Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

[Grifman]

So it was about consumer confidence in banking when they were all in trouble, and now it's backfired in consumer ire when they are still struggling and the banks that survived are making money hand over fist.

I don't think any banks are making money hand over fist:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/12/markets ... /index.htm" target="_blank

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44786916/Bank_Ea ... han_Before" target="_blank

U.S. bank profits were likely squeezed by weak loan demand and low lending rates in the third quarter, and analysts are even more pessimistic about earnings than they were just two months ago.

Analysts are estimating that financial companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index will report earnings only 3.9 percent higher than a year earlier, instead of the 14.6 percent increase they forecast on Aug. 1, according to Thomson Reuters Proprietary Research.

For many of the biggest banks, earnings are likely to fall in the quarter, dragged down by investment banking businesses like trading and underwriting. And the tough environment for traditional businesses like lending is only making things worse, analysts said.

"Some big banks are in the position where they are going to have to make the case to investors that they can turn things around," said Kathleen Shanley, a financial services analyst at Gimme Credit LLC in Chicago.

[Isgrimnur]

July 19th, 2011: Wells Fargo Advances on Record Profit, Cost-Cutting Plans

Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), the biggest U.S. home lender, climbed the most since November as profit rose to a record and it announced a goal of cutting $1.5 billion in quarterly costs by the end of next year.
...
The lender is the last of the four largest U.S. banks to report second-quarter results. The biggest, Bank of America Corp. (BAC), reported an $8.83 billion loss today on costs tied to defective mortgages. No. 2 JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) said last week that profit rose 13 percent to $5.43 billion as revenue unexpectedly climbed on gains from underwriting stocks and bonds. Citigroup Inc. (C), the third-biggest, said profit surged 24 percent to $3.34 billion on higher investment-banking fees.

Next quarterly results should be out next week or so, I expect.

[GreenGoo]

PS, I'll be watching to make sure you don't shoot me in the back next time we play Borderlands

I've been trying to figure out how to turn on friendly fire for weeks now, with no luck, unfortunately.

[LawBeefaroni]

Next quarterly results should be out next week or so, I expect.

JPM was today, not good. Banks pretty much all down across the board as a result.

I think WFC and C are Monday.

[GreenGoo]

Next quarterly results should be out next week or so, I expect.

JPM was today, not good. Banks pretty much all down across the board as a result.

I think WFC and C are Monday.

What?! We cannot allow this to stand, not even in this economy. Somebody start charging customers for debit card use, stat!

[noxiousdog]

You'll have to excuse me if I take what you say with some skepticism. Just because another bank used bail out cash to buy a failing bank on the cheap doesn't change anything.

They didn't use bailout cash to buy another bank. They didn't get that much cash.

[Defiant]

Last week, I noted a Rasmussen Reports survey that gave Occupy Wall Street slightly higher favorable ratings than the Tea Party. Time magazine's new national poll is out, and there's no "slightly" here. The Occupy movement has a 54 percent favorable rating; the Tea Party's rating is 27 percent.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/ ... party.html" target="_blank

[Smoove_B]

Cleaning has been postponed.

Immediately prior to being told by Deputy Mayor Cas Holloway that the cleaning was postponed, Occupy Wall Street protesters were preparing to link arms and risk confrontation and arrest to protect Zuccotti Park.

People speaking at the general assembly told the crowd that people that do not want to be arrested should go across the street and wait on the sidewalk.

Immediately after that, the group announced that they received word that the planned cleaning had been postponed.

[Holman]

Last week, I noted a Rasmussen Reports survey that gave Occupy Wall Street slightly higher favorable ratings than the Tea Party. Time magazine's new national poll is out, and there's no "slightly" here. The Occupy movement has a 54 percent favorable rating; the Tea Party's rating is 27 percent.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/ ... party.html" target="_blank

America: clearly just a bunch of lazy, pot-smoking college students who hate Liberty.

[GreenGoo]

You'll have to excuse me if I take what you say with some skepticism. Just because another bank used bail out cash to buy a failing bank on the cheap doesn't change anything.

They didn't use bailout cash to buy another bank. They didn't get that much cash.

Ah. Who are "they" in this instance? All of them? Truthfully, the tale is convoluted and obfuscated at every step, so I'm pretty tired of trying to unwind it, only to have another spin put in my way. The "facts" are constantly changing still, depending on who's interpreting them and what spin they want them to have.

[coopasonic]

Next quarterly results should be out next week or so, I expect.

JPM was today, not good. Banks pretty much all down across the board as a result.

I think WFC and C are Monday.

What?! We cannot allow this to stand, not even in this economy. Somebody start charging customers for debit card use, stat!

Just to clarify what "not good" means:

JPMorgan made $4.3 billion, or $1.02 a share, in the third quarter.

[LawBeefaroni]

Just to clarify what "not good" means:

JPMorgan made $4.3 billion, or $1.02 a share, in the third quarter.

Yeah, I meant vs. expectations. I think they may have beaten the lowered estimates with $1.02 but net was still down 4%. Shares are down 20%+ on the year.


On the Occupy Wall Street front, the city/NYPD/park owner has backed down on "cleaning" today.

[coopasonic]

Just to clarify what "not good" means:

JPMorgan made $4.3 billion, or $1.02 a share, in the third quarter.

Yeah, I meant vs. expectations. I think they may have beaten the lowered estimates with $1.02 but net was still down 4%. Shares are down 20%+ on the year.

I understand why it was not good, year over year, but based on GGs reaction, I wanted to make sure it was understood we weren't talking about actual losses here. The market is brutal.

[LawBeefaroni]

I understand why it was not good, year over year, but based on GGs reaction, I wanted to make sure it was understood we weren't talking about actual losses here. The market is brutal.

Whether GG meant it or not though, in a roundabout way results like this are why they're doing things like charging for using a debit card.

They're getting hit in their trading businesses and by some banking regulations. They cannot abide losses in revenue or net. They adapt and seek additional sources of income.

[GreenGoo]

Just to clarify what "not good" means:

JPMorgan made $4.3 billion, or $1.02 a share, in the third quarter.

Yeah, I meant vs. expectations. I think they may have beaten the lowered estimates with $1.02 but net was still down 4%. Shares are down 20%+ on the year.

I understand why it was not good, year over year, but based on GGs reaction, I wanted to make sure it was understood we weren't talking about actual losses here. The market is brutal.

Thanks. Given that Lawbeef's post followed Isg's hand over fist comment, and the "not good" tone of Lawbeef's, I figured that they broke even or something. If anything, this corroborates Isgr, given the profit we're seeing in the current economy. But chip away at debit card users anyway. What the hell.

[Isgrimnur]

As I documented in the EBG thread, Wells Fargo has decided that rather than ding me for having a debit card, they'd just charge me $5 a month for not having either a standing balance of $1,500 or Direct Deposit of $500+ a month.

The only reason I have the account is because they made it impossible to do bank transfers to my student loan payment without paying them for the privilege. But then they sold off my loan without telling me. Well, I'm going to be closing the account, moving to a local credit union, and they can accept a paper check from me for my credit card payment every month. All this after last quarters "record profits".

[coopasonic]

they can accept a paper check from me for my credit card payment every month.

why punish yourself!?

[Kraken]

Last week, I noted a Rasmussen Reports survey that gave Occupy Wall Street slightly higher favorable ratings than the Tea Party. Time magazine's new national poll is out, and there's no "slightly" here. The Occupy movement has a 54 percent favorable rating; the Tea Party's rating is 27 percent.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/ ... party.html" target="_blank

Well I would certainly hope so, given that a couple of months ago the tea party's popularity ranked below atheists and Muslims.

That put the tea party below 23 other entries--including Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, Republicans and Democrats--that the professors included on their survey of "a representative sample of 3,000 Americans."

[Isgrimnur]

they can accept a paper check from me for my credit card payment every month.

why punish yourself!?

They have a supermarket location three blocks from my house. It's honestly not that much of an inconvenience to me. I would have to go to that supermarket to mail the damn check anyway, as there's no outgoing box at my apt complex.

[LawBeefaroni]

they can accept a paper check from me for my credit card payment every month.

why punish yourself!?

They have a supermarket location three blocks from my house. It's honestly not that much of an inconvenience to me. I would have to go to that supermarket to mail the damn check anyway, as there's no outgoing box at my apt complex.

When you move from WFC to a CU, you'll probably find that you can do an electronic payment on your credit card for free.

[LawBeefaroni]

I guess when you get issued a Vespa as your duty motor you have some masculinity issues to work out:

NYPD officers runs over a National Lawyers Guild observer as Occupy Wall Street demonstrators march through the streets near Wall Street in New York.

I had no idea NYPD officers rode Vespas. Here they 4 wheel ATVs or bicycles.

The throng of protesters streamed onto Broadway, blocking traffic, setting up a confrontation with police who are waiting for them on the street.

[noxiousdog]

You'll have to excuse me if I take what you say with some skepticism. Just because another bank used bail out cash to buy a failing bank on the cheap doesn't change anything.

They didn't use bailout cash to buy another bank. They didn't get that much cash.

Ah. Who are "they" in this instance? All of them? Truthfully, the tale is convoluted and obfuscated at every step, so I'm pretty tired of trying to unwind it, only to have another spin put in my way. The "facts" are constantly changing still, depending on who's interpreting them and what spin they want them to have.

The "another bank" you referenced. Mainly it's just that it's rare to use cash to buy companies in general. In this case, the companies were bankrupt. They were worth negative amounts. So the purchasers, simply agreed to take on the liabilities as well as the assets.

The previous owners got nothing. The bond holders and other creditors agreed to the sale such they would get some/most of their money back.

[noxiousdog]

Just to clarify what "not good" means:

JPMorgan made $4.3 billion, or $1.02 a share, in the third quarter.

That's a worthless number unless you include equity and liabilities.


They have 2.2 trillion in equity and liabilities. So to make that 4.3 billion, there's 500 times that amount at risk. (though for this comparison yearly is better, so say 17 billion for last year, with 2.2 trillion at risk.)

[Smoove_B]

Meanwhile, back on Main Street, USA here's a chart comparing corporate profits versus employee wages.



Yeah, I know it's been done to death before but you'll excuse me if I don't cry a river for The Corporation. I've said it before - revolutions have been started over less and there's only so many versions of American Idol they can reasonably expect to soothe our appetite for bread and circuses.

[LawBeefaroni]

Meanwhile, back on Main Street, USA here's a chart comparing corporate profits versus employee wages.

See! Wages went up! Ungrateful hippies.

[noxiousdog]

Meanwhile, back on Main Street, USA here's a chart comparing corporate profits versus employee wages.



Yeah, I know it's been done to death before but you'll excuse me if I don't cry a river for The Corporation. I've said it before - revolutions have been started over less and there's only so many versions of American Idol they can reasonably expect to soothe our appetite for bread and circuses.

What is the source on that chart? I'm curious what the longer timeframe looks like, as well as the data source and scale.

[Isgrimnur]

Reading Fail

Corporate Profit after Taxes

Wages & Salary Accruals

http://research.stlouisfed.org/

[noxiousdog]

Never mind. I figured it out and it's not a good comparison.

Both are aggregations. The whole purpose is capital allocation is to create more value than a labor component can do so individually. As such it should always move faster than the labor function. Otherwise we would have zero productivity gains.

[Smoove_B]

Here is the actual article I lifted it from -- a post from Paul Krugman, noted Communist and Hippie Sympathizer.

[GreenGoo]

The "another bank" you referenced. Mainly it's just that it's rare to use cash to buy companies in general. In this case, the companies were bankrupt. They were worth negative amounts. So the purchasers, simply agreed to take on the liabilities as well as the assets.

The previous owners got nothing. The bond holders and other creditors agreed to the sale such they would get some/most of their money back.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the same thing, buying failing banks. Are you suggesting that the purchasing of these banks was done out of the kindness of their hearts? A number of banks were picked up for a song, and the federal government practically picked who would live and who wouldn't, propping up some while consigning others to the chopping block.

