|
Prev Blog << |
A few things for the AM Coffee |
Next Blog >> |
 |
Category: Finance and Credit Current Grade: A Total Views: 1702 Member Comments: 0 |
Posted on: 11/25/2007 Posted by: Jeff_Tumbarello Blog Points: 5344 View all blogs >> |
| Quote: |
At the Movies: Vampires End Rule of Light Comedies Category: MOVIES By: Pete Kendall, October 22, 2007 Until recently, the last bear market era, the 1970s, was largely considered cinematic wasteland because of its use of gore, sex, violence and dark themes. In recent months, however, its reliance on this more subversive subject matter has been cheered as a “groundbreaking” achievement. The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast, December 2003 As the quote above illustrates, dark themes emerged as a dominant trend in film back near the end of the last major stock market decline in 2003. Since then, upbeat Disney cartoons and action hero favorites like Superman Returns have battled it out for box office supremacy with horror films like Saw I, II and III and serious, tear jerkers like Million Dollar Baby. At this point, the bear market fare appears to have the upper hand as the latest issue of USA Today just classified 30 Days, a movie in which vampires attempt to massacre an entire town, as “light fare.” It seems Hollywood is so immersed in dark themes that vampires can actually be considered "light." |
http://www.sociotimes.com/archives/2007/10/light_fare_stil.aspx
| Quote: |
| Bloodbath expected to claim more victims By Peter Thal Larsen in London Published: November 5 2007 22:45 | Last updated: November 5 2007 22:45 When the world’s largest investment banks last month wrote off tens of billions of dollars, their shares went up as investors assumed that the worst of the bad news was out of the way. But additional writedowns from Merrill Lynch and Citigroup have shattered that optimistic view. Citigroup’s announcement that it was writing down the value of securities exposed to the US subprime mortgage market by a further $8bn-$11bn on Monday prompted a sell-off in banking stocks on both sides of the Atlantic as investors anticipated that other lenders would suffer similar setbacks. The writedown, which dwarfs the $3.3bn charge Citi took at the end of the third quarter, is a sign that the subprime mortgage market is continuing to deteriorate, further dragging down the value of a range of mortgage-backed securities and structures based on them. The sell-off has been triggered by growing concerns that further writedowns might force some banks to breach their reserve capital ratios. This would force them to suspend share buy-back programmes, cut dividend payments and – in extreme circumstances – even raise new equity. Most of all, however, the disclosures from Citi and Merrill – which last month reported much heavier losses than it had warned of a few weeks before – have left investors with the impression that the valuations banks are putting on their subprime exposures cannot be trusted. In the absence of more information, many investors are assuming the worst. “The bear market for banks is unlikely to end until we get some clarity on the extent of the losses and impact on banks’ capital ratios,” said Huw van Steenis, an analyst at Morgan Stanley. “Weak disclosure by some banks, deteriorating fundamentals in US subprime and spillover impacts into other credit and funding markets mean in many cases we’ll not get real clarity until the full-year results next year,” he said |
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c78dfc24-8bed-11dc-af4d-0000779fd2ac,dwp_uuid=1c573392-3015-11da-ba9f-00000e2511c8,print=yes.html?nclick_check=1
| Quote: |
| Annaly CEO Mike Farrell is nobody’s fool. His is the one mortgage REIT that got it right. In the face of a scoffing Wall Street that thought he was nuts, he positioned his company to take advantage of the very economy we’re now in: A pretty dysfunctional one with falling rates. What now? Let’s just say inflation is the least of his worries. If you think this housing “thing” is overblown, the credit crunch is “contained” and the markets have discounted the bad stuff, grab a bottle of Maalox, sit back, put up your feet and read some excerpts from what he told his shareholders the other day after announcing third quarter earnings: On October 15th, 2007, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke addressed the Economics Club of New York. After his prepared remarks, the Chairman took a question from Henry Kaufman, who wanted to know what kind of information he would like to receive from the risk takers who were both lenders and borrowers in the structured markets. Bernanke thought for a moment and then replied, with an air of resignation in his voice, “I’d like to know what those damn things are worth.” The thousand or so participants in the New York Hilton ballroom thundered their applause |
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/greenberg/2007/11/credit-crisismortgage-mess-deflation/
| Quote: |
| Bank Of America (BAC): Bad News Doesn't Matter? 11/14/2007 5:29:40 PM By Vadim Pokhlebkin On Wednesday (Nov. 13), Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) revealed that it would have to write off $3 billion worth of bad debts and warned that its losses could grow. That very day their stock opened with an upward gap and closed 5.2% higher. Yes, I know: "shares rose as investors gained confidence that the bank and its rivals could withstand further turmoil," the losses were "manageable," etc. (Reuters) And let's not forget the DJIA's 300-point rally on Wednesday: Rising tide lifts all boats, as they say, and that rally certainly added some buoyancy to BAC, too. But let's be frank. All those arguments amount to nothing but rationalization. We could come up with a dozen more "reasons" to explain the move, but the fact remains: anyone with a sense of logic understands that on Wednesday BAC did the opposite of what it should have. That's all there is to it. Even if we could come up with a good explanation, one question would still remain – the most important question, really. And that is – next time a company whose stock you own reveals something terrible, should you be concerned? When another bank announces its subprime-related losses (I'll bet you it won't be long), what do you do with its stock: buy, sell or hold? |
http://www.elliotwave.com/features/default.aspx?cat=emw*aid=3492*time=pm
| Quote: |
| Mortgage Bailouts: Who Should Be Helped, and How? By David Wessel From The Wall Street Journal Online While we're sorting out the big question about the subprime debacle, how to preserve the good (hard-working, bill-paying people once barred from the American dream becoming homeowners) without repeating the bad (fraud, reckless lending and fast-talking salesmen peddling mortgages to folks who simply can't afford them), there's an issue that can't wait: a tidal wave of foreclosures. Interest rates on about two million once-popular, subprime mortgages known as 2/28 or 3/27 (because the rate for the first two or three years is lower) are poised to jump in the next year. Many will rise to a range of 9.5% to 11% from 7% or 8%. That would boost a typical subprime borrower's payment by roughly $350 a month. For many of those borrowers, that's the difference between affordable and not. There's good reason to presume that someone who stops paying the mortgage will lose the house. If that rule is broken, lenders and the investors to whom they sell mortgages will grow reluctant to lend. Even in good times, though, self-interested lenders often decide they're better off renegotiating a deal with a borrower than seizing and selling the borrower's home. Foreclosure costs a lender as much as 40% or 50% of the unpaid balance more here! |
http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/mortgages/20071116-wessel.html?mod=RSS_Real_Estate_Journal&rejrss=frontpage
