meiroy Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Wouldn't higher reserves help in pushing down the theoretical future inflation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 On the other hand you have that possibly new regulation mentioned on the other thread for limiting IRA to 3m, which would increase consumption and help fix the economy (ignoring any law of unintended consequences for the moment.) Considering the very few people who meet the 3m criteria, I'm not expecting much "fix" to the economy. What's relevant is the surplus in the aggregate, not the number of people. Either way, it's not a complete "fix" all by itself, it's a step in a certain direction. There are multiple ways that you could be thinking about this, and I chose one of them. I assumed you meant that people would be spending more if they were not encouraged (with tax incentives) to invest for their retirement. However I threw that out as a possibility because if we're talking about the few people like myself, I'm not going to spend more if I can't have a RothIRA. I'm going to spend less because I now realize my net worth won't last as long as I thought it would. So via the wealth effect that Bernanke loves to think about, I'll go into siege mentality and spend less. Now I'm worried my money will compound slower and thus I must reign in spending. I'm serious, the last thing on my mind this weekend is spending more. My level of financial security just fell off a cliff and now I'm worried, ready to put it into lockdown because it changes the perception of my wealth that I was anchored to (and had adjusted my spending to). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltacular Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Wouldn't higher reserves help in pushing down the theoretical future inflation? meiroy, I hadn't thought of that one -- seems plausible at first blush. Still, at a 15% level of capital, a bank with a 1.5 ROA gets a 10% ROE. I guess it is possible they go for this level. A bank like Wells Fargo is already trading at a PE that (to me at least) implies its return on tangible equity is around 10% rather than the 18%+ that it actually is. Maybe the market knows this is coming. Still, it seems unlikely to me. ----- There are multiple ways that you could be thinking about this, and I chose one of them. I assumed you meant that people would be spending more if they were not encouraged (with tax incentives) to invest for their retirement. However I threw that out as a possibility because if we're talking about the few people like myself, I'm not going to spend more if I can't have a RothIRA. I'm going to spend less because I now realize my net worth won't last as long as I thought it would. So via the wealth effect that Bernanke loves to think about, I'll go into siege mentality and spend less. Now I'm worried my money will compound slower and thus I must reign in spending. I'm serious, the last thing on my mind this weekend is spending more. My level of financial security just fell off a cliff and now I'm worried, ready to put it into lockdown because it changes the perception of my wealth that I was anchored to (and had adjusted my spending to). Ericopoly, Not sure if it matters to you, but I doubt they're going to come for your IRA over $3 million aggressively. I doubt my doubts will change your approach / reaction. And, that might be the point of your comment. Just the fact they're talking about this means that you (one) starts asking: "What'll they come for next." If that's the case, I understand how it affects your spending and risk taking, etc. and it is a good point. It is affecting me already especially as I consider what is likely to come on the health insurance front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Hey guys...you know Puerto Rico doesn't charge any cap gains. Anyone want to start a physical Corner of Berkshire outpost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 I'll take one for the team and be the physical presence for the office... and no, no, you don't have to thank me, I'm just a selfless person. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stahleyp Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Congrats to BAC for not winning this! :P http://consumerist.com/2013/04/09/ea-makes-worst-company-in-america-history-wins-title-for-second-year-in-a-row/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 WFC and JPM both reported excellent earnings. There were middling effects from reserve releases. Both are raising their dividend: JPM from 0.30/q to 0.38 - tarp threshold is 0.38 WFC from 0.25 to 0.30 - tarp threshold is 0.34 I hold warrants in boh companies & common & Leaps in JPM. What will BAC have for Wednesday. We know ML has been doing lots of business. Consensus is for 0.23 per share. Probably on the low side. Question? When reserves are used to pay down a settlement, is there a charge to earnings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valuecfa Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 EXPERT REBUTTAL REPORT OF PROFESSOR ADAM J. LEVITIN (for intervenors to article 77) http://www.scribd.com/doc/135804568/Levitan-Art-77 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valuecfa Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Do MBS trustees have power to make global put-back deals? http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=74643&terms=@ReutersTopicCodes+CONTAINS+%27ANV%27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 The plaintiffs better hope the answer to this question is "yes." Because absent global settlements, they're going to find lawyers less willing to take cases and/or the lawyers will receive more of their proceeds. The lawyers would have to sit around negotiating each of 400 individual trusts, and no one would get paid until at least 2017. (1 case took years to get this far; 400 cases will probably last past the end of this decade). Do MBS trustees have power to make global put-back deals? http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=74643&terms=@ReutersTopicCodes+CONTAINS+%27ANV%27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Tangential to BAC, but interesting nonetheless....gov't using Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act to toll statute of limitations in financial prosecutions: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324345804578422862246279502.html?mod=ITP_moneyandinvesting_0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankap Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Tomorrow morning, BAC will announce 1Q results.I will be looking at 60+ deliq. loans (773k in 4Q'12).I want to see it at 650-700k. Decrease in non interest expense for LRAS ($ 4.9B for 4Q'12) Decrease in employees for LRAS. NIMS probably will not show much change. Tangible Book - Would like to see some increase. BAC has not announced any major write downs or settlements in 1Q. I expect investment banking to be strong for 1Q. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinod1 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 1Q Earnings released http://investor.bankofamerica.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=71595&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1807514&highlight=#fbid=SGtLN5L33ds Vinod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Another disappointing earnings release while every other large bank blew past estimates. While many here will dismiss analysts, the fact remains that $0.20 a share in earnings is a very poor number. I say it is time for the board to do its job and to let go Moynihan. Things are working at snail pace in there. I see no sense of urgency to drive earnings. No sense of urgency to address litigation issues. No sense of urgency to increase the dividend or return more capital to shareholders. Personally, I think that Pandit at Citigroup did a better job turning it around while he was still removed due to conflicts with one powerful board member. He sure left an easier job to his successor than what someone would pick now from Moynihan. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Another disappointing earnings release while every other large bank blew past estimates. While many here will dismiss analysts, the fact remains that $0.20 a share in earnings is a very poor number. I say it is time for the board to do its job and to let go Moynihan. Things are working at snail pace in there. I see no sense of urgency to drive earnings. No sense of urgency to address litigation issues. No sense of urgency to increase the dividend or return more capital to shareholders. Personally, I think that Pandit at Citigroup did a better job turning it around while he was still removed due to conflicts with one powerful board member. He sure left an easier job to his successor than what someone would pick now from Moynihan. Cardboard Your jumping the que a bit here Cardboard. Moynihan has outlined the priorities quite nicely and delivered on them so far. By early 2014 they should be easily pushing toward a 15 billion year. That is only 8 months away now. The other banks hardly reported stellar earnings. JPM and WFC both had reserve releases padding the results a little. Both got punished by the markets. NIM are very tight for everyone. I am a cheerleader with a very critical eye. At some point the banks are all going to have to open the spigot and take on more risk, or they are going to stay moribund. BTW: I bought 200 $10 put contracts yesterday for this eventuality. May sell them today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Litigation expense was $881 million in the first quarter of 2013, compared to $916 million in the fourth quarter of 2012 and $793 million in the first quarter of 2012. Included in litigation expense for the first quarter of 2013 is a class action settlement in principle between certain Countrywide entities and various institutional and individual plaintiffs (collectively, the Luther, Maine State, and Western Teamsters plaintiffs) concerning residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by subsidiaries of Countrywide Financial Corporation. The first of these class action lawsuits was filed in November 2007, and they collectively concern the disclosures that were made in connection with 429 Countrywide RMBS offerings issued from 2005 through 2007. The original principal balance of the RMBS involved in these cases exceeded $350 billion, and the unpaid principal balance of these securities as of February 2013 (excluding securities that are the subject of individual or threatened actions) was $95 billion. Under the settlement in principle, the