09-17-2008, 05:01 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,484
|
As I understand, AIG essentially insured the securities based on bad mortgages. That is, investors in these bum securities bought insurance from AIG to cover any losses they would suffer. And as the real estate market tanked, and the securities became worth pennies on the dollar, the losses were huge, and AIG has to cover them. They call them credit default swaps or whatever, but at bottom, didn't AIG just sell insurance to these people who wanted to cover their risk in the event of a crash in the real estate market and a wave of foreclosures? Smart investors to buy the insurance. Dumb AIG to sell it.
__________________
"Now I say that I know the meaning of my life: 'To live for God, for my soul.' And this meaning, in spite of its clearness, is mysterious and marvelous. Such is the meaning of all existence." Levin, Anna Karenina, Part 8, Chapter 12 |
09-17-2008, 05:05 PM | #12 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
09-17-2008, 05:11 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
|
09-17-2008, 05:13 PM | #14 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Those guys and girls should be outed. Who made these notorious pricing decisions? However, if Levin's description is accurate, what we are witnessing is further fallout from the real estate crisis sweeping the country.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα Last edited by Archaea; 09-17-2008 at 05:20 PM. |
09-17-2008, 05:48 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
I don't hihnk it is underwritten like typical life or casualty insurance. I think they do it more like a resinurance program, where thye look at a markte risk. I think Levin's descirption is accurate, as I understand it. This does all tie back to the housing fiasco.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
09-17-2008, 06:26 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
|
09-17-2008, 06:33 PM | #17 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
the ones that the fed asked to buy AIG or float them. The idea that this was a great business deal with little downside , but that the companies couldn't get the cash to take advantage of it is patently false (and stupid).
|
09-17-2008, 06:35 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
The government asked multiple companies to collectively float the $80 billion, knowing that none of them could do it individually. As I understand it, negotiations broke down when the companies couldn't resolve how AIG would be split up following the float. The government, as the sole provider, didn't have to worry about that.
|
09-17-2008, 07:49 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
|
09-17-2008, 08:50 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Titanic Sheep
What this shows me is that all these high paid financial executives have few original ideas. They seem all to have fallen prey to the same fad. They are all going over the same cliff. Management at AIG, Merrill, Lehman and the others were monstrously overpaid and are pulling the rip chord on their big bousy golden parachutes. Capitalism is better than a controlled economy. But it has its imperfections.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
Bookmarks |
|
|