Originally posted by The17sss
the NY Times published a resignation letter today from one of the AIG officials that was targeted by congress and the prez. He was working in the commodity and equity division of AIG FP and had nothing to do with AIG running into the ground. He was working on a salary of 1 dollar per year because of the guarantee (he thought he had) of being rewarded with his bonus for helping resuce the company from bankruptcy. Check it out:
I believe there are a finite number of people that are smart and capable upper eschelon business leaders in this world... and what I fear is that a lot of them are going to look to other countries to showcase their talents.
ing amazing. Even more ing amazing that I posted that on the previous page.
The17sss
quote:
Originally posted by Shakka
ing amazing. Even more ing amazing that I posted that on the previous page.
HAHA!! holy man I blew right past that post. Sorry!
Capitalizt
I predict more resignations from major companies in the coming months as the dems continue their anti-profit crusade.
Atlas is shrugging.
Sunsnail
quote:
Originally posted by The17sss
HAHA!! holy man I blew right past that post. Sorry!
just shows how much you pay attention to what others are posting
:p
The17sss
Shakka is one of the people I agree with a lot. I'm more inclined to read the posts of those I don't agree with, looking for debates. :toocool:
jerZ07002
quote:
Originally posted by The17sss
Shakka is one of the people I agree with a lot. I'm more inclined to read the posts of those I don't agree with, looking for debates. :toocool:
how do you know the extent to which you agree with him if you are less inclined to read his posts?
;)
Groundhog Boy
quote:
Originally posted by The17sss
the NY Times published a resignation letter today from one of the AIG officials that was targeted by congress and the prez. He was working in the commodity and equity division of AIG FP and had nothing to do with AIG running into the ground. He was working on a salary of 1 dollar per year because of the guarantee (he thought he had) of being rewarded with his bonus for helping resuce the company from bankruptcy. Check it out:
I believe there are a finite number of people that are smart and capable upper eschelon business leaders in this world... and what I fear is that a lot of them are going to look to other countries to showcase their talents.
A bunch of them work in foreign countries, but for US companies. Those profits benefit the US.
Take a gander at this one
quote:
* MARCH 25, 2009, 9:59 P.M. ET
AIG Fights a Fire at Its Paris Unit
Executives' Resignations Put Billions in Contracts at Risk of Default
By LIZ RAPPAPORT, LIAM PLEVEN and CARRICK MOLLENKAMP
Amid the flap over bonuses at American International Group Inc. two of the company's top managers in Paris have resigned. Their moves have left the giant insurer and officials scrambling to replace them to avoid an unlikely but expensive situation in which billions in AIG trading contracts could default.
Representatives of the Federal Reserve, AIG's lead U.S. overseer, are talking with French regulators and AIG officials to deal with the consequences of a complicated legal scenario in which the departures of the managers in Banque AIG, a subsidiary of AIG's Financial Products unit, could trigger defaults in $234 billion of derivative transactions, according to people familiar with the situation and a document AIG provided to the U.S. Treasury.
Defaults, by no means inevitable, could not only hurt AIG but also could force European banks involved in the trades to raise billions in capital to cushion potential losses, according to AIG documents.
That is because the banks used Banque AIG to hedge the risk in some of the assets they own, allowing them to hold less capital against those assets, which could include securities such as mortgages and corporate debt.
The executives at Paris-based Banque AIG, Mauro Gabriele and James Shephard, have resigned in recent days but have agreed to stay on for a transition, according to people familiar with the matter. In the wake of their resignations, AIG must replace them to the satisfaction of French banking regulators.
If they don't, French regulators may appoint their own designee to manage the bank -- an outcome that could trigger defaults under the bank's derivative contracts. The private contracts say that a regulator's appointment of a manager constitutes a change in control, according to a person familiar with the matter; the provision is often included in derivative contracts where parties want to preserve a way out if something about their counterparties changes.
Messrs. Gabriele and Shephard didn't respond to requests for comment.
AIG said in a statement that the departing managers "have agreed to stay on to help ensure an orderly transition. They, AIG, and our stakeholders have been in communication with the regulatory authorities in France to discuss our plan to replace them."
France's Commission Bancaire, the banking regulator, declined to comment.
Regulators and the company are motivated to find a solution in Paris. AIG described the issues in a five-page white paper submitted to the U.S. Treasury Department earlier this month along with a letter about $165 million in retention payments the company made to employees in the financial-products unit, the unit responsible for the worst of AIG's woes.
The company was rescued by the federal government in September. After a public outcry this month about the bonuses, employees were urged to return them, and now several have quit, according to AIG. The two departing managers at Banque AIG have offered to return their bonus payments, AIG says.
In the white paper, AIG said it had legal obligations to make the retention payments, but it also discussed the "significant business ramifications" of failing to pay. AIG said that employees at the financial-products unit are needed to wind down and sell pieces of that business, which has $1.6 trillion in outstanding trades.
Referring to the circumstances at Banque AIG, the company said that at a minimum, the "disruption associated with significant departures related to a failure to honor contractual obligations would require intensive interactions with regulators and other constituents (rating agencies, counterparties, etc.) to assure them of the ongoing viability of AIGFP as well as its commitment to honoring counterparty contracts and claims."
The risk that the Banque AIG transactions would default if managers departed would represent an unexpected problem for what had been one of the AIG Financial Products businesses that hadn't run seriously aground in recent months, according to AIG securities filings.
Banque AIG enabled AIG to generate revenue by helping European banks lower the amount of capital they are required to hold to protect against losses on assets such as mortgage and corporate loans. The bank was set up in the early 1990s, and was licensed by French banking regulators in early 1991. More recently, a Banque AIG branch has been located in London's Mayfair district along with the financial-products unit.
In the event of a default, European banks that have done these trades with AIG could be forced to take back responsibility for billions of dollars in assets. That could require them to raise billions of dollars in capital, AIG has said.
The deals worked like this, according to a Banc of America Securities-Merrill Lynch report and a person familiar with AIG's contracts: A European bank with a hypothetical $1 billion portfolio of assets could unload some of the risk by having AIG protect the top and largest layer, or tranche, against losses with insurance-like derivative contracts. The move greatly reduced the regulatory capital charge for AIG clients.
In May 2007, a British executive in the financial-products office in London told investors: "For the European banks and the Asian banks, this is very much a regulatory capital arbitrage business. By structuring their businesses, whether it's their mortgage lending or their corporate loans into these sorts of trades and tranching the risk up, they're able to significantly reduce the capital they have to hold against their portfolios."
BTW, reading the comments on the NY Times and the letters that will be published in today's edition, it's hard to miss how flawed the logic of those hating DeSantis are. I mean, I read numerous comments saying "You're luck you have a job" from people who apparently missed the "Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored" part of the section because they started their critique after reading just the first paragraph and understanding that it was just some greedy Wall Street scumbag that they wouldn't agree with.
Look, I believe in a lot of the things that Obama and some members of the Democratic party support. But this anti-business/bank bull is one area that is not helping me and other fiscally conservative Dems. I also highly believe that this is retarding our recovery. If it weren't so immediatley needed, I'd have said it was idiotic to launch the PPP the Monday after this retardation.
I'll also add this last video. I mean, I'm glad he admitted it, but Jim Clyburn's video really struck a nerve with me. To actually admit that they joined the mob, disregarded the Constitution, voted based on emotion rather than fact and said "that those of us who really wondered whether or not what we were doing may or may not be constitutional decided that we would leave that up to the courts to decide, but that we would respond to the American people with our votes. And that's what we did, responded to the American peoples' anger and emotion" really ing irritated me. It is not the jobs of our representatives to lead the pitchfork charge, especially when the mob is not based in fact, but rather emotion! It's their job to explain why the public has a misperception of what's happening on Wall Street.
This mentality should scare the out of all Americans. And it wasn't just Democrats spewing this moronic , so don't go there. To be honest, in the past few weeks Obama has tempered his comments fairly well and is leaving it open with his rhetoric. I'm just hoping that his meeting with the big TARP bank CEOs on Friday will help kill some of this stupidity. If companies with the capital requirements like Bank of America feel forced to pay back TARP money in order to retain employees that will leave like Jake DeSantis, the American public is in for a world of hurt. Goldman can probably pull it off without hampering recovery, probably JP Morgan, but when some of these other banks whose stocks are under $10 for a reason feel obliged to keep up with the Goldmans, lending is ED.
The17sss
I agree Groundhog. I believe they are actively stoking emotions as a strategy.... they want a perpetual crisis going on all the time in one facet or another so they can impose more government expansion and regulation. Let's not forgot Rahm's words of "never wanting to miss out on the opportunities that a good crisis provides." I think we're seeing the reality of what he meant.
pkcRAISTLIN
yeah, AIG and wall street arent at all to blame for the problems we're having :rolleyes:
Shakka
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
yeah, AIG and wall street arent at all to blame for the problems we're having :rolleyes:
They're not?
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Shakka
They're not?
i was mocking 17sss's typical partisan nonsense.
occrider
We just got an email from our CEO that we would be impacted by the bill currently sitting in the senate regarding bonuses. According to that bill, any company that received more than $100 million in tarp money (a paltry sum particularly since most major banks were required to take at least $5 billion), would be levied with a tax on bonuses over a certain amount of an additional 35% to the individual tax rate and an additional 35% to the company. If that bill passes, I will migrate to a European, Middle Eastern, or an Asian bank. Congress is just going to drive intellectual capital away from the institutions that need it the most.
