Portfolios

My Portfolio - hide

Mkt Cap

			B
C	41.15	+0.10 (0.24%)	118.10B
BAC	13.14	+0.08 (0.61%)	130.97B

World markets

Shanghai	2,840.84	-21.72 (-0.76%)
Nikkei 225	16,825.80	+183.60 (1.10%)
Hang Seng Index	20,094.58	+98.32 (0.49%)
TSEC	8,641.08	+6.97 (0.08%)
FTSE 100	6,146.32	+20.88 (0.34%)
EURO STOXX 50	3,016.18	+14.17 (0.47%)
CAC 40	4,425.65	+21.63 (0.49%)
S&P TSX	13,392.90	+81.85 (0.61%)
S&P/ASX 200	5,164.90	+7.70 (0.15%)
BSE Sensex	24,793.96	+134.73 (0.55%)
TA25	1,466.47	+5.99 (0.41%)
SMI	7,975.81	+4.66 (0.06%)
ATX	2,247.91	+10.94 (0.49%)
IBOVESPA	48,665.09	-437.05 (-0.89%)
SET	1,390.66	0.00 (0.00%)
BIST100	78,738.19	+1,055.30 (1.36%)
IBEX	8,761.10	+20.80 (0.24%)
WIG	46,482.03	-52.96 (-0.11%)
TASI	6,370.37	-60.50 (-0.94%)
MERVAL	13,756.49	-125.86 (-0.91%)
IPC	44,492.50	-11.79 (-0.03%)
IDX Composite	4,768.45	-42.59 (-0.89%)

Currencies

EUR/USD	1.0980	-0.0005 (-0.05%)
USD/JPY	113.6345	+0.3955 (0.35%)
GBP/USD	1.4200	-0.0006 (-0.04%)
USD/CAD	1.3264	+0.0014 (0.11%)
USD/HKD	7.7627	-0.0031 (-0.04%)
USD/CNY	6.5159	+0.0030 (0.05%)
AUD/USD	0.7478	+0.0010 (0.13%)

Bonds

3 Month	0.26%	0.00 (0.00%)
6 Month	0.44%	-0.01 (-2.22%)
2 Year	0.87%	-0.03 (-3.33%)
5 Year	1.38%	0.00 (0.00%)
10 Year	1.88%	0.00 (0.00%)
30 Year	2.66%	-0.02 (-0.75%)

CalPERS settles with Moody's for $130 million in ratings case

James Rufus KorenContact Reporter

Moody's Corp. will pay $130 million to the California Public Employees' Retirement System to settle allegations that the ratings agency acted negligently by giving top scores to ultimately toxic investments that cost the pension fund hundreds of millions of dollars, CalPERS said Wednesday.

CalPERS sued Moody's and rival ratings agencies Standard & Poor's and Fitch in 2009, saying the agencies gave AAA ratings -- which imply extremely low risk -- to bonds backed by subprime mortgages.

CalPERS, the nation's largest public pension fund, put $1.3 billion into those bonds in 2006, at the height of the subprime-fueled housing boom. When the bonds went bad in the ensuing crash, the fund estimates it lost as much as $1 billion, according to court filings.

In those filings, CalPERS said the ratings agencies' opinions of the bonds "proved to be wildly inaccurate and unreasonably high," and that the methods the agencies used to rate the bonds "were seriously flawed in conception and incompetently applied."

With today's settlement, plus a $125-million deal reached with S&P last year, CalPERS' total settlements related to the $1.3-billion bonds investment stand at $255 million.

"This resolves our lawsuit against Moody's and restores money that belongs to our members and employers," said Matthew Jacobs, CalPERS' general counsel. "We are eager to put this money back to work to help ensure the long-term sustainability of the fund. "

In an emailed statement, Moody's spokesman Michael Adler said: "The resolution of this long-running litigation ... is in the best interest of our company and its shareholders.”

The ratings agencies played a key role in fueling the subprime mortgage market, putting solid credit ratings on bonds and complex investment products backed by risky loans.

