peanutbutterjelly:
damn, what's the next bank to go bankrupt.

to be fair, the bill was put to get very quickly and wasn't fully explained to the public. many people disapproved it, a lot of the midwest, south ...

True. I don't think that the public understood what a collapse on Wall St. would mean for the economy as a whole. Congress now has nothing to show for its hype and hustle, except that that it is too divided to quickly handle crises such as these.

 

This thing should have been explained to the public as an asset purchase, rather than a bail out. It also should have been made clear that this is a solution for a national problem - not a wall street problem.

STill, the average person struggles to understand that a dollar in someone else's pocket now may benefit him in the future.

There is a fatal flaw in our political system. Decision makers look out for their constituency's short term interests rather than the nation's long term interests.

I wish this thing had happened after the elections.

 

My graduation plan had changed to moving back in with my parents in California come December. At least I'll enjoy the weather short-term, maybe become a hippie long-term. 4.5 years of college down the drain. Cheers.

 

This is absurd. People are angry at people on Wall Street for taking huge bonuses... how about the fact that these assholes in Washington are voting no on this bill even though they know that we need it just because they are afraid they won't get reelected. Talk about selfishness... this is a total mess. The general public does not understand that they are purchasing assets which may/can/will be sold some time in the future, and they actually have a chance to potentially profit off of this.

NEVER lose your BlackBerry www.conveniencesoftware.com

 
Clueless Wanderer:
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people

So true...

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." -Henry Mencken

Makes me sick. Now not only are the American public a bunch of idiots, the House is playing a childish blame game and preventing any sort of bill from passing. You would think they could put aside their political party for one freaking second so they could get something done, but apparently not. It's not just one party I'm pissed at now, it's everyone.

 
ARD45:
Clueless Wanderer:
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people

So true...

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." -Henry Mencken

Except for the people who went broke assuming that Wall Street was smart enough to not over leverage itself.

 
Clueless Wanderer:
Fucking House Republicans....
you see, it wasn't Al Qaeda, Russia, Iran, or China that's our worst enemy. It's our fucking partisan politics that has failed at every step of the way.
 

Another frustrating thing is that by keeping the $700B bill from passing, Congress sent fear into the markets and the DOW fell by 777 points. Overall investors lost over $1 Trillion dollars today in the markets. So what's better, $700 billion that could actually turn out to make the taxpayers money over time, or a $1 Trillion loss?

 

i'm pretty sure we're all preaching to the choir on this board. it's too bad the constituencies of the south and midwest formulate their intricate and well-developed theories on fiscal policy with their church groups and avoid places like this and people who know what they're saying.

 

it's funny to see how a lot of people here claim to be so in favor of the free markets but when the government fails to carry through with the bail out, everyone starts shouting like crazy.

sure, the market collapsed. but isn't that what is supposed to happen in the free markets? aren't the poor decision makers supposed to be punished and disciplined?

 
Best Response

The ignorance of this board.

The bill in its present form is garbage. Punitive, hastily written, garbage piece of legislation that doesn't address any of the central problems surrounding the issues.

And I'll say this--I'm a multifamily (apartment) lender with a lot of friends in the single-family lending industry--there is plenty of credit out there! This whole thing is a complete sham. There are 310 million Americans and only about 50 million of them have significant stock investments. And the bill wasn't opposed by southerners and midwestern hicks--it was opposed by 3-1 majorities, and one poll last week had the opposition at 95%!

The false pride and raving ignorance of people on this board is shocking. I challenge any of you to STFU and actually read this legislation without laughing out loud.

Array
 

Blame the Republicans? I'm not a fan of either party, but 2/5ths of the Dems voted No on this. If anything, this rejection looks terrible on those that voted for it. It was a terrible piece of legislation. With the way all of Washington has treated the whole thing as a political bullet instead of a real problem, I implore everybody to vote every one of these clowns out of office.

I'm surprised this group, who thrives on the free market, is so for a government run program like this. Let it burn. You wanna be mad at someone, be mad at the Fed for allowing banks to over-leverage themselves while allowing money to be dirt cheap.

 

Let me add this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/25/AR20080…

"Smaller Banks Thrive out of the Fray of Crisis" Washington Post, 9/26/2008

Some text:

Banks throughout the United States carried on with the business of making loans yesterday even as federal officials warned again that their industry is on the verge of collapse, suggesting that the overheated language on Capitol Hill may not reflect the reality on many Main Streets.

"We're doing fine. There are 9,000 financial institutions out there, and most of them are small and most of them are doing fine."

Array
 

I agree with you Virgina Tech 4ever,

This legislation is toilet paper

The people on this board are frikin retards, who have nothing else to do, but hang around with the American public, whom they apparently call stupid

Use your brains for once and stop ranting!

 

george W.ANKER bush - worst fkg president ever. he used up his political change on the war and now he couldnt round up a fkg silver quarter.

as to the bailout being a disaster, where have you guys been? to suggest not passing this has been a nasty death sentence on WSO for the last week or so. call me a hypocrite, but i was not opposed to this bill passing given the adjustments that had been made. still as ive said before, this whole showdown is akin to the banks holding a remote detonator and telling washington, if you dont help us we keep the financial system hostage and eventually blow ourselves and everyone else up. in this situation, clearly the government needs to do something and i would have settled with the bill as the lesser of evils.

my hypocrisy is, i just dont really think this bill is designed effectively to do what the administration claims. there is nothing in here guaranteeing that after these assets are purchased, banks will not continue to hoard liquidity. clearly we need to do something else in concert. the obvious wall street problem is trust. how do you address issues of trust? transparency. where is the push from the government to redefine and magnify it? also, i think we need to focus in on recapitalization. bernanke claims to be a scholar of the great depression. he should broaden his scope internationally and see that recapitalization by public equity was the leading factor in the more successful banking recoveries across the globe (eg sweeden). i think paulson backed him into a corner with a silver tongued dire scenario and he folded the same way i did that something was better than nothing. now i do believe that there is a significant risk to the financial system, but i think it is grossly over exaggerated. and i think it is disingenuous to claim that this bill largely benefits main street in order to push it through. to all challengers of that view, please add DETAIL to your claims of opposition. the last problem ill mention with this bill is that it doesnt address the root cause of the housing problem which is the continuing increase of foreclosures across the country due to bad loans. if youre willing to sacrifice for the good of the financial system - sacrifice for this root cause. if this is not addressed and these mortgages continue to deteriorate and affect neighboring assets, the cycle continues and well be back for another $700b later on.

ill stop there cause i know what a short attention span we all have.

actually one more thing, slightly off topic - if you think the dow drop was catastrophic, please review your market history and your investment objectives. it is irresponsible of the news to report it as the worst point drop in dow history without also mentioning that it doesnt even make the top 10 in terms of percentage loss. and your 401k, which is the vehicle the majority of middle america uses to invest in the stock market should have a at least 15+ year horizon. in which case there is no need to panic, there is sufficient time for recovery. and if youre well off enough to be playing w/ stocks and got burned you should know the risks. if you couldnt afford it? a fool and his money....

signing off.

 
wintonheights:
now i do believe that there is a significant risk to the financial system, but i think it is grossly over exaggerated. and i think it is disingenuous to claim that this bill largely benefits main street in order to push it through. to all challengers of that view, please add DETAIL to your claims of opposition.

do you really not understand how a dramatic reduction in the availability of credit would slow our economy? do you really need someone to walk you through this? do you also think paulson, bernanke, and buffet would speak out if everything was ok?

it's more irresponsible of the news to report this plan as a "bailout of wall street" when it's actually an asset purchase by the government.

 

I didn't read all of wintonheights's post, but, from mlamb's excerpt, it seems as if winston is another 65th, which is the problem with this country [and why the bill didn't get passed]... there are so many 65ths out there who have no idea wtf is going on, so they completely misunderstand how this thing works.

