You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Call me crazy - I want to buy banks!
- Thread starter timscott
- Start date
Quote from option_trad3r:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the housing bubble in Canada is worse. An extreme example - it was around $600k for a cardboard box in Fort McMurray, Alberta. Not to mention Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, etc.
There is still a huge housing bubble in western Canada, but the bulk of Canada's population doesn't live there. So while parts of the country did indeed have tremendous RE bubbles, much of Canada appreciated at rates that, while still too high, were nowhere near the ludicrousness seen across most of the US.
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
USB is in serious trouble: they and other Swiss, Italian and German banks lent 1.7 trillion to Eastern Europe and this is the next crisis to hit the globe. This is probably why USB capitulated in banking secrecy to US authories - they have a gun pointed to their head.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/19/AR2009021903284_2.html
And, by the way, did you realize the US is actually going to get away with fining them almost a BILLION dollars?
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=OBR&date=20090222&id=9627969
UBS, not USB (USBank).
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
USB is in serious trouble: they and other Swiss, Italian and German banks lent 1.7 trillion to Eastern Europe and this is the next crisis to hit the globe. This is probably why USB capitulated in banking secrecy to US authories - they have a gun pointed to their head.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/19/AR2009021903284_2.html
And, by the way, did you realize the US is actually going to get away with fining them almost a BILLION dollars?
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=OBR&date=20090222&id=9627969
I think you mean UBS - wouldn't touch it.
Investing in banks is like stepping into a land mine field. Who knows whats "off the balance sheet". Common shareholders would certainly never find out.
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
Strong banks stand to gain tremendously. But you have to be very careful: there is a new wave of regional bank failures that has just begun. The predictions are that it will be nothing like the S&L crisis, yet it will be sizeable and dangerous for non-insiders...
http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/20/news/companies/bank_failures/index.htm
Do you really think you have any idea how many toxic assets are on the banks' books? Probably not unless you are on the board of the bank...
You can't know, of course - all you can do is place your bets. Personally I think we're in or nearing the phase where the market has identified the weak hands, and the "getting blindsided and going to zero" risk is receding, to be replaced by "10+ years of slow/no growth" risk. Got to start putting money on the table at some point if you want to take the pot. In any case, I have 90-95% of my TLNW in cash right now, down from 99-100% before this latest flush down in the markets.
Quote from Specterx:
You can't know, of course - all you can do is place your bets. Personally I think we're in or nearing the phase where the market has identified the weak hands, and the "getting blindsided and going to zero" risk is receding, to be replaced by "10+ years of slow/no growth" risk. Got to start putting money on the table at some point if you want to take the pot. In any case, I have 90-95% of my TLNW in cash right now, down from 99-100% before this latest flush down in the markets.
Let me ask this question: did you have any idea which of the original 13 regional banks failed? Probably not. In fact, I would guess that almost no one of Wall Street did and that's because the banks can legally hide their assets, which I think is absurd. That's a throw back to the 30's if you ask me, but my point is that I would not invest in a sector where it is legal to hide information from shareholders.
Let me put it another way: almost all stock sectors have gotten bludgeoned. Why not stick with one where there is much more full disclosure and not a bunch of hidden, toxic assets on the balance sheet?
Seriously, so what if you only have the opportunity for 40% growth instead of 60% or whatever numbers you pick?