Yes, liabilities came with the assets. Like million dollar bonuses for their executive staff. How does that change what we're talking about?

[noxiousdog]

The "another bank" you referenced. Mainly it's just that it's rare to use cash to buy companies in general. In this case, the companies were bankrupt. They were worth negative amounts. So the purchasers, simply agreed to take on the liabilities as well as the assets.

The previous owners got nothing. The bond holders and other creditors agreed to the sale such they would get some/most of their money back.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the same thing, buying failing banks. Are you suggesting that the purchasing of these banks was done out of the kindness of their hearts? A number of banks were picked up for a song, and the federal government practically picked who would live and who wouldn't, propping up some while consigning others to the chopping block.

Yes, liabilities came with the assets. Like million dollar bonuses for their executive staff. How does that change what we're talking about?

Your quote: "Just because another bank used bail out cash to buy a failing bank on the cheap doesn't change anything."

They didn't use bail out cash to buy failed banks.

[noxiousdog]

Here is the actual article I lifted it from -- a post from Paul Krugman, noted Communist and Hippie Sympathizer.

And this is one of those times that Krugman is being intellectually dishonest, and why he's so irksome.

1) Compensation has grown 35% since 2001.
2) As I said before, profits should always rise faster than labor compensation. Example as follows:

Lets say you have a business that produces widgets. Your expenses are $80,000 PPE, and $20,000 labor. You sell widgets with a profit margin of 10%. You can product 100 widgets per year, for $110,000. Profit $10,000.

The following year you make capital improvements that allow you to produce 50% more widgets, with the same headcount. PPE goes up 25%, so your new allocation is $100,000 PPE, $20,000 Labor, and you're selling 150 widgets for $165,000. Profit $35,000.

Any business is always going to be focused on increasing productivity. Certainly some of those gains can and will be passed on as normally a more productive work force is a higher skilled work force. However, technology is pushing productivity far faster than you could reasonably expect labor to follow. For instance, let's assume our previous example and instead of increasing profits by 250%, we pass it all on to labor. Labor is now $45,000 with the same head count. One person retires, and a new graduate is hired. Are you really suggesting we should pay him 2.5 times prevailing rates simply due to productivity gains that previous employees obtained? Or are you going to pay him prevailing rates for the job?

[Grifman]

In this case, the companies were bankrupt. They were worth negative amounts. So the purchasers, simply agreed to take on the liabilities as well as the assets.

The previous owners got nothing.

Shhsssh, don't confuse people with the facts. They think that no financial institutions were "punished" during the financial crisis. Telling people that a number of them actually went bankrupt will create cognitive dissonance and I don't think they can handle that.

[GreenGoo]

Your quote: "Just because another bank used bail out cash to buy a failing bank on the cheap doesn't change anything."

They didn't use bail out cash to buy failed banks.

Oh.

See, this is why it's kind of pointless to get into these discussions. Because now I'm going to link to an article from 2008 which claims otherwise. And then you'll make some claim that tax-payer backed means something else, but definitely not bail out cash. At which point I'll go find another article saying it might as well be. And then you'll find a reason why *this* particular example isn't so, and then I'll get tired of fighting over semantics at that point and just give up.

If the average well educated American has no clarity on what happened, and no one is working hard to hold anyone accountable, then...business as usual I guess. See you next time.

PNC's $5.2 Billion National City Purchase Is Takeover Template

By Elizabeth Hester

Oct. 25 (Bloomberg) -- PNC Financial Services Group Inc.'s taxpayer-backed $5.2 billion purchase of National City Corp. is a blueprint for regional bank takeovers pressed for by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, investors said.

PNC, led by Chief Executive Officer James Rohr, becomes the fifth-largest U.S. bank by deposits with its fourth acquisition in less than two years. Pittsburgh-based PNC announced the deal yesterday after getting $7.7 billion in government funds, part of the $125 billion the Treasury is doling out to regional banks to thaw frozen credit markets.

