Bye bye, Wachovia

[Bocsius]

10/3 Update

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081003/ap_on_bi_ge/wells_fargo_wachovia;_ylt=Ak6yZ7YIpKrjqtFLP_Ffbxas0NUE

Citigroup: Bye bye, Wachovia

Wachovia is such a slut. Now it has went and sold itself to Wells Fargo.


Original Post:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080929/ap_on_bi_ge/wachovia_citigroup;_ylt=AleVNPQuGXtJJM4pbGux2y2s0NUE

Acquired by Citigroup. Technically not a failure, but close enough. Shares dropped 91% today to 94 cents.

Now who will buy Citigroup? They've been losing billions, too.

NEW YORK - In the latest byproduct of the widening global financial crisis, Citigroup Inc. will acquire the banking operations of Wachovia Corp. in a deal facilitated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Citigroup will absorb up to $42 billion of losses from Wachovia's $312 billion loan portfolio, with the FDIC covering any remaining losses, the government agency said Monday. Citigroup also will issue $12 billion in preferred stock and warrants to the FDIC.

...

The FDIC asserted Monday that Wachovia did not fail, and that all depositors are protected and there will be no cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, in a statement Monday, said he supports the "timely actions" taken by the FDIC "which demonstrate our government's unwavering commitment to financial and economic stability."

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson also welcomed the sale of Wachovia to Citigroup, saying it would "mitigate potential market disruptions." Paulson said he agreed with the FDIC and the Fed that a "failure of Wachovia would have posed a systemic risk" to the nation's financial system.

"As I have said before, in this period of market stress, we are committed to taking all actions necessary to protect our financial system and our economy," Paulson said.

As details of its takeover unfolded, Wachovia shares plunged 91 percent to 94 cents. The stock had closed Friday at $10, down 74 percent for the year.

[Bocsius]

Wachovia is not completely gone. They're selling off their entire banking business to Citigroup (under intense pressure from the FDIC), but they'll still be around in a slimmed down form.

Wachovia Corporation will remain a public company with two main operating subsidiaries:  Wachovia Securities, the nation's third largest brokerage firm, and Evergreen Asset Management, a leading provider of asset management services.

http://www.wachovia.com/inside/page/0,,134_307%5E1803,00.html

To think, I left Citigroup last year, and almost went to work at Wachovia.

[Kestastrophe]

If some of these banks can weather the short-term storm they will see their asset values go back up in response to the market created by the bailout (in theory).

[Tauntaun]

So what bank is still afloat? 

[Bocsius]

So what bank is still afloat? 

In two weeks, it might just be one institution known as the Federal Reserve Bank of America.

[Tauntaun]

So what bank is still afloat? 

In two weeks, it might just be one institution known as the Federal Reserve Bank of America.

 

[Kestastrophe]

Bank of America is looking good. There was article in today's WSJ that said 85% of the firms affected by Fannie/Freddie takeover (i.e. having a significant share of stock) are credit unions and smaller banks 

[The Fake Shemp]

Yeah, Bank of America is still good.  I think Wells Fargo is in good shape too, no?

[Eric P]

but a month ago the ceo sent out a mailer saying they were strong!

alas

i was thinking of shifting everything over to usaa anyway

[Madrun Badrun]

Can anyone explain to me how this all started and why everything is falling apart?   

[Human Snorenado]

Can anyone explain to me how this all started and why everything is falling apart?   

Like everything in life worth making fun of, Libertarians are to blame.

[T234]

Does that mean I can pull a Tom Dubois and throw Ron Paul in the trunk?

[Bocsius]

Can anyone explain to me how this all started and why everything is falling apart?   

Best I understand it is as follows:

 

I sort of have a handle on it as far as predatory lending, subprime mortgages, adjustable rates, etc., but draw a total blank regarding mortgage backed securities.

[Kestastrophe]

Can anyone explain to me how this all started and why everything is falling apart?   

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122231160991774325.html

"It's a perfect storm. It started with Congress encouraging lending to lower-income people. You went from subprime loans being 2% of total loans in 2002 to 30% of total loans in 2006. That kind of enormous increase swept into the net people who shouldn't have been borrowing.

Those loans were packaged into CDOs rated AAA, which led the investment-banking firms [buying them] to do little to no due diligence, and the securities were distributed throughout the world, where they started defaulting.

When they started defaulting, out of bad luck or bad judgment, we implemented fair-value accounting....You had wildly different marks for this kind of security, which led to massive write-offs by the commercial-banking and investment-banking system.

In the face of those losses...you needed to raise new equity...which came from sovereign-wealth funds, in part, which then caused political resistance to sovereign-wealth funds, who predictably have withdrawn from putting money into the system....It seemed pretty obvious that would happen. We now find ourselves with a liquidity crisis where fundamentally the cost of money for financial intermediaries [such as investment banks] is significantly in excess of their cost of lending it. So several institutions found themselves in a structurally impossible position. ...Goldman reverted to a banking charter for a lower cost of funds, which today is still not low enough for the business.

"So that's the story of how we got there."

[Human Snorenado]

Can anyone explain to me how this all started and why everything is falling apart?   

Best I understand it is as follows:

 

I sort of have a handle on it as far as predatory lending, subprime mortgages, adjustable rates, etc., but draw a total blank regarding mortgage backed securities.

Here's how it works, to my knowledge:

You take out a mortgage from a bank.  The bank then sells your mortgage off to a broker, who then immediately packages it up with more mortgages and sells it off as a package.  Then, say that maybe 10% of the mortgages in the package yours is part of go into default.  Your mortgage is now fucked as well because of some schmuck in Muncie, Indiana and also because America doesn't make anything other than debt to sell anymore.

[Van Cruncheon]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS. massive deregulation under greenspan's watch is a far, far bigger culprit than the clinton bill to aid housing purchases among lower income folks. being allowed to bundle loans into "waterfall" packages and let one bad card topple the tower is a far, far more pervasive evil -- as it let those bad loans crash entire packages, as triumph indicates,

[Himu]

Wack ovah yah

[Kestastrophe]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS.

I took it more as a scathing criticism of the lack of due diligence on the part of mortgagers. smh

[Flannel Boy]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS.

I took it more as a scathing criticism of the lack of due diligence on the part of mortgagers. smh

In the future, I hope no one complains when dirty poors are unable to get mortgages because they have bad credit, no money to put down, and no income to pay back the loans.

[Lone]

Ok, I have a checking account and a CD in Wachovia.  How Boned am I?

[Human Snorenado]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS.

I took it more as a scathing criticism of the lack of due diligence on the part of mortgagers. smh

In the future, I hope no one complains when dirty poors are unable to get mortgages because they have bad credit, no money to put down, and no income to pay back the loans.

As I've said plenty of times to my center and right leaning friends in conversation on this- you didn't see me rushing out to take out a mortgage back when I was making 30k a year and had no way to make a sizable down payment.  Unfortunately, if you can't save up and practice fiscal discipline you shouldn't own a house.  Fiscal discipline cuts both ways, tho.  In my book I'd say the enablers are more to blame than the enabled.  People are only as good as the options they're given, at least in my experience.

[Flannel Boy]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS.

I took it more as a scathing criticism of the lack of due diligence on the part of mortgagers. smh

In the future, I hope no one complains when dirty poors are unable to get mortgages because they have bad credit, no money to put down, and no income to pay back the loans.

As I've said plenty of times to my center and right leaning friends in conversation on this- you didn't see me rushing out to take out a mortgage back when I was making 30k a year and had no way to make a sizable down payment.  Unfortunately, if you can't save up and practice fiscal discipline you shouldn't own a house.  Fiscal discipline cuts both ways, tho.  In my book I'd say the enablers are more to blame than the enabled.  People are only as good as the options they're given, at least in my experience.

I agree with this, especially when the enablers knew better but were only interested in short-term financial rewards. However, I can see needed regulations being opposed on egalitarian principles--even if those principles are only being given lip service, as Bush gave them when he said owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream.

[Beardo]

Why arent banks lending to people who cant afford it. Poor people will never be able to afford a house unless the evil banks stop their discriminatory practices.
/liberals


You can also interchange banks with other institutions and house with almost anything. For example here is a fun mad-lib,


Why arent ____(Noun) lending to ____(a minority*). ____ (a minority*) will never be able to afford a _____ (Noun) unless the evil ____ (Noun) stop their discriminatory practices.

*feel free to divide and segment the population till everyone is categorized in a minority.



You now have the basis for all liberal complaints

[Mr. Gundam]

Yeah, Bank of America is still good.  I think Wells Fargo is in good shape too, no?

I haven't heard any bad news about Wells Fargo, so I think they're ok. I sure hope so, they're my bank!

[Tauntaun]

 

 

 

It's a cascade of Freedom Tears.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[Bocsius]

It wasn't just that these institutions gave subprime mortgages to those who wouldn't otherwise qualify (filthy poors!), they also gave subprime mortgages to people who qualified for better. Shame on the individual for not shopping around, but shame on the institution for putting the individual, the company, and the entire economy at risk. And shame on the regulators who let it happen.

[Kestastrophe]

As I've said plenty of times to my center and right leaning friends in conversation on this- you didn't see me rushing out to take out a mortgage back when I was making 30k a year and had no way to make a sizable down payment.  Unfortunately, if you can't save up and practice fiscal discipline you shouldn't own a house.  Fiscal discipline cuts both ways, tho.  In my book I'd say the enablers are more to blame than the enabled.  People are only as good as the options they're given, at least in my experience.

I agree with this sentiment. I absolutely hate the shirking of personal accountability, and I think the "enabled" have a large part of the blame in this mess. But the mortgagers, banks whose business it is to analyze cash flow and sensitivity analysis with respect to interest changes, lacked the due diligence when it was in their best interest to do so. On top of that, there was very little consumer awareness as to the terms of adjustable rate mortgages (which also falls on the shoulders of mortgagers and mortgagees, but moreso on the former imo). I don't understand Prole's comment at all, unless it was meant as sarcasm.

[Van Cruncheon]

i don't blame the enabled, because they HIRE these financial advisers to play expert on their behalf. i don't expect folks to be educated on every little aspect of their lives -- and to say i do would make me (or anyone else who claims so) a hypocrite. we have experts in a society for a reason. it's a uniquely american thing to attack the victim; as i noted in gaf, we blame grandma for losing her pension instead of the slicksters who defrauded her. the "bootstrapper" attitude is nothing more than self-righteous posing.

human nature MUST be accounted for. now, do we account for stupidity, which is pervasive, contextual, and ill-defined; or do we identify those pivotal areas of the financial sector most easily exploited by greed and sociopathy, and regulate? it's pretty safe to assume that given a totally open system, certain folks will look for those venues that minimize work and maximize profit at the expense of others. we should be working to punish that behavior and close the system, not scream at grandma for not understanding the minute ramifications of her actions.

[Brehvolution]

I still have to wonder who these banks were that gave out these loans. I'm 33, and since I turned 18, no one would ever give me a CC*, I got my first ever car loan last year, and 4 years ago the bank said  my wife would be better off if I wasn't on the loan for the house.  All because I have no credit.

I must have missed out.


*The only CC offer I would get were the one for a $250 limit that come with $180 in fees front loaded on them.

[Great Rumbler]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS. massive deregulation under greenspan's watch is a far, far bigger culprit than the clinton bill to aid housing purchases among lower income folks. being allowed to bundle loans into "waterfall" packages and let one bad card topple the tower is a far, far more pervasive evil -- as it let those bad loans crash entire packages, as triumph indicates,

I found this article to be more insightful:

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

[Van Cruncheon]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS. massive deregulation under greenspan's watch is a far, far bigger culprit than the clinton bill to aid housing purchases among lower income folks. being allowed to bundle loans into "waterfall" packages and let one bad card topple the tower is a far, far more pervasive evil -- as it let those bad loans crash entire packages, as triumph indicates,

I found this article to be more insightful:

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

that's a really good summation of the problem.

[Great Rumbler]

that wsj article is being really fucking specious, and preying on the white middle-class republican desire to blame THEM GREEDY POORS. massive deregulation under greenspan's watch is a far, far bigger culprit than the clinton bill to aid housing purchases among lower income folks. being allowed to bundle loans into "waterfall" packages and let one bad card topple the tower is a far, far more pervasive evil -- as it let those bad loans crash entire packages, as triumph indicates,

I found this article to be more insightful:

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

that's a really good summation of the problem.

Greedy rich people being greedy!

Laissez-faire

[Flannel Boy]

science blogs 

[Eric P]

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

science blogs is such a great place.  i have their combined feed in my RSS reader and it's just constantly has great stuff in it

[Flannel Boy]

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

science blogs is such a great place.  i have their combined feed in my RSS reader and it's just constantly has great stuff in it

PZ Myers has gotten old, however. There are only so many blog entries on creationism a man can take.

[demi]

I still have to wonder who these banks were that gave out these loans. I'm 33, and since I turned 18, no one would ever give me a CC*, I got my first ever car loan last year, and 4 years ago the bank said  my wife would be better off if I wasn't on the loan for the house.  All because I have no credit.

I must have missed out.


*The only CC offer I would get were the one for a $250 limit that come with $180 in fees front loaded on them.

I only tried to get one through my bank and they denied me because I had no credit. I'm not sure at this point if getting a CC is even an option.

[Great Rumbler]

I still have to wonder who these banks were that gave out these loans. I'm 33, and since I turned 18, no one would ever give me a CC*, I got my first ever car loan last year, and 4 years ago the bank said  my wife would be better off if I wasn't on the loan for the house.  All because I have no credit.

I must have missed out.


*The only CC offer I would get were the one for a $250 limit that come with $180 in fees front loaded on them.

I only tried to get one through my bank and they denied me because I had no credit. I'm not sure at this point if getting a CC is even an option.

Yeah, unless you have great credit you're probably not getting a credit card from anyone.

[demi]

I notice I don't get any offers from CapitolOne in the mail anymore, either.  :'(

[brawndolicious]

I still have to wonder who these banks were that gave out these loans. I'm 33, and since I turned 18, no one would ever give me a CC*, I got my first ever car loan last year, and 4 years ago the bank said  my wife would be better off if I wasn't on the loan for the house.  All because I have no credit.

I must have missed out.


*The only CC offer I would get were the one for a $250 limit that come with $180 in fees front loaded on them.

Online applications make it pretty easy to get your first card and even though it's easy to jack up a credit score, I have no idea whether you should get a card anytime soon with the economy the way it is.

[Cravis]

Here's my 2 cents...

The situation these lenders and individuals are in is a result of the "I want it now" generation. These borrowers want what everyone else has and they want it now. They want what their parents have but they don't think of what their parents went through to get it. That big house your parents have right now probably wasn't their first home and they probably had to put a sizeable chunk down. If you want something you have to save and work towards it. If you have bad credit then you need to work towards getting your score up. Do what has to be done. If you haven't paid someone then pay it off. Something on there that isn't yours? Get it taken care of. There is the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act that were established to help you get it taken care of. If you can't get it taken care of through that then you probably legitimately owe that and should just pay up. Make payments arrangements; see what they'll settle for. Do what it takes. If you don't want to do that because it will take too long then you obviously don't need to be a homeowner just yet.

People do not read fine print. They needed to shop around and look at the details of what type of mortgage they were getting into. Some of these mortgages had no caps on how high the interest could rise and some even had no caps on how high it could be raised in a year. All they saw was the bottom line of what they would pay right now, they didn't think of if they could afford it when the rates change. These people had nothing invested in these homes. They couldn't pay? No big deal we'll just move out and let the bank have it back. They would not have been so quick to leave if they would have had 10% invested in the property. They would be more willing to tough things out and do what they had to do.

The financial institutions should have explained better and let them know the risks of these mortgages. All they cared about at the time was building their portfolios and getting these mortgages on the books. They should have required down payments and weighed the risks of these borrowers. They should have looked to see if these people could afford the payment if it went up. These C and D borrowers shouldn't even be in homes in the first place. If you can't pay back a $2,000 credit card then what makes these lenders think they'll pay back a $200,000 mortgage?

It was foolish for the banks to give these loans to them and it was foolish for these individuals to accept these loans under these terms. Each should be equally held accountable and have to face the consequences of their decisions. There should be no bail out. The economy will work itself out. It might hurt like hell at the moment and the next year but all the bad debt will wash itself out.

[Mr. Gundam]

I notice I don't get any offers from CapitolOne in the mail anymore, either.  :'(

I used to get 4-5 credit card offers every month, but it's gone down to only 1-2 now. I always shred them, but it's still interesting.

I've already got three credit cards. I have a Target card I got to get 10% off my PS3, but I paid it off right away and I've never used it since. I have a Visa with my old credit union before I got married, which I now only use to buy my wife birthday/Christmas presents, and we put pretty much everything on our Northwest Airlines Visa, and pay it off in full each month.

[Kestastrophe]

Here's my 2 cents...

Worst analysis ever. I thought that your argument was going to be about the short-term orientation of the financial markets when you stated "I want it now". Disappointment-ton

[Eric P]

I still have to wonder who these banks were that gave out these loans. I'm 33, and since I turned 18, no one would ever give me a CC*, I got my first ever car loan last year, and 4 years ago the bank said  my wife would be better off if I wasn't on the loan for the house.  All because I have no credit.

I must have missed out.


*The only CC offer I would get were the one for a $250 limit that come with $180 in fees front loaded on them.

I only tried to get one through my bank and they denied me because I had no credit. I'm not sure at this point if getting a CC is even an option.

same situation here

i'm glad i don't have a credit card because i've never had one, but man i wish i had a way to build credit

[Bocsius]

I notice I don't get any offers from CapitolOne in the mail anymore, either.  :'(

I used to get 4-5 credit card offers every month, but it's gone down to only 1-2 now. I always shred them, but it's still interesting.

I got a 0 or 1% or whatever credit card offer from Washington Mutual last week.

[Cravis]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html

[Bocsius]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081003/ap_on_bi_ge/wells_fargo_wachovia;_ylt=Ak6yZ7YIpKrjqtFLP_Ffbxas0NUE

Citigroup: Bye bye, Wachovia

Wachovia is such a slut. Now it has went and sold itself to Wells Fargo.

[drozmight]

i was thinking of shifting everything over to usaa anyway

i did this

[The Fake Shemp]

This was the only scenario that made real sense.  Even with the government absorbing most of Wachovia's bad assets, Citi was on shaky ground to begin with.

Citi could very well be the next Wachovia!