OracleofCarolina Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/holder-wont-meet-bofa-ceo-204516886.html?.tsrc=applewf Holder says no meeting..we'll see if BAC takes this to the courts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Government negotiators declined to credit the bank with $6.3 billion Bank of America agreed to pay the Federal Housing Finance Agency in March over misrepresentations in mortgage-backed securities purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 2005 and 2007. The credit would essentially close the gap, a second source said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indirect Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Al and Gary, I was not the guy who thought to ask this question. It was posed by couple of academic people who retrospectively analyzed periods of rising rates to see the improvement in bank's earning . What they found was NIM is not as important as economic activity which makes sense, higher GDP, more loans, more fees and more profit. That was a recently published finance paper. I found that relevant as NIM may not increase now, but I feel GDP will increase, hence outlook for BAC better. How BAC will do in comparison to C and JPM depends upon the execution of the strategies that Al talked about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sswan11 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 "Morgan Stanley’s Betsy Graseck and Manan Gosalia:" Expect this puts pressure on Bank of America to announce a settlement soon. We already bake in a $12B settlement for Bank of America ($7B hard dollar, $5B soft dollar). This is 1.8% of the $653B PLS issued by Bank of America and CFC between 2004-08. While press reports have suggested the DoJ is asking for $17B, we are sticking with our $12B estimate given that JPMorgan Chase settled last year for 65% of the initial $20B ask, and now Citi seems to be settling for 70% of the initial $10B ask. We keep our 2Q14 1c EPS est for Bank of America unchanged for now. blogs.barrons.com/stockstowatchtoday/2014/07/09/citigroup-thats-a-mighty-big-settlement/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I'm working from memory, but I recall BAC's 2009 NIMs to be around $10Bn higher than they are now, i.e. nearly $1/share pre-tax. Today's situation is a special case. Typically deposit rates are (say) 1% below the Fed Funds rate. So Fed Funds at 5%, then deposits will pay 4%. But today, because the Fed Funds rate is essentially 0%, but the deposit rate can not go below 0%, you've got NIM compression. When the Fed raises rates from 0% to 1%, the deposit rate will hardly move upward, but the lending rate (for loans based on LIBOR or other short-term rates) will move up a full percent. This will cause nice margin expansion. There is also an argument that higher rates will cause a lending expansion, as people rush to get loans sooner rather than later knowing that lending rates will only be increasing from here on out. Al and Gary, I was not the guy who thought to ask this question. It was posed by couple of academic people who retrospectively analyzed periods of rising rates to see the improvement in bank's earning . What they found was NIM is not as important as economic activity which makes sense, higher GDP, more loans, more fees and more profit. That was a recently published finance paper. I found that relevant as NIM may not increase now, but I feel GDP will increase, hence outlook for BAC better. How BAC will do in comparison to C and JPM depends upon the execution of the strategies that Al talked about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenaidaMacroura Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Dividend and buyback resubmission https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bank-america-requests-5c-dividend-102908155.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ourkid8 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I think the general consensus is a $0.05/quarterly dividend + $2-3B in share repurchases. Tks, S Dividend :) and buyback resubmission https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bank-america-requests-5c-dividend-102908155.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I am reasonably confident the resubmission will be approved. I have some understanding of regulator relations with their constituents from a prior life. Usually such an action receives tacit approval during the process to avoid embarrassment and needless cost for either side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I have some understanding of regulator relations with their constituents from a prior life. >> But things have changed. The regulators almost seem out to embarrass the big banks. Look at Citigroup last year, they got a very public "pass" on their numbers, then shocked everyone (CEO, etc) by turning down their capital request. I am reasonably confident the resubmission will be approved. I have some understanding of regulator relations with their constituents from a prior life. Usually such an action receives tacit approval during the process to avoid embarrassment and needless cost for either side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 So I'm looking at BAC's 2011 investor day presentation. Ohhh boy. Back then they were talking about $35-$40Bn, normalized PPNR. Analyst estimates for 2013-2014 totaled $4.20/share. They were talking about returning $30Bn in excess profits to shareholders(!). I'm curious to what degree these numbers are still possible (just delayed), possibly after rates go up - or were they smoking crack? I guess $2/share in earnings seems possible to me though it always seems "a few years away." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Citigroup appears to be settling for $7Bn, which seems like many times what they should based on relative issuances from C vs JPM. http://online.wsj.com/articles/behind-the-scenes-of-citigroups-7-billion-settlement-1405274009?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Citigroup appears to be settling for $7Bn, which seems like many times what they should based on relative issuances from C vs JPM. http://online.wsj.com/articles/behind-the-scenes-of-citigroups-7-billion-settlement-1405274009?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories JPM acquired entities that did the crime. C did the crime. Punishments should take that into account -- in which case, JPM should get the lighter fine (if any at all). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 C's results on the capital generation side are pretty amazing. In spite of the huge settlement, they've generated $10 billion of capital this year. 2H looks better than 1H (they say on the CC) which suggests $20Bn+ this year alone. I don't know when they can return capital, but they are generating it at such a fast pace and eventually capital in = capital out. $20Bn in capital/ year before interest rates have gone up vs. $150Bn in market cap seems cheap. Hope BAC has good results too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankap Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I am wondering how much City had to pay because of accounting fraud at the Mexican unit. I think some of the $7B is attributed to the Mexican fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 This settlement did not cover the Mexican problems. They are probably indirectly paying via CCAR though. I am wondering how much City had to pay because of accounting fraud at the Mexican unit. I think some of the $7B is attributed to the Mexican fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Results: http://investor.bankofamerica.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=71595&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1947860&highlight= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 So, can someone explain to me what the 4.3 Billion being put into reserve is for. The presentation refers to it as "a previously disclosed issue". It looks like the DOJ settlement estimate but they aren't calling it that. The 10Q or conference call may reveal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QLEAP Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 So, can someone explain to me what the 4.3 Billion being put into reserve is for. The presentation refers to it as "a previously disclosed issue". It looks like the DOJ settlement estimate but they aren't calling it that. The 10Q or conference call may reveal.... Slide 7: Total noninterest expense of $18.5B in 2Q14 declined $3.7B from 1Q14 – Litigation expense of $4.0B, down $2.0B from 1Q14 – 1Q14 included annual retirement-eligible incentive compensation costs of $1.0B • Litigation expense in 2Q14 driven by $3.8B net increase in reserves for previously disclosed legacy mortgage-related matters, including the AIG settlement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankap Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I do not understand this. Total litigation expense for 2Q'14 was 4.0B. If out of 4.0B, 3.8B was increase in reserves does that mean Litigation expense excluding increase in reserve was only 0.2B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 So, can someone explain to me what the 4.3 Billion being put into reserve is for. The presentation refers to it as "a previously disclosed issue". It looks like the DOJ settlement estimate but they aren't calling it that. The 10Q or conference call may reveal.... Slide 7: Total noninterest expense of $18.5B in 2Q14 declined $3.7B from 1Q14 – Litigation expense of $4.0B, down $2.0B from 1Q14 – 1Q14 included annual retirement-eligible incentive compensation costs of $1.0B • Litigation expense in 2Q14 driven by $3.8B net increase in reserves for previously disclosed legacy mortgage-related matters, including the AIG settlement Yes, I saw that, but it doesn't refer to what the litigation reserve is for? Is "previously disclosed" cryptic for "our estimate of the DOJ settlement". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 From the Charlotte Observer: ""Of the $4 billion in litigation expenses the bank reported Wednesday, $3.8 billion was taken for mortgage-related matters, Bruce Thompson, the bank's chief financial officer, said in a conference call with reporters. Thompson declined to comment on negotiations with the U.S. Department of Justice on a possible $12 billion settlement over its sale of shoddy mortgage-backed bonds, but indicated the expense was related to the talks. "Clearly, the DOJ is the most significant matter out there remaining," Thompson said."" Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/07/16/5046925/bank-of-america-returns-to-profitability.html#storylink=cpy I Couldn't catch the call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abitofvalue Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Small progress on litigation continues. AIG settled @ $650mm so now the $8.5bn Countrywide can move forward and BoA can finally put that behind them. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/16/bankofamerica-mbs-settlement-idUKL2N0PR05J20140716?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssFinancialServicesAndRealEstateNews Looks like BAC has one big settlement to go now. Would be a shame for investors if there were any more large issues related to the crisis that suddenly came out of the woodwork at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbharadwaj Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 BAC offering $13B to settle http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bofa-offers-13-billion-settle-144242356.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gokou3 Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Small progress on litigation continues. AIG settled @ $650mm so now the $8.5bn Countrywide can move forward and BoA can finally put that behind them. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/16/bankofamerica-mbs-settlement-idUKL2N0PR05J20140716?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssFinancialServicesAndRealEstateNews Looks like BAC has one big settlement to go now. Would be a shame for investors if there were any more large issues related to the crisis that suddenly came out of the woodwork at this point. I wonder why BAC would pay AIG $650M to settle a lawsuit where the latter has lost? Is the nuisance of AIG dragging on the case worth such sums? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MYDemaray Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I wonder why BAC would pay AIG $650M to settle a lawsuit where the latter has lost? Is the nuisance of AIG dragging on the case worth such sums? I had a similar thought when I saw the announcement. 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