berkshiremystery Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 My estimate for PTPP is between $4-5 B for 4Q.I think Motley fool has not mentioned positive tax impact that BAC will have in 4Q. I might remind you that our board member PlanMaestro wrote some interesting research.... http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/valuing-banks-using-ptpp-(plan-maestro)/msg67051/?topicseen#msg67051 Charting Banking XXIV: pre-tax pre-provision earnings ---> PTPP 2012-01-24 http://variantperceptions.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/charting-banking-xxiv-pre-tax-pre-provision-earnings/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 BAC price today is 25% lower than two years ago -- on Jan 14, 2011 it was $15.25. Better balance sheet and legal clarity today, worse net interest margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 BAC price today is 25% lower than two years ago -- on Jan 14, 2011 it was $15.25. Better balance sheet and legal clarity today, worse net interest margin. Yup. And that net interest margin is probably the lowest it will ever get. Mr. Market gets confused at times! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berkshiremystery Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 BAC price today is 25% lower than two years ago -- on Jan 14, 2011 it was $15.25. Better balance sheet and legal clarity today, worse net interest margin. Yup. And that net interest margin is probably the lowest it will ever get. Mr. Market gets confused at times! Cheers! Big banks on thin ground with margins 2013-01-13 Financial Times http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fec67a80-5d76-11e2-ba99-00144feab49a.html#axzz2I1flWlQB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 BAC price today is 25% lower than two years ago -- on Jan 14, 2011 it was $15.25. Better balance sheet and legal clarity today, worse net interest margin. Yup. And that net interest margin is probably the lowest it will ever get. Mr. Market gets confused at times! Cheers! Yes, and I was a buyer back then, albeit thinly. And I was a buyer recently once I realized this. In the past couple of weeks I have bought 350 x $15.00 2015s. I did have to sell some deep in the money 2014s -around 50 or so to balance it a bit. The biggest hits I have made in this gig is in situations I have followed deeply for a long time: Russell Metals, FFH, RBS preferreds, Mullen Group, the rebound in 2009 blue chips. One way or another all of the issues of the past few pages will resolve long before 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 BAC price today is 25% lower than two years ago -- on Jan 14, 2011 it was $15.25. Better balance sheet and legal clarity today, worse net interest margin. Yup. And that net interest margin is probably the lowest it will ever get. Mr. Market gets confused at times! Cheers! Actually, going back yet another year to Jan 14th, 2010 gets us to $16.82. The most important thing to know, however, is that the stock is overheated because it recently gained 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanMaestro Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2013/01_-_January/Who_owns_AIG_s_MBS_fraud_claims__Billions_ride_on_the_answer/ This particular dispute dates back to the fall of 2011, when New York Fed general counsel Thomas Baxter sent a letter to AIG counsel Michael Carlinsky of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. Baxter took note of AIG's suit against Bank of America and asked Carlinsky to confirm that the suit did not make any claims based on supposed breach of contract by BofA. The Fed GC didn't discuss it in his letter, but it's important to remember that in the fall of 2011, the Fed and AIG were on opposite sides of the fight over Bank of America's proposed $8.5 billion breach-of-contract, or put-back, settlement with holders of Countrywide notes. The Fed's Maiden Lane vehicle, you will recall, was part of the noteholder group that negotiated the deal with BofA. AIG, on the other hand, was one of the most prominent objectors to the proposed settlement. In a response to Baxter's letter, AIG GC Thomas Russo confirmed that the insurer wasn't bringing put-back claims based on securities it had sold to Maiden Lane and wasn't demanding that Bank of America buy back securities AIG didn't own. But he also said that AIG has the right to bring so-called "rescissory" damages, seeking cash for the value of securities AIG was supposedly duped into buying. In a series of ensuing letters, AIG and the Fed tried and failed to reach an understanding of precisely what the Maiden Lane purchase agreement had to say about the suit AIG had brought against BofA. In October 2012, the bank's lawyers at Reed Smith and Munger, Tolles & Olson filed a motion to dismiss AIG's claims against Countrywide that specifically cited AIG's release of fraud claims to the Fed. (The Countrywide piece of AIG's case was severed from claims against BofA and Merrill Lynch and sent to the Countrywide MBS multidistrict litigation before U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer in Los Angeles.) After AIG's lawyers at Quinn Emanuel filed a response that disclosed the letters AIG had exchanged with the Fed and argued that the Fed had conceded ownership of the fraud claims, BofA submitted rebuttals from former Fed vice president James Mahoney and Fed deputy GC Stephanie Heller. In Mahoney's declaration, the former Fed official, who negotiated the Maiden Lane deal, said the Fed's intent was to retain all litigation claims stemming from the MBS it bought from AIG. Heller's declaration said that AIG was misrepresenting the end result of the letters between the Fed and AIG in the fall of 2011. The Fed, she said, never agreed that AIG had the right to bring securities fraud claims, and "when the exchange with AIG turned into a negotiation, the FRBNY discontinued its dialogue with AIG concerning this matter as the FRBNY was not interested in negotiating a new allocation of claims or other after-the-fact agreement." Those declarations led to AIG's new complaint, which shrugs off Mahoney's "vague" assertion and says Heller's argument that the Fed walked away from discussions with AIG in the fall of 2011 "is difficult to reconcile with how sophisticated counsel typically behave in matters involving billions of dollars." If the Fed really disagreed with the position AIG outlined in its final letter, AIG said, "its counsel would not have remained silent while AIG asserted its unambiguous position and the (BofA) action advanced." The Fed certainly hasn't acted like it owned billions of dollars of securities fraud claims against BofA, AIG argued in the declaratory judgment complaint. It never tried to intervene in AIG's case and, unlike the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, didn't file its own securities case against BofA or Countrywide. Instead, the complaint pointed out, the Fed has sided with BofA in the proposed $8.5 billion put-back deal, in which AIG is now the leading objector. The Fed actually asked AIG in a letter in October 2011 to drop its objections to the put-back settlement, which the Fed accused AIG of using as leverage in its securities litigation against BofA. (AIG responded in November 2011 that it wasn't objecting just for leverage but was "pursuing all avenues of recovery" against BofA.) With the ownership of the securities claims already briefed before Judge Pfaelzer in AIG's case against BofA, I'm not sure AIG can seriously expect a declaratory judgment ruling in New York state court before Pfaelzer decides the question. There are optics to consider, though. State Supreme Court Justice Barbara Kapnick is scheduled to hold hearings on whether to approve BofA's $8.5 billion deal in May, with AIG's lawyers at Reilly Pozner leading opposition to the deal. By filing its declaratory judgment suit against the Fed in the same court, AIG underlines its argument that the Fed and other noteholders in its group were too quick to reach a deal with Bank of America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I think AIG loses this round... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanMaestro Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I think AIG loses this round... Me2. From October: BofA unveils October surprise in motion to dismiss AIG MBS case http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/10_-_October/BofA_unveils_October_surprise_in_motion_to_dismiss_AIG_MBS_case/ Motion to dismiss. http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/uploadedFiles/Reuters_Content/2012/10_-_October/aigvbofa--bofaMTD.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanMaestro Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 AIG moves to stay MBS case vs Countrywide: fear or strategy? http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=65477&terms=@ReutersTopicCodes+CONTAINS+%27ANV%27 On the other hand, the insurer is not maneuvering from a position of strength. Consider the timing of the New York filing. Based on the letter exchange disclosed in the Countrywide case, AIG has known since the fall of 2011 that the Fed disputes its interpretation of the MBS purchase agreement. Countrywide explicitly challenged AIG's ownership of the fraud claims back in October. Yet AIG didn't bring its declaratory judgment suit to clarify the terms of the contract until last week -- after the Fed declarations supporting Countrywide's argument entered the record before Pfaelzer. If AIG weren't concerned about that record, why wouldn't it take its chances with Pfaelzer, as it was apparently prepared to do until recently? After all, if AIG won a ruling from Pfaelzer that it has standing to sue Countrywide, it would improve its leverage with other MBS issuers. Prolonging uncertainty is only a good move if certainty favors the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 BofA Takes a Mortgage Mulligan http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324595704578244051117171128.html?mod=WSJPRO_hpp_LEFTTopStories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanMaestro Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 BofA Takes a Mortgage Mulligan http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324595704578244051117171128.html?mod=WSJPRO_hpp_LEFTTopStories WSJ sees problem, we see opportunity? http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8474/8385872456_f993769e60.jpg Screen shot 2013-01-15 at 9.35.16 PM by PlanMaestro, on Flickr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraven Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 hahahaha! "A few years ago after I received a lump sum payment I decided to go bargain hunting. At that point in time Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) was dirt cheap – I think I paid something ridiculous like $3 a share." I must have been out of the office that day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
value-is-what-you-get Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 I have to agree it did go up pretty fast . . . maybe too fast . . . hmmm ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 I have to agree it did go up pretty fast . . . maybe too fast . . . hmmm ;D Well, reading that wasted a minute of my life.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 Peckyno -- must be difficult to introduce himself to latina women. "Excuse me, did you say you are pequeno?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olmsted Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 Damnit Kraven, you got me there for a second! Until I started reading :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy1 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 I went ot check my calendar to see whether today is April fools day... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraven Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Sorry all (not really)! Just trying to bring a little levity to what is the super serious business of investing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraven Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 This article makes some seriously good points and it's worth considering whether to hold BAC after reading this. It's well thought out and reasoned and shows a depth of understanding of the banking industry that is ridiculously advanced. http://beta.fool.com/ryanpeckyno/2013/01/16/why-bank-america-sell/20953/?ticker=BAC&source=eogyholnk0000001 Peckyno -- must be difficult to introduce himself to latina women. "Excuse me, did you say you are pequeno?" If the response is "si, lo siento" he has more to worry about than his lack of understanding about BAC and banking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbitisrich Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Haaah, you really fooled me. I read it, then stepped away to make coffee in case I missed something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stahleyp Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Eric, are you still 100% in BAC or have you cut it down a bit after the recent run up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Eric, are you still 100% in BAC or have you cut it down a bit after the recent run up? I haven't sold any BAC. I added some MBI common and AIG calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stahleyp Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Eric, are you still 100% in BAC or have you cut it down a bit after the recent run up? I haven't sold any BAC. I added some MBI common and AIG calls. Did you lighten up on the warrants or calls? For what it's worth, you're my hero. 8) 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