 

i agreed there is a significant risk to the financial system, did i not? what i said was i believe it is over exaggerated in DIRECT connection with this bill. just because we need to do something does not mean we should do anything. and the reality is, if this bill is passed the next market hesitation will be over when the details will be worked out and into action and then whether or not the bill will even be effective. see, wall street by nature is shortsighted. the government needs to act quick but not in haste. the markets have waited. they can wait for a better solution. nobodys talking inactivity here.

and as i said above, this bill most certainly should not be characterized as "bailout of mainstreet" either. it is clear whos getting the immediate benefit here and thats why it was characterized as it was. long term benefactors maybe be more widely diverse, i agree, but dont kid yourself, this "rescue plan" WILL NOT stop the broader economy from going into a recession and any main street benefit from it is surely residual - save us, so we can loan to credit worthy customers/businesses again and restore profits. yay! wait, what?

so save me the "slow our economy bit". the pain is here to stay. DEAL WITH IT. i have mentioned what i believe are other measures that are better at making this less severe or should at least be included in combination. those are my thoughts. in addition the government should stay out of the way of the free markets and go back to being THE LAST resort. if it intervenes it, should be do what it did w/ bear, wamu and Wachovia, be proactive. use its mighty hand to broker deals that consolidate the industry well before it collapses (they have to get better terms and take on less risk tho. geez). it should preside over the orderly dissolution of insolvent companies so there isnt panic. it should reassure the public that its savings and 401ks are safe. and it should force more transparency into the system by investigating all the financial institutions and make their findings public. or temporarily suspend or adjust certain accounting rules for illquid assets. or temporarily suspend all companies from paying dividends. or hell, locking all the heads of banks into a room and not letting them out until they come up with a solution to HELP THEMSELVES. these are things the government has historically been better at doing rather than being an investor in assets it knows nothing about compared to the sellers (ever heard of asymmetric information?).

to be fair though, i actually do agree with you that it is/was irresponsible of the news to report this as a "bailout of wall street", but more irresponsible? im guessing that was just for arguments sake. ill ignore it. "rescue plan" would have been sufficient. but dont kid yourself there would still have been opponents and proponents. now, if youre asking whether or not the american people would have gotten involved enough to intelligently question the bill under than scenario? well thats another story. my guess is it probably would have sneaked through. i mean it almost did yesterday against overwhelming public backlash.

lastly, dont attempt to oversimplify this. IT IS NOT basic economics, otherwise the solution would be in that macro textbook at the back of your shelf you havent read in the last couple of years. and wed be well on our way to recovery.

 
wintonheights:
in addition the government should stay out of the way of the free markets and go back to being THE LAST resort. if it intervenes it, should be do what it did w/ bear, wamu and Wachovia, be proactive. use its mighty hand to broker deals that consolidate the industry well before it collapses (they have to get better terms and take on less risk tho. geez). it should preside over the orderly dissolution of insolvent companies so there isnt panic.

I really can't think of a more appropriate time where the "last resort" concept applies. Look at the roster of failed institutions: Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Fannie/Freddie, AIG, WaMu, Wachovia, and Merrill (to a certain extent). Nevermind the fact that many of these occurred within days. The market is in a complete state of panic and systemic risk is dangerously high. The LIBOR-OIS spread is at its highest level ever.

I am not one for reckless government spending; however, I firmly believe something needs to be done in the near term to avoid additional stress to the financial markets. Paulson's plan is the best idea we have right now.

 

too bad mlamb93.

b2 just almost blew up any credibility you have by hopping aboard your train. doh!

dont worry. i wont hold that against you. its obvious by other posts he suffers from dementia. and at such a young age. shame.

i also wont respond directly to him, cause really whats the point?

 

and it seems were really closer than not overall...but with key differences.

i do believe something needs to be done and that paulsons adjusted plan (not his ridiculous original) is the best idea on the hill. but ah.....ive also read some better plans from across the industry (imo) that are just simply not being considered there. what of those?

as to government intervention and the roster of failed institutions. ok, i agree w/ you. youre right.

i also advocate intervention before the last resort. as in, i think the government needs to be more proactive earlier and earlier than they have in those cases. but also in different ways beyond injecting money into the banking system and buying these assets. in ways that perhaps include what ive mentioned before.

 

looks like we agree more than i originally thought. what makes this whole situation so incredibly complex is the fact that there's so many different parties to blame: wall street bankers for selling toxic securities and abusing leverage, mortgage bankers for writing subprime loans, homeowners for piling on debt and living above their means, regulators for failing to adequately monitor the industry, rating agencies for slapping "investment grade" on risky securities, the fed for pumping too much money into the market after 9/11 ... the list goes on and on.

everyone knows something needs to be done - both to avert further damage to the financial system and to mitigate the risk of this happening again in the future (although bubbles will always exist). unfortunately, no one has come up with a solution(s) that addresses all these issues yet.

