350zCommtech's Account Talk

350Z, Carnac, someone... Make the announcement! Tom! That's it! No wait... Ebb! :nuts::D

Hey, hey...No Ebb talk here. There's a paid site for that. :D Just kidding..:)


But seriously, the perfect announcement for me would be the downgrade of ABK and MBIA. When that happens, we'll see Dow -800 or worst. I hope to be in the F fund when it happens.
 
LMAO at MBIA whining to Congress to stop shorts.

A CEO shouldn't be concerned with how many people are betting against their company. However, the way Bill Ackman from Pershing Square is going about doing it has been a foolish finger pointing conflict, like that of which you could find in an elementary school playground. Ackman has made this battle personal. If he's so confident in his position, he shouldn't be lobbying for a mass downgrade.
 
Hey Z,

Why no mention of this anywhere in the news today?

Quote:
S&P cuts $6.75 bln in CDOs backed by mortgages Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:47pm EST


Another one after the bell.
Quote:
UDPATE 1-S&P cuts Radian debt ratings, may cut PMI
Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:29pm EST
 
Hey Z,

Why no mention of this anywhere in the news today?

Quote:
S&P cuts $6.75 bln in CDOs backed by mortgages Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:47pm EST


Another one after the bell.
Quote:
UDPATE 1-S&P cuts Radian debt ratings, may cut PMI
Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:29pm EST

Because it was released after the bell yesterday.
 
LMAO at MBIA whining to Congress to stop shorts. Your opinion, 350?

If he's so confident in his position, he shouldn't be lobbying for a mass downgrade.

Bullit,

The rating agencies are paid by the bond insurers, not investors. Do you see a conflict of interest here? That's why they have been dragging their feet on the downgrades. ABK and MBIA both report 4qtr losses of $32 and $18 per share, respectively. Look at where their stock is.

A great example is Enron. Remember when they got downgraded? Wasn't it a day before or on the day of their implosion?

That is why Ackman is lobbying for a downgrade.

As for MBIA's CEO bitching, it's a freaking joke. Did you listen to their last CC? I compared it to CFC's November CC where the CEO said that CFC will turn a profit in the 4qtr. He said this in freaking November, giving the stock a boost. Well, we now know that it was a lie because CFC actually reported a big loss for the 4qtr. Did anybody call him out on it? The SEC? Hell no.

Oh, this is funny:

Ambac CFO, Other Execs Get 2007 Bonuses
Associated Press 02.04.08, 8:50 AM ET

NEW YORK - Bond insurer Ambac Financial Group Inc. on Monday said it paid out $3.05 million in cash bonuses to four of its top executives in 2007, according to a regulatory filing.

Ambac has struggled in recent months as ratings agencies worry the insurer might not have enough capital in reserve to cover future potential losses. Fitch Ratings downgraded Ambac in January to "AA" from "AAA," while Moody's and Standard & Poor's both said they are reviewing bond insurer ratings.

Bond insurers typically need "AAA" ratings to continue booking new business.

Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Sean Leonard received a $700,000 bonus and William McKinnon, a senior managing director of credit risk management, got an $800,000 bonus, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

John Uhlein, an executive vice president who oversees securities, emerging markets and structured insurance received a $750,000 bonus, while Executive Vice President Douglas Renfield-Miller received an $800,000 bonus, Renfield-Miller oversees Europe and Asia-Pacific operations.

All four also received stock options and restricted stock unit awards for 2008. The stock options vest in three installments between 2009 and 2011, while the restricted units vest in three years.

Shares of Ambac have plummeted in recent months over concerns its business could be drastically reduced because of downgrades or the company could become insolvent. Shares of Ambac have fallen 52 percent since the beginning of December and 82 percent since the middle of October.http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/02/04/ap4609909.html
 
Earlier comments from today's bond insurer hearing:

Spitzer: "I need to talk with urgency to get movement, but I don't want to spook the markets. I don't think Congress could move quickly enough. We want resolution in 3 to 5 business days."
3 to 5 days!!!!!!!!!:nuts:
 
3-5 days? Who do they think they are, the President (need to get that stimulus package in yesterday). Lolol if they make important decisions in 3-5 days no wonder they are in the mess they are in.
 
Can someone explain how this bond insurer meltdown will affect bonds (F-fund) and stocks. This seems to have come out of nowhere. I know I'm missing something. Any help is appriciated.:worried:
 
Can someone explain how this bond insurer meltdown will affect bonds (F-fund) and stocks. This seems to have come out of nowhere. I know I'm missing something. Any help is appriciated.:worried:

Malyla,

I've been posting about this for last month or two. It's all here in my thread.
 