The Securities and Exchange Commission found in a 2008 report that the agencies had no set procedures for rating mortgage-backed bonds and other now-toxic assets, and that the firms didn't disclose conflicts of interest.

Chief among the complaints against the agencies was that they were paid for their ratings by the banks and other lenders issuing mortgage-backed bonds.

"This conflict of interest led to the ratings agencies giving high credit rankings to increasingly riskier deals," CalpERS said in its suit against the agencies.

The Moody's settlement comes just over a year after S&P, a division of data provider McGraw Hill Financial, agreed to pay $1.4 billion to the U.S. Department of Justice and 19 states, including California, to settle similar allegations.

California received $210 million, most of which was set to go to CalPERS and the state's other massive pension fund, the California State Teachers' Retirement System, to offset crisis-era investment losses.

S&P's $125-million settlement over CalPERS' $1.3-billion bonds investment was handled separately.

james.koren@latimes.com

Twitter: @jrkoren

Join the conversation on Facebook >>

lPERS settles with Moody's for $130 million in ratings case

Los Angeles Times - 2 hours ago

Moody's Settles Calpers Ratings Lawsuit for $130 Million Bloomberg

Moody's to Pay Calpers $130 Million to Settle Lawsuit Wall Street Journal

Mr. Buffett’s Pregnant Silence (or How the Executive Branch is Helping Him Steal Fannie Mae from Retail Investors who Can’t Fight Back)
First, to set the stage, a story from Mr. Buffett’s official biographer, Alice Schroeder, about how Mr. Buffett has a glorious history of screwing the retail investor (I assume the story was included in Snowball to illustrate Mr. Buffett’s keen ability to identify and capture value…I think it emphasizes something else entirely)
“By then, Dan Monen, his lawyer, had joined Warren on a personal side project that he had been pursuing for some time: buying the stock of an Omaha-based insurer, National American Fire Insurance. This company’s worthless stock had been sold to farmers all over Nebraska by unscrupulous promotors in exchange for Liberty Bonds issued during World War I.
The defrauded farmers had no idea that their moldering paper was now worth something. National American was (now) earning $29 per share. National American was one of the cheapest stocks Warren had ever seen.
So Dan Monen, Warren’s partner and proxy, went off to the countryside carrying wads of Warren’s money…He sat on front porches, drinking iced tea, eating pie with farmers and their wives, and offering cash for their stock certificates….Warren kept it in the original shareholders’ names, with a power of attorney attached that gave him control, rather than transferring it into his name.
The brainstorm behind Warren’s National American coup had been more than just price. He had learned the value of gathering as much as possible of something scarce.”
…or he had learned the value of forcefully punching defrauded farmers in the groin.
2. In his 1991 letter to shareholders, Mr. Buffett confessed that NOT accumulating as many Fannie Mae shares as he could was a major blunder.
In early 1988, we decided to buy 30 million shares (adjusted for a subsequent split) of Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), which would have been a $350-$400 million investment. We had owned the stock some years earlier and understood the company’s business. Furthermore, it was clear to us that David Maxwell, Fannie Mae’s CEO, had dealt superbly with some problems that he had inherited and had established the company as a financial powerhouse — with the best yet to come.
I visited David in Washington and confirmed that he would not be uncomfortable if we were to take a large position. After we bought about 7 million shares, the price began to climb. In frustration, I stopped buying (a mistake that,thankfully,I did not repeat when Coca-Cola stock rose similarly during our purchase program).
In an even sillier move, I surrendered to my distaste for holding small positions and sold the 7 million shares we owned. I wish I could give you a halfway rational explanation for my amateurish behavior vis-a-vis Fannie Mae.
3. Mr. Buffett’s silence regarding Fannie Mae’s conservatorship and the 3rd Amendment sweep is deafening…for a very good reason (or billions and billions and billions of them).