``It's going to start to become the template,'' said Michael Yoshikami, president of YCMNet Advisors in Walnut Creek, California, which manages $1 billion.

Paulson already handed $125 billion to nine of the largest U.S. lenders, and says the remaining money can recapitalize ailing banks, fund takeovers and benefit the economy. The Treasury may also take stakes in insurance firms, a person briefed on the plan said yesterday.

And yes, I realize later in the article they talk about it being a for stock only transaction. But they also discuss how tax payer cash was used to boost capital ratio, and how the government supplied cash put the acquisition on "solid footing".

So now we're back to quibbling over minor details. Was government supplied cash used for this one particular acquisition? No. Was it a cornerstone of the transaction that it enabled? Yes.

I don't really care if the cash was handed over or only acted as a safety net to allow the transaction. That is a difference without meaning in the context being discussed.

And this is the very first link I clicked on. I'm not digging into this any deeper because I don't want to play this game with history. I'm tired of it. I was tired of trying to parse reality at the time, and I'm already tired of trying to unobfuscate history. So...fuck it.

Rohr is taking advantage of a weaker rival to expand his reach into the Midwestern U.S. The deal will bring PNC to more than 2,500 branches in 13 states and Washington, D.C.

``Speed is of the essence now,'' said Roger Cominsky, a partner at law firm Hiscock & Barclay in Buffalo, New York. ``Everybody has a target on their back. A suitor one day can be a target the next day.''

The title of the article is

Bank Bailout Money Used to Buy Out "Ailing" Financial Competitors

How much clearer does it need to be?

[GreenGoo]

In this case, the companies were bankrupt. They were worth negative amounts. So the purchasers, simply agreed to take on the liabilities as well as the assets.

The previous owners got nothing.

Shhsssh, don't confuse people with the facts. They think that no financial institutions were "punished" during the financial crisis. Telling people that a number of them actually went bankrupt will create cognitive dissonance and I don't think they can handle that.

Er....they got bought out by their competitors using tax payer funds and it's still business as usual with less competition.

Don't worry, no one is cognitively dissonancing here. Except maybe you guys. I don't really care if the players rotate positions. The game remains the same. Which is why, 3 years later, you have people willing to sit in the cold on the street, and why those people have a 54% approval rating from the American people.

So don't point at a couple of easy acquisitions and tell me everything is working fine and the culprits have been punished. After 3 years of near constant propaganda, I think I'm full.

[Smoove_B]

I can't tell if it's more violence or just following up from this morning (I think it's new), but there are some good photos of what's going on.

Should be an interesting weekend.

[Smoove_B]

1) Compensation has grown 35% since 2001

Not according to this

Are you really suggesting we should pay him 2.5 times prevailing rates simply due to productivity gains that previous employees obtained? Or are you going to pay him prevailing rates for the job?

No, I'm saying that when you have a generation of people that bought into the "American Dream" of going to college, getting a job and buying a house, there's going to be some push back when the wheels go flying off the System. Also, no one is retiring any more, so paying a new graduate 2.5x the prevailing wage is irrelevant - there's no job for him to fill.

[LawBeefaroni]

The bank bankruptcy purchases were total heists.

[GreenGoo]

The bank bankruptcy purchases were total heists.

Agreed. Government sanctioned at that.

[noxiousdog]

1) Compensation has grown 35% since 2001

Not according to this

You're mixing average and aggregate.

Are you really suggesting we should pay him 2.5 times prevailing rates simply due to productivity gains that previous employees obtained? Or are you going to pay him prevailing rates for the job?

No, I'm saying that when you have a generation of people that bought into the "American Dream" of going to college, getting a job and buying a house, there's going to be some push back when the wheels go flying off the System. Also, no one is retiring any more, so paying a new graduate 2.5x the prevailing wage is irrelevant - there's no job for him to fill.

The wheels haven't gone flying off the system. Home ownership rates have dropped 1% since 2000 (source with scarey headline.)

And, fine, no one retires until they die, but people are still dying.