Malyla,

I've been posting about this for last month or two. It's all here in my thread.

I've been reading your posts (lurking) and what I understand is that the F-fund is tied to the 30 year bond yields. As the yields go down, the F-fund goes up. Now we are seeing bond insurers being down graded and Warren Buffet looking to selectively 'save' these insurers. What I'm missing is how this is connected to the bond yields. Is there expectation that if the bond insurer go bankrupt, that bond yields will fall? Or is there some tie to the Fed possibly cutting rates again which is causing the selling of bonds on the expectation that the yields will fall? If that is the case, how does the cutting of rates by the Fed save the bond insurers? This seems very obscure (although, in fairness, I have never truely understood the bond market and how external pressures influence it).

Thanks for you patience.
 
I've been reading your posts (lurking) and what I understand is that the F-fund is tied to the 30 year bond yields. As the yields go down, the F-fund goes up. Now we are seeing bond insurers being down graded and Warren Buffet looking to selectively 'save' these insurers. What I'm missing is how this is connected to the bond yields. Is there expectation that if the bond insurer go bankrupt, that bond yields will fall? Or is there some tie to the Fed possibly cutting rates again which is causing the selling of bonds on the expectation that the yields will fall? If that is the case, how does the cutting of rates by the Fed save the bond insurers? This seems very obscure (although, in fairness, I have never truely understood the bond market and how external pressures influence it).

Thanks for you patience.

Cutting rates does nothing for the bond insurers. When the bond insurers(ABK/MBIA) get downgraded and/or go bankrupt, the stock market will tank and the bond yields will drop causing the F fund to rise.

What we are seeing today, with bond yields going up despite the market selling off, has to do with a technical bullish flag and the problems with the 30yr auctions. Bullish flags usually break to the upside. I was hoping for it to break the wrong way because I was hoping for a higher jobless claims and maybe a major downgrade today. Non of which happened today.

The other factor, which is more important, is the failure of the 30yr auction. This suggests that foreigners(like China), don't want to touch any thing that has to do with the US. ie. falling dollar, coming recession, feds out of bullets, etc.....
 
That's really scary. They've got enough of our debt, don't want more, and next will be looking to unload it? US debt obligations become junk bonds. Or am I not understanding the larger picture?
And since our "trust funds" are basically IOU's, should we be worried? What's the value of a junk bond IOU?

BINGO!!!!!!

You hit the nail on the head. We had a hint of this back in June of 07 when China dumped a bunch of US treasuries. It shot the 10yr interest rate to 5.2%. I wrote about that either here, in the F fund thread, or in the I fund thread.

We could be headed for a worst of the worst case scenario. ie. falling dollar, deep recession, market crash, and high interest rates. Although, IMO, we are probably headed for a Japan like, deflationary situation, which is good for the F fund. But, I've been wrong a lot lately.:)
 
It keeps getting worst....

Auction-Bond Failures Spread to Student Loan Debt (Update2)
By Michael Quint and Martin Z. Braun

Feb. 11 (Bloomberg) -- College Loan Corp., a San Diego- based lender, said some bonds it issued with rates determined through periodic auctions failed to attract enough bids.
The company wouldn't say which specific issues failed or identify the banks that managed the auctions.
Demand for bonds in the $360 billion auction-rate securities market is waning on investor concern that dealers who collect fees for managing the bidding on the bonds won't commit their own capital to prevent failures. Reduced appetite for auction-rate debt in the municipal market also reflects expectations that the credit strength of insurers backing the securities may deteriorate.

``It is unfortunate that certain auctions did not clear,'' said John Falb, chief financial officer at College Loan in an e- mailed statement Feb. 8. Falb said investors couldn't have been concerned about the quality of the College Loan Corp. bonds, which are backed by government-guaranteed student loans.

Auction bonds issued by Sallie Mae, the largest student loan lender, also failed to attract enough bidders last week, according to a report today by Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, a New York-based securities firm. The report said weak demand for auction securities may not extend to other debt backed by the same pool of student loans.
Thomas Joyce, a spokesman for Reston, Virginia-based Sallie Mae, couldn't be reached for comment on the status of the company's auction securities.

Failure Consequences

Auction bonds have interest rates that are determined by bidding that typically occurs every seven, 28 or 35 days. When there aren't enough buyers, as has occurred in recent months on some securities, the auction fails and bondholders who wanted to sell are left holding the securities. Rates at failed auctions are set at a level spelled out in bond documents.

Fitch Ratings in a Dec. 19 report said some issuers of student-loan backed securities ``have been faced with the possibility of failed auctions.'' Ratings on the debt may be cut as rising rates at auctions shrink the gap between what the student loan companies pay on their bonds and what they collect on the student loans they hold, Fitch said.

``It seems that the dealers are no longer willing to bid in large amounts for these issues,'' said Lee Epstein, chief executive at Money Market One, San Francisco-based securities firm specializing in short-term securities.

Dealer Support

Bidding by dealers is essential to the smooth functioning of auction securities and banks are now wary of loading their balance sheets with the bonds, Epstein said. Failures are concentrated in securities that were privately sold, he added.

Officials at Sallie Mae, the largest student loan lender, couldn't be reached for comment on the status of their auction securities.

In the municipal market, at least two auctions run by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. failed on Jan. 22, the first day the bond investors could react to a ratings downgrade of Ambac Financial Group Inc.'s main insurance units.


Debt issued by electric utility Nevada Power reset at 6.757 percent, the maximum proscribed under the terms of the bonds, while securities from Georgetown University reset at 6.604 percent. Ambac insures Nevada Power's debt, while MBIA Inc.'s MBIA Insurance Corp. guarantees Georgetown's debt.

Failed auctions have hurt companies that bought those variable-rate securities as short-term investments with excess cash, and are unable to sell their holdings. Bristol-Myers Squibb announced Jan. 31 a $275 million write-off of its holdings, which totaled $811 million at the end of 2007.
About a third of 449 companies polled in a survey last May for the Association for Finance Professionals said they had investments in auction-rate bonds.http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aBoA.zr2Pzyw&refer=home
 
This suggests that foreigners(like China), don't want to touch any thing that has to do with the US

China is the bottom line and I'm really impressed with your insight. They made it very clear "the FED CUTS" are a mistake and in all liklihood let the ones who really count know they better be careful. So how did the FED respond: Basically gave em the finger and in like a week made a .5% and .75% CUT.

CHINA owns the United States (but it seems that no one wants to admit this). Their surplus is "our deficit" and they have at least a TRILLION of cash reserves in US Bonds.

Anyway - that is one of the best analysis I've seen in quite awhile.
 
Well, they have that much in $ not only because of the deficit, but also because they were holding $ to try to prop up their currency. Dropping all of those $'s at once will cause a boomerang effect, a rapidly rising Yuan, and a huge drop in the worth of their reserves (which are in $). They are buying up euros to some extent, and the yuan has been creeping upward, but dropping all the $ will still have a catastrophic affect on China.

Ditto to a smaller effect in Japan, they also try to keep their currency lower than the $.

Oil is priced in $ too, do not expect prices to drop.

The euro countries do not buy up $ like the Asians do. The Euro therefore is rising faster than other currencies.

The Chinese do not own the U.S. They are bound by the overstock of $'s they've bought.:worried: And now they find out the currency manipulation game has its own consequences. If they owned us, they'd be "winning". At this time, they are losing cause they are tied up in $'s.

The U.S. is finding out the free ride is over...I'm amazed the $ hasn't dropped further, but I think it's that China, Japan, and other $ holders are trying to prop up their reserves. The question is, how long will they be able to do it?

Also, can anyone blame them for not wanting to buy more $? Kinda asking them to jump back into the fire, may have looked nice and toasty warm the first time, but the second time, you gotta be crazy.
 
China is the bottom line and I'm really impressed with your insight. They made it very clear "the FED CUTS" are a mistake and in all liklihood let the ones who really count know they better be careful. So how did the FED respond: Basically gave em the finger and in like a week made a .5% and .75% CUT.

CHINA owns the United States (but it seems that no one wants to admit this). Their surplus is "our deficit" and they have at least a TRILLION of cash reserves in US Bonds.

Anyway - that is one of the best analysis I've seen in quite awhile.

Yup, China has the US by the balls. Fed cuts too much, killing the dollar, which in terns cuts into the profits of Chinese companies. They have to raise prices to stay in business. That is slowly happening now. Further more, Any fair trade talk out of congress and China will dump just a little bit of US bonds to drive up mortgage rates and congress shuts up.

It's got to suck to be Bernanke and the Feds right now.
 
Back
Top