4. Mr. Buffett is very close with Hank Paulson (his banker at GS for many years) and didn’t utter a peep when Fannie & Freddie were put into conservatorship, stuffed like a turkey with $40 Billion of TBTF toxic mortgages (the only balance sheets in town that could absorb them), and saddled with intentionally punitive terms. (Note: the government’s force-feading Fannie and Freddie TBTF mortgage garbage may have helped some of Mr. Buffett’s rather large TBTF investments, no? Pass me my 6th cherry coke!)
FEDERAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ADVISORY BOARD December 17–18, 2008 “Mr. Reid (note: deputy assistant treas sec) reminded the Board that the government owning the preferred stock with punitive dividend terms provides incentive for the GSE’s to work its issues out as expeditiously as possible. Furthermore, by design, the warrants were issued not to take ownership but rather to devalue the common stock.”
Note: the TBTF banks were charged 2.5% interest and were not required to turn over any equity unlike AIG, FNMA, FMCC (otherwise known as the “Crisis Patsies”). Just a reminder that Morgan Stanley had already borrowed over $100 Billion by Sept ‘08.
5. Mr. Buffett is very close with President Obama and didn’t utter a peep when the admin/treasury starting taking all of Fannie & Freddie’s profits in 2012 (the gov claims they were in a “death spiral” but knew they were about to return to soaring profitability…come on people). Fannie and Freddie have poured over $220B into the treasury’s coffers since the sweep (really impeccable timing on that sweep admin/treas!)…to be used however the administration sees fit (really makes those deficit reduction numbers look awesome!).
6. Oh, and then there’s this…Berkshire Hathaway’s largest publicly traded holding is Wells Fargo.
7. And Wells Fargo wants Fannie and Freddie dead. “No joke, I once heard a Wells lobbyist say ‘we are going to kill Fannie and Freddie and take over their business.’” — unnamed source, you decide if he/she’s lying
8. Louise R, a retired nurse who resides in California, owns 36,000 shares of Fannie Mae common stock, some of which she and her late husband purchased over 25 years ago.
9. Josephine R. is a retired psychiatric social worker and inner-city school counselor who owns 1,000 shares of Fannie Mae purchased 15 years ago.
Note: (Louise and Josephine acquired their shares way before Bill Ackman or Bruce Berkowitz did…to all of the folks peddling the cheap, lazy narrative that this is about greedy hedge funds and not vulnerable retail investors and staggeringly important constitutional issues, shame)
10. Even if it flies in the face of all that we (and especially he) should hold dear regarding the rule of law in our capital markets and country, Mr. Buffett is more than happy to let admin/treas attempt to kill fannie/freddie and screw the retail investors who have owned shares for decades (retail investors can’t afford to fight the gov…you may hate the GSEs, but you should be able to erase the names of the plaintiffs and decide what the subject government actions mean in terms of fundamental shareholder rights and broad, critical constitutional issues)
These are the GSEs not drone strikes. Executive Privilege claims are ludicrous and highly indicative of “foul play.” If you think the folks on this priv log from White House and Treasury weren’t drafting the 3rd Amendment Sweep, I’ll point you towards my crack dealer…I mean my friend’s crack dealer.
11. Mr. Buffett’s hoping he finally has a chance to get his hands on Fannie Mae (through his massive holding in Wells Fargo), the missed opportunity he lamented in his 1991 shareholder letter. You know the financial powerhouse (his words) that got away. (Alternatively, there’s always that massive Berkshire cash hoard waiting for elephants to kill…and Fannie Mae’s a nice looking elephant). I wonder how many times he’s spoken with the President about it?
12. So Dan Monen, Warren’s partner and proxy, went off to the countryside carrying wads of Warren’s money…He sat on front porches, drinking iced tea, eating pie with farmers and their wives, and offering cash for their stock certificates…
References: The Snowball: Warren Buffett and the Business of Life (Or How My Colon Looks after 80 Yrs of Cheeseburgers), Berkshire Hathaway Chairman’s Letter 1991 (So So Folksy), FASAB Minutes 12/17 2008 (Oh Sh%$ There’s a Transcript of this?)

it is not the MBA etc that give you money but connections -connections and connections with ability to deceive.

lali- beaten all life now i know

buffet

Wednesday, 9 March 2016

Is Buffet not behind this rating Did he buy or sell with this INFO??