 

700 billion, with leverage of 10:1 will add $70b of equity to the banks if the assets are bought at current prices. Lets say the Fed gives the banks 30% premium for the illiquid assets, increasing the banks equity by $210 + $70 = roughly $300 billion.

If you add up all the equity of all the banks in the US, its $1.3 trillion. So my question is that will the $700 billion be enough?

The objective is to free up the credit market, and there is no way to find out what these assets are worth. The 30% assumption is merely an example, could it be the average of last 10 years?

 

I believe the $700 billion is a credit line that the government can draw down upon multiple times once they've sold the assets. Also, the government would never pay a 30% premium for the illiquid assets. This will be conducted through a reverse auction process where essentially the government will purchase assets at the lowest available price... which makes $700 billion all the more potent.

Side note: b2 reminds me of a certain politician... something McCain? Replying to a post without reading it, awesome - quite similar to one of the presidential candidates commenting on the bill only to say that he hasn't read it shortly afterwards. Maybe that's a bigger contributing factor to the bill not passing instead of all the 65ths polluting the world. But hey, if McCain's almost there, no stopping b2 from becoming our future US president!

 

Isn't a reverse auction a crappy system for price discovery in a situation like this? That is, institutions that are more desperate to just get rid of the toxic assets, and well capitalized enough to afford it, will drop their assets no matter what. This will likely drive prices down to a level where less well-capitalized peers are fucked if they sell off, so they wont even want to participation. Some institutions would go bankrupt anyways if they had to mark assets down to the levels a reverse auction would suggest.

 
Hephaestus:
Isn't a reverse auction a crappy system for price discovery in a situation like this? That is, institutions that are more desperate to just get rid of the toxic assets, and well capitalized enough to afford it, will drop their assets no matter what. This will likely drive prices down to a level where less well-capitalized peers are fucked if they sell off, so they wont even want to participation. Some institutions would go bankrupt anyways if they had to mark assets down to the levels a reverse auction would suggest.

They probably won't do a straight-up reverse auction, but will use something like Olympic diving, where they throw out the highest and lowest prices and take the median of the remaining.

 

I am quite surprised to see how many people here are shocked that the House didn't vote for the bill. The Congress has been demonizing it as a bailout since its inception. The political grandstanding is appalling, but should be expected. With the 777 point meltdown, it reminded me of Nero fiddling while Rome burned. The Senate will vote on their version today, and it looks like the stock markets will "hopefully" continue to tread water. I frankly expected a large drop yesterday. The credit markets are still seized up, but at least the media is beginning to point out to "Main Street" that they have MUCH skin in the game.... think plunging 401k's and no car loans.... shudder the thought!!

John

The Kaighn Report

 

Impedit quisquam hic sit ut voluptate. Culpa qui doloremque qui quaerat aliquam. Ipsum dolore et aliquid eaque qui aperiam. Ad quo non perspiciatis modi. Similique error dolorum sit enim explicabo ipsa.

Quam non doloribus dicta deserunt doloribus. Eligendi est eaque earum similique.

Quia voluptas distinctio ut et laborum est. Qui veritatis omnis est quia mollitia quam fuga est. Nostrum praesentium assumenda praesentium recusandae similique commodi magnam odio. Et maxime repellendus modi cupiditate sed quia assumenda. Ipsum culpa quia nulla fugit ut est eum repellendus. Sed voluptas consequatur et et.

Dolor sint natus sed quasi commodi. Doloremque facilis et ducimus adipisci officiis ut. Ut qui eos modi facere autem ipsa et. Ab nulla et quis blanditiis labore nisi beatae. Cumque quod saepe cum necessitatibus id tempora similique. Occaecati dolores illo et voluptas dicta nemo.

 

Est eaque veniam in saepe. Eius perspiciatis provident et itaque unde et voluptatem. Quo dolores reiciendis omnis est. Nam error eum aut libero quod totam. Voluptas possimus doloribus vitae doloremque odit atque.

Ea corporis qui in qui. Odio ipsa consequuntur ut sit accusamus commodi.

Autem iste eos aut. Soluta dolorem quod vitae cupiditate. Eum dignissimos rem modi natus dolor.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”