Archive for TALF

Citigroup Three Card Monty Policy on Executive Compensation

One would think that under the Obama administration of “greater transparency and accountability” that the 36% government owned Citigroup would wise up to the fact taxpayers are no longer tolerating huge compensations for, well absolutely nothing in return for shareholders but massive risk taking and losses.
Today, the NY Times reported that many of the bailed out banks who have received and continue to possess taxpayers’ money are looking for ways to divert previous “bonus” money to their base salaries.  No matter how they funnel money into the pockets of Wall St fat cats, they are simply raping their shareholders and taxing people who struggle to keep their jobs, their homes and pay their taxes.
Then why wouldn’t President Obama, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Senator Dodd and Congressperson Barney Frank do something about?
Even at the behest of taxpayers not to bailout failed businesses, the previous and current administration also failed to elect directors to the board of Citigroup!  How can that be?  36% shareholder and no representation on the Board of Directors.
Say what?
Doing a little research, you can easily detect the international political underpinnings to Citigroup.  Citigroup is made up of large concentration of foreign investors, mainly Middle East and Far East money.  A royal Saudi prince is the single largest shareholder as well as other various investment groups in the Middle East and Singapore.
So it is this writer’s opinion that because of the money ties to the Middle East, the current administration have no issue in bailing these people out with taxpayers’ money and at the same time, let them decide what to do with that money, even if it means it never makes it back to the taxpayers with interest.

One would think that under the Obama administration of “greater transparency and accountability” that the 36% government owned Citigroup’s Board and senior executives would wise up to the fact taxpayers are no longer tolerating huge compensations for, well absolutely nothing in return for shareholders but massive risk taking and losses.  Wrong!

Today the NY Times reported Citigroup as well as other banks that received and continue to possess taxpayers’ money are looking for ways to divert previous “bonus” money to their base salaries.  No matter how they funnel money into the pockets of Wall St fat cats, they are simply raping their shareholders and taxing people who struggle to keep their jobs, their homes and pay their taxes.

Then why wouldn’t President Obama, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Congressional leaders such as Dodd and Frank do something about it given the tough rhetoric during campaigning?

Even at the behest of taxpayers not to bailout failed businesses, the previous and current administration also failed to elect directors to the board of Citigroup!  How can that be?  36% shareholder and no representation on the Board of Directors of Citigroup?

Say what?

Doing a little research, you can easily detect the international political underpinnings to Citigroup.  Citigroup is made up of large concentration of foreign investors, mainly Middle East and Far East money.  A royal Saudi prince is the single largest shareholder as well as other various investment groups in the Middle East and Singapore.

So it is this writer’s opinion that because of the money ties to the Middle East, the current Obama administration has no qualms in bailing these foreign investors out of failed Citigroup with taxpayers’ money but simultaneously let Citigroup decide what to do with that money, even if it means taxpayers’ money never making it back to the taxpayers with interest.

How’s that for fiduciary responsibility post Madoff and Stanford?

Comments Trackbacks / Pingbacks (81)

Bailed Out Banks to Trade Toxic Assets Between Themselves

Since there are no markets or buyers for these toxic assets, the bailed out banks who received taxpayers money through TARP or TALF will now trade these toxic assets between themselves to create the illusion that these assets are being moved.  By doing so these banks can agree on a “price” therefore artificially establishing a value to something that currently have no buyers and side stepping any generally accepted accounting rules or regulation such as “mark to market” per FASB.

This is is a real danger to American taxpayers and other investors of not replacing the senior management and the boards that supposedly watch over them.

How long will Americans wait for results from the trillions spent by the US Government supported by the Obama administration?
Bailed-out banks may buy toxic assets: report

  • Friday April 3, 2009, 9:19 am EDT

(Reuters) – U.S. banks that have received government aid, including Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase & Co, are considering buying toxic assets to be sold by rivals under the Treasury’s $1,000 billion plan to revive the financial system, the Financial Times said.

Goldman and Morgan Stanley have pledged to increase investments in distressed assets, the paper said.

This week, John Mack, Morgan Stanley’s chief executive, told staff the bank was considering how to become “one of the firms that can buy these assets and package them where your clients will have access to them,” according to the paper.

Spencer Bachus, the top Republican on the House financial services committee, told the paper that he would introduce legislation to stop financial institutions “gaming the system to reap taxpayer-subsidized windfalls.”

Bachus added it would mark “a new level of absurdity” if financial institutions were “colluding to swap assets at inflated prices using taxpayers’ dollars,” according to the paper.

Citigroup, JPMorgan and Goldman declined to comment to the paper.

The U.S. government’s plan, known as the Public-Private Investment Program, gives government help to private investors looking to buy loans and securities from banks.

“It’s an open program designed to get markets going,” a Treasury official told the paper, adding that “it is between a bank and their supervisor whether they are healthy enough to acquire assets.”

A Citigroup spokesman in Hong Kong was not immediately available for comment, while JPMorgan’s Asia-Pacific spokesman did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

A Goldman Sachs spokesman in Hong Kong declined to comment.

A Morgan Stanley spokesman from the company’s office in Hong Kong was not immediately available for comment.

Comments

Bank Lending Continues to Plummet Despite Trillions of Taxpayers’ Bailout Money Spent

After trillions of dollars issued to various failed financial institutions to bailout failed companies, to stabilize the financial system of the United States and to stimulate the economy, the banks failed to cooperate.  Bank lending continues to plummet.

So why are trillions of taxpayers’ bailout money going out the door?

Bank Loans Plummet as Obama Boosts Lending Efforts (Update1)
By Emre Peker

April 1 (Bloomberg) — Bank loans fell to a record low in the first quarter as the Obama administration steps up efforts to jump start debt markets and revive corporate lending.

Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. led banks in providing $79.6 billion of syndicated loans in the three months ended yesterday, a 61 percent drop from $203.2 billion a year earlier, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The volume has dropped from $446.4 billion in the first quarter of 2007, before credit markets seized up amid the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Banks are hoarding cash and driving up borrowing costs as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner seeks to spur them to resume lending by enticing private investors to buy troubled assets clogging their balance sheets. Companies including casino operator MGM Mirage and toymaker Mattel Inc. are agreeing to pay higher interest rates to maintain their credit lines.

“Banks are very much reducing their credit commitments overall, there’s no question about that,” Nicholas Bijur, assistant treasurer of PG&E Corp., said yesterday in a telephone interview. “In addition to the dollar amount, the pricing terms seem to have changed.”

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »