Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (36.27)

Are we all a bunch of silent sleeping sodomized sheep???

Recs

26

April 13, 2009 – Comments (16)

Wells Fargo reports $3 Billion in profits a few days ago........

Now this

 

April 13 (Bloomberg) -- Wells Fargo & Co., the second- biggest U.S. home lender, may need $50 billion to pay back the federal government and cover loan losses as the economic slump deepens, according to KBW Inc.’s Frederick Cannon.

KBW expects $120 billion of “stress” losses at Wells Fargo, assuming the recession continues through the first quarter of 2010 and unemployment reaches 12 percent, Cannon wrote today in a report. The San Francisco-based bank may need to raise $25 billion on top of the $25 billion it owes the U.S. Treasury for the industry bailout plan, he wrote.

 

 So which is it....$3 Billion of profits or $120 BILLION of stress losses?

 

WTF does "profits" mean these days?????????????????????????????????????????????

 

Is there any integrity left in the reports of American business................................

 

This could get volitile..............................................

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 13, 2009 at 7:42 PM, DaretothREdux (36.24) wrote:

We have always been at war with Eurasia...

Report this comment
#2) On April 13, 2009 at 7:53 PM, motleyanimal (48.85) wrote:

Report this comment
#3) On April 13, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Varchild2008 (84.41) wrote:

$120 billion is completely made up future projection of America's economy from now to Q1 2010 and has NOTHING to do wtih Wells Fargo's Q1 2009 earnings report.

$3 Billion is just that.. a Figure that happened in Q1 of 2009.

In the face of the POSSIBLE $120 Billion figure.... Wells Fargo simply has to produce profitability in the next 4 quarters to offset the stress losses.

And while that happens... The Stress Loss projection will SHRINK if Unemployment doesn't come anywhere close to
12%.  So maybe $90 Billion will be the Stress Losses at 9.5% unemployment?

With $3 Billion in profits... It needs $87 Billion to pay down the Stress Losses from KBW. 

Report this comment
#4) On April 13, 2009 at 8:47 PM, alstry (36.27) wrote:

Unemployment is already 12% in Oregon.  U6 unemployment is much higher, over 20%, and not just Oregon but in a number of states. 

Over 100K retailers are expected to shutter their doors this year.  Hundreds of auto dealers the same.  Various Health Care providers are starting to reduce workforces and so are state and local governments for the first time.

Almost every economist is forecasting much higher unemployment as the year proceeds.  Based on the current parabolic rise in unemployment over the past six months, Alstrynomics is forecasting an U3 unemployment rate over 20% by the end of the year and a U6 rate over 30% by the same time frame.

Based on size and nature of WFC's current loan portfolio and concentration in CA.....the $120 Billion projection may likely prove conservative.

For a company whose market cap is less than $90 Billion at current stock price, and net tangible assets at about $60 Billion.....it appears we have a serious problem....don't we....especially for a company who never earned more than $20 Billion at the peak of originating toxic debt.

Report this comment
#5) On April 13, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Bupp (28.59) wrote:

Varchild the reason that they are able to post a 3 billiion profit in Q1 is because they are not required to mark the loans they hold to market value.  If they were required to price the loans at their actual worth they would have shown huge losses in the first uarter.  the 3 billion is a made up number and has no relevancy.

Report this comment
#6) On April 13, 2009 at 9:28 PM, alstry (36.27) wrote:

rwil,

In some circles they call that lying....and in some courtrooms they call it fraud.

In the old days, when lying was wrong and fraud was enforced....people went to jail for less.

We may soon learn the consequences for abandoning the rule of law.....the hard way.

When people lose everything....they lose it and demand change.

Pretty soon we may lose our free market economy.....the irony.....becuase the citizens will demand it.

The only question now is which ism...Communism, Socialism, or Fascism?

You may want to to review history how Hitler, Musolini, and Stalin came to power on the backs of the popularity of their people.  They ruled with under totalitarian authority, with little regard for the will of others once control was achieved......the only difference, some were fascists and others communists.

In the end....really only a difference with little distinction.

Report this comment
#7) On April 13, 2009 at 9:40 PM, nuf2bdangrus (< 20) wrote:

I have seen a lot of loans "reworked"...but the loans are still in trouble.  And otehrs are still coming to the fore.

 

Not over yet baby.  Other than mortgage refinances, which help only those in decent shape, there is more pain to come

Report this comment
#8) On April 13, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Seano67 (25.05) wrote:

You may want to to review history how Hitler, Musolini, and Stalin came to power on the backs of the popularity of their people.  They ruled with under totalitarian authority, with little regard for the will of others once control was achieved......the only difference, some were fascists and others communists.

 

They didn't necessarily rise to power due to overwhelming levels of popular support. Hitler's Nazi Party never achieved a majority vote in any Geman election, and in fact after the elections of 1933, the last free election in Germany and an election in which the Nazi Party won only 44% of the vote, Hitler later admitted that had been the lowest point of his political career and that he had come very close to suicide at that time. He saw that election as being his great opportunity, and with that strong repudiation of his Nazi Party by 56% of the German public, he saw it all slipping away from him and that window of opportunity closing forever. It was only through an incredible sting of fortuitious events and some manipulative malfeasance and strong-arm tactics that Hitler and his party ever come to power. He never rode in on any wave of public support at all.

 

And neither did Mussolini, nor did Stalin. They were just products of their times, and through historical circumstance just seized power rather than being publicly granted it.

 

The common thread is that they did all come to power in a world in upheaval and massive turmoil, and a world in utter distress both economically and politically. Times like that traditionally give rise to totalitarianism, because people are angry and frightened and even more easily led.

 

 

 

Report this comment
#9) On April 13, 2009 at 10:36 PM, tonylogan1 (28.23) wrote:

It's a little like the mafia "asking" for protection money.

Does the world end up in utter distress by accident or by design?

Report this comment
#10) On April 13, 2009 at 11:07 PM, alstry (36.27) wrote:

As I recall, the in 1933 Nazi party got more than twice the votes of the next closest party as most European nations are framented into many more parties than we are in the U.S. 

Benito was very popular in the 20's and wasn't he even knighted which I believe was later revoked.

As far as Stalin, communism and  the Bolsheviks....history is pretty clear on that one and I think we are both pretty much tracking and in sum, economic turmoil led people in directions which they later regreted.

The human suffering as a result of those decisions will be forever remembered by students of history.

Report this comment
#11) On April 14, 2009 at 10:52 AM, mliu01 (< 20) wrote:

You guys are worse than a bunch of silent sleeping sodomized sheep now.

Report this comment
#12) On April 14, 2009 at 11:11 AM, weg915 (< 20) wrote:

When I was a kid, I used to go flea markets often.  There was this old guy - who would tell us stories about WWII.  Stuff like - jumping out of planes and disobeying orders.  It seems everyone was told to jump in full gear, he jumped empty.  After he landed, most everyone else died (drowned) of landing too hard with too much gear, he took their gear and lived. 

This guy could curse like nobody I knew.

One day I pushed him a little too hard on price and he said something so graphic, so perfect, I never forgot.  I think it's apt now.

 

"What are you trying to do?  F**k me with my pants on!" 

 

I think about that phase often now. 

 

 

Report this comment
#13) On April 14, 2009 at 11:54 AM, kaskoosek (35.23) wrote:

1984

Report this comment
#14) On April 14, 2009 at 4:29 PM, eldemonio (98.04) wrote:

Hopefully we are not silent, sleeping, sodomized sheep.  Although, that would help explain why my b-hole hurts so bad.

Report this comment
#15) On April 14, 2009 at 6:20 PM, ClandPhoenix (79.98) wrote:

I think Alstry is the personification of an overcorrection to the downside.

Report this comment
#16) On April 14, 2009 at 7:35 PM, DemonDoug (32.19) wrote:

Is there any integrity left in the reports of American business................................

Not on any business associated with wall street.  There are some companies that do business the right way, and are transparent and are doing well - Apple, Google, Proctor and Gamble, Johnson and Johnson, Intel, Texas Instruments, Research in Motion, 3M, Amgen, Suncor, ConocoPhillips, I could probably find mroe.  But you'll notice none of the companies I listed got bailed out (they didn't need to - they aren't lying immoral frauds of companies that are shells for corporate bigwigs to embezzle money from the idiots that give them the money).

So yeah Al, there is still some ethics left in this country, you won't find it in DC or Manhattan though.

Poor choice on the Thai riots tho.  They have a strange way of doing politics over there... instead of having elections every few years and two main parties debating for power, they have two groups of people riot for change (the reds and the yellows) and there is a huge disagreement between them.  And both sides claim the leaders of the other sides are corrupt.  In this country we have 2 parties that are basically in bed together and a regular voting system, it's a system that is much less violent for the most part (unless you decide you want to own slaves and secede from the union, then you are going to have a bloody battle on your hands).

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement