I like what I saw at Friday's end and can only hope for the best
come morning.

We are thinking on the same lines SB. I hope we can rally up to Wednesday, then I'll bail before the meeting on Thursday.

 

[350zCommTech]

Money coming out of bonds and gold. And no signs of the PPT.

 

[mojo]

If it looks like I can exit today with a gain I think I will. Getting out 1 day to late could be a big loss in this enviroment. I would guess we finish down this week 300-500 on the dow.