Search results

This article and anyone who thinks transparency of the Fed would result in Mutually Assured Destruction is a complete and total moron and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a computer or the internet.

I didn't say he won't be better off with a put if they re-organize. I said he won't be better off holding a put if the firm is liquidated and equity is wiped. If he's holding $1 and it's wiped and given to bond holders. He loses $1 on equity, but gains $1 on the put.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203946904574300050657897992.html Weak economy? Bernanke says we must give out free money (reserves) and pay interest to the banks on the free money and then ask them to make loans (pretty please). Loans to WHO you ask? The over-leveraged...

Well, nothing you said refuted what I've been saying about the bankruptcy process first of all. Second, equity holders holding puts is not exactly the same because it will never be more beneficial for the equity holder to allow the equity to go to 0 just to collect some money on the put. For...

Well, I never really considered current equity holders as having a major say in any bankruptcy preceeding outcome and so I never gave the equity-put relationship much thought. But if the majority equity stake desired bankruptcy, why would they ever initiate bankruptcy protection in the first...

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The very fact that most companies that go into bankruptcy protection are insolvent belies the fact that equity holders end up being wiped out or lose almost all of their money. Just because equityholders TECHNICALLY initiate preceedings to get...

Generally, equity holders are wiped out in the event of bankruptcy as bond-holders are owed first... -- http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_25/b4136063169698.htm "To file for bankruptcy, a company is supposed to be insolvent, with debts exceeding assets. Since debtholders...

The difference is that equity holders are generally not called to the table in bankruptcy proceedings. And more than just disclosure is needed, you have to remove the financial conflict of interest or you could always abolish bankruptcy laws. And tell me why deep capture is 'opinionated...

Try reading the rest of the article. Also, if you are naive enough to think there are no predatory and manipulative hedge funds out there, this conversation is over. Read www.deepcapture.com 15 part segment on how hedge funds manipulated the markets for a single prostrate treatment...

http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13871164 "Credit-default swaps are pitting firms against their own creditors SIX FLAGS, an American theme-park operator, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on June 13th, bringing its long ride to reduce debt...

Sfan do you deny that bankruptcy has various social and economic benefits for employees and customers of the firm who desire and require stability? Not to mention for bondholders who want at least a portion of their money back in the event of a failure and have a mutual incentive toward...

Rising loonie is only a problem for Ontario... It's not bad for the rest of Canada.

Bingo. There's not NEARLY enough regulation to discourge moral hazard and market manipulation potential due to the plethora of derivatives out there entirely unlinked from cash settlement values.

Is your mind so entrenched in dogma that you are unable to grasp the possibility that GS and MS is (legally) playing both the stock market and the tax payer like a fiddle? They know as long as they can use the excuse of competitive salaries and make large profits, the game will go on and...

1) Do you not understand the socio-economic benefits of bankruptcy proceedings? To ensure that assets that benefit society have a second lease on life even when not economically viable in the strictest sense? Allowing bond-holders to hold CDS and have an economic interest in allowing a firm to...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akcQKz2G5CX4 Morgan Stanley boosts pay by 37 percent. 72% of revenues...

Of course investors love him. He's re-inflating bubbles left and right. Without him, they'd all have no jobs.

'Paradox of Thrift' doesn't exist. Any consumption over and above the optimal level of consumption at T = 0 is damaging for all future periods' consumption levels.

"Please sir, may I have s'more?" --Oliver Twist

Not gonna happen... The link between interest rates and equities is too powerful.