lawsuits will be dismissed in their entirety, and defendants will receive a global release in exchange for a settlement payment of $500 million. The settlement will not affect investors' rights to receive trust distributions upon final court approval of the $8.5 billion settlement with Bank of New York Mellon as trustee. The settlement is subject to final court approval. If approved, and all class members who have not already filed or threatened individual suits participate, the settlement is expected to resolve approximately 80 percent of the unpaid principal balance of the Countrywide-issued RMBS as to which securities disclosure claims have been filed or threatened, and approximately 70 percent of the unpaid principal balance of all RMBS as to which securities disclosure claims have been filed or threatened as to all Bank of America-related entities. The amounts to be paid in the settlement are covered by a combination of pre-existing litigation reserves and additional litigation reserves recorded in the quarter ended March 31, 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescobrk Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Does anyone have the 60 day delinq loan handy? A lauded analyst report circulated on this board projected 14.65 in tangible equity by q4. That looks wildly optimistic at this point. BAC should easily be able to do that in 14 (earn about 1.10 a share on tce in 3 quarters)but around 14 per tce at year end will probably be closer. At this pace the stock won't hit tbv for several more months but at least Moynihan can buy back at lower prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racemize Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Does anyone have the 60 day delinq loan handy? A lauded analyst report circulated on this board projected 14.65 in tangible equity by q4. That looks wildly optimistic at this point. BAC should easily be able to do that in 14 (earn about 1.10 a share on tce in 3 quarters)but around 14 per tce at year end will probably be closer. At this pace the stock won't hit tbv for several more months but at least Moynihan can buy back at lower prices. I'm listening to the call now--I think it was 660, down from 770. Still expecting <400 by the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay21 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Does anyone have the 60 day delinq loan handy? A lauded analyst report circulated on this board projected 14.65 in tangible equity by q4. That looks wildly optimistic at this point. BAC should easily be able to do that in 14 (earn about 1.10 a share on tce in 3 quarters)but around 14 per tce at year end will probably be closer. At this pace the stock won't hit tbv for several more months but at least Moynihan can buy back at lower prices. It was in the press release at 667k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racemize Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 They just said litigation reserves did go up as a result of the recent monoline decisions (it is within the litigation expense line item). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luck Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 well, with the stock down 4% or so and perhaps future pressure, they'll have a buyback opportunity at a decent price it seems. nothing devastatingly bad on the call. hopefully no one had nearer term options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 I could be wrong, but I think the legal settlement announced today, greatly diminishes the possibility of runaway litigation issues in the event of a G&B settlement failure...possibilities which were low-probability to begin with. They've taken out 70-80% of UPB, so it will be near impossible to gather 25% threshold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vpagano Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Tomorrow morning, BAC will announce 1Q results.I will be looking at 60+ deliq. loans (773k in 4Q'12).I want to see it at 650-700k. Decrease in non interest expense for LRAS ($ 4.9B for 4Q'12) Decrease in employees for LRAS. NIMS probably will not show much change. Tangible Book - Would like to see some increase. BAC has not announced any major write downs or settlements in 1Q. I expect investment banking to be strong for 1Q. Pretty spot on as I look at each line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 ouch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Another disappointing earnings release while every other large bank blew past estimates. While many here will dismiss analysts, the fact remains that $0.20 a share in earnings is a very poor number. I say it is time for the board to do its job and to let go Moynihan. Things are working at snail pace in there. I see no sense of urgency to drive earnings. No sense of urgency to address litigation issues. No sense of urgency to increase the dividend or return more capital to shareholders. Personally, I think that Pandit at Citigroup did a better job turning it around while he was still removed due to conflicts with one powerful board member. He sure left an easier job to his successor than what someone would pick now from Moynihan. Cardboard Now I know where those votes against Prem came from! ;D Patience my friend, patience! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now