Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 36 of 36
  1. #26
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    39,469
    Quasi insurance

    bs

  2. #27
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Post Count
    20,699
    Ex-A.I.G. Chief Wins Bailout Suit, but Gets No Damages





    Maurice R. Greenberg, the former chief executive of theAmerican International Group, prevailed in his lawsuit against the United States government on Monday, but a federal judge declined to award any damages.

    The lawsuit, brought by Mr. Greenberg on behalf of himself and other A.I.G. shareholders, contended that the Federal Reserve overstepped its bounds when it bailed out the giant insurer in 2008, taking 79.9 percent of the company’s equity in the process. They argued that the Fed did not have the legal right to take the equity and effectively become its majority owner as a condition for the bailout.


    Judge Thomas C. Wheeler of the United States Court of Federal Claims sided with Mr. Greenberg, who is still a large A.I.G. shareholder through his company Starr International. But at the same time, the judge ruled that Mr. Greenberg could not show that the shareholders were damaged by the seizure of the equity and therefore awarded no monetary judgment. Mr. Greenberg had been seeking nearly $40 billion in compensation.

    Judge Wheeler wrote that the Fed’s action “cons uted an illegal exaction under the Fifth Amendment.”


    “The Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve Banks possessed the authority in a time of crisis to make emergency loans to distressed en ies such as A.I.G., but they did not have the legal right to become the owner of A.I.G.,” he wrote in his decision. “There is no law permitting the Federal Reserve to take over a company and run its business in the commercial world as consideration for a loan.”


    The judge’s ruling also criticized the government for “unduly harsh treatment” of A.I.G. compared with other financial ins utions that were bailed out during the financial crisis.

    However, when it came to assessing damages, Judge Wheeler ruled that he “must examine what would have happened to A.I.G. if the government had not intervened.”

    “The inescapable conclusion is that A.I.G. would have filed for bankruptcy,” he wrote. “In that event, the value of the shareholders common stock would have been zero.”
    Consequently, even though the government acted illegally, the shareholders, he wrote, were not en led to damages.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/bu...T.nav=top-news

    chances the s bag will appeal?

    How is Greenberg a s bag? He built AIG into the largest insurance/financial company on the planet. After he was forced out in '05 the idiots in charge decided to gamble the entire company on CDS's. When AIG was on the verge of collapse he built a group of investors who would have bailed out AIG, put Greenberg back in charge, and sent the morons packing. Instead the govt stepped in and let the morons keep their jobs.

  3. #28
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    How is Greenberg a s bag? He built AIG into the largest insurance/financial company on the planet. After he was forced out in '05 the idiots in charge decided to gamble the entire company on CDS's. When AIG was on the verge of collapse he built a group of investors who would have bailed out AIG, put Greenberg back in charge, and sent the morons packing. Instead the govt stepped in and let the morons keep their jobs.
    Plus if you hate "too big to fail", this is an excellent ruling... hopefully it's not overturned...

  4. #29
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    Under normal cir stances AIG would have been able to go to the bond market and within two weeks do an issuance to cover it's collateral requirements. What AIG failed to realized was that if the hit the fan like it did the markets wold freeze up and that wouldn't (wasn't) be an option anymore.

  5. #30
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    AIG was lied to, like many other parts in that chain on trust. They thought they were insuring AAA loans, but only a fraction were AAA. But they're not blameless. They have a duty to know exactly what they are insuring before signing any papers and taking on the risk. They didn't. Whether it was a bad actor within the company or a conscious company decision, we'll probably never know.

  6. #31
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    AIG was lied to, like many other parts in that chain on trust. They thought they were insuring AAA loans, but only a fraction were AAA. But they're not blameless. They have a duty to know exactly what they are insuring before signing any papers and taking on the risk. They didn't. Whether it was a bad actor within the company or a conscious company decision, we'll probably never know.
    AIG couldn't have written $200B of paper by the work of one bad actor. IIRC, it was a small GROUP within AIG that took on $100Bs in liability without adequate reserves. AND the risk management, and even mgmt about risk mgmt, that must have known about the huge risks taken.

    Behind Insurer’s Crisis, Blind Eye to a Web of Risk

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/bu...pagewanted=all


  7. #32
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    All insurance is a gamble, Boo. The companies charge X amount of money per year to assume Y amount of risk. When RandomGuys insurance company charged him $1500 a year for comprehensive car insurance they were betting he wouldn't have to use it. When his car got flooded in San Marcos and totaled it cost them a load of money. That's just the way it works. AIG made some horrible bets and lost. They understimated the collateral damage from the derivatives tanking and their effect on the credit markets. With the credit market frozen they couldn't come up with enough collateral for reserve to cover their bad bets.

  8. #33
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    39,469
    All insurance is a gamble, Boo. The companies charge X amount of money per year to assume Y amount of risk. When RandomGuys insurance company charged him $1500 a year for comprehensive car insurance they were betting he wouldn't have to use it. When his car got flooded in San Marcos and totaled it cost them a load of money. That's just the way it works. AIG made some horrible bets and lost. They understimated the collateral damage from the derivatives tanking and their effect on the credit markets. With the credit market frozen they couldn't come up with enough collateral for reserve to cover their bad bets.
    Insurance companies like you described are REQUIRED to keep a certain amount of liquidity for large scale emergencies. Of course if everyone gets in a wreck the same day they are fried.

    What are the rules for liquidity for financial insurance companies?
    A: There are none so don't sell it as "insurance".

  9. #34
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    This whole thing goes into risk assessment and who you can really trust. AIG thought it could trust a big bank like Goldman and their rating agencies, but in reality they could not. We're talking billions of dollars of packaged loans, it's practically impossible to go through and review every loan in a sensible time. That fact was obviously a key part of the con job, but it's also entirely possible that AIG was well aware of what was happening. Only when everything exploded the nitty gritty of unraveling every piece of paper happened.

    What's striking about all this is that the vast majority of actors that took part on this con simply paid off a monetary penalty and walked away scot-free without admitting to any wrongdoing or facing criminal charges, despite the seriousness of the situation.

  10. #35
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    39,469
    This whole thing goes into risk assessment and who you can really trust. AIG thought it could trust a big bank like Goldman and their rating agencies, but in reality they could not. We're talking billions of dollars of packaged loans, it's practically impossible to go through and review every loan in a sensible time. That fact was obviously a key part of the con job, but it's also entirely possible that AIG was well aware of what was happening. Only when everything exploded the nitty gritty of unraveling every piece of paper happened.

    What's striking about all this is that the vast majority of actors that took part on this con simply paid off a monetary penalty and walked away scot-free without admitting to any wrongdoing or facing criminal charges, despite the seriousness of the situation.
    Assessing financial risk on financial instruments should be a good deal more difficult than insuring a house. I have never bought stock or even municipal bonds expecting that I would compensated in some way if it went bad. And I knew if a hurricane hit Florida, my home insurance had the chance of going up.

    The financial instruments people are creating have way too many layers to hide crap under. Some of these things need to be totally illegal it seems.

  11. #36
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    All insurance is a gamble, Boo.
    The AIG "financial innovation" that blew up and froze the credit markets and ed America was not traditional insurance.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •