Bailout exit strategy

Titan
Posts
1743
Joined
8/30/2007
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
Edited Date/Time 1/26/2012 10:38pm
First of all, I'm 100% against the bailouts...100% AGAINST them.

But, I've been doing some research into them, and it appears there is an exit strategy.

I posted about it earlier in another thread, but essentially the government is buying "bad" mortgage debt from these wall street firms.

"Bad" mortgage debt, does not necessarily mean loans that have been foreclosed on, are delinquent on their payments, or even that there is any gaurantee that they will foreclose. The reason they are classified as "bad" is because nobody wants to buy them, even though a large percentage of them will stay current until they're paid off.

Anyway, the government is buying these loans at a huge discount...like 60%-70% (For Example: Buying a $100K mortgage, for $30K), in the industry companies that buy these types of loans are buying them on the "scratch and dent" market...it happens all the time.

Now, what is eventually going to happen, since most of these loans will not foreclose, is when the housing market stabelizes and wall street gets back it's appitite for mortgage backed securities (which will happen...once the collateral stops depreciating), the Feds are going to sell these loans back to Wall Street for face value (earning a 60%-70% profit).

It's a great business model...why do you think Buffet just wrote Merrill Lynch a $5Billion check for their "bad" mortgages? he's gonna do the same thing....smart man.

now, I'd like to know how the revenue this bailout could potentiall produce is going to be distributed?

I'm still agianst it...but it's nice to know they aren't just giving away $700Billion...with no exit strategy.
|
BMSOB
Posts
1191
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
PN
9/25/2008 3:18pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 8:34pm
I still want to see some numbers. Where did the $700 billion number come from? Do we know for a fact that the Fed is getting them for 30% of their future value? What are the costs of maintaining the program for however long it takes to recoup? Lots of properties out there that need to be maintained. I want to know that we aren't just covering the bad paper passed off as securities & I want to make sure these guys involved don't walk away with lovely parting gifts.
WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
USA
9/25/2008 3:18pm
Well said. Also, the bill that's being discussed gives 250 billion authority to Paulson now, then 100 billion in one year, and keeps the remaining 350 billion in reserve subject to Congressional approval. Now, Congress is being told by THE financial authorities in our government - the guys who are responsible for bringing THE OFFICIAL evaluation of our economic condition to government - that if we don't get something done the economy is going to just collapse. They have to err on the side of caution, even with misgivings. They have to play the hand they've been dealt.

My personal opinion is this is a bunch of crap. For one thing, the investment banks that are in peril are quickly going out of business and being absorbed into real banks. Second, if credit is an issue, it seems much more direct to push money into real banks by the government specifically to fund loans. But the problem is time - if Paulson and Bernacke are right, there's no way they'll work out those details before Monday, and that seems to be the drop-dead day.
txmxer
Posts
9770
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Weatherford, TX, USA
9/25/2008 3:38pm
as you described it, it's not such a bad deal.

As Paulson described it, we were flushing 700B down the toilet no questions asked...no time for questions or explanations. No time for oversight.

Dogs sleeping with cats!
brent26wood
Posts
1103
Joined
11/1/2006
Location
Washington, DC, USA
9/25/2008 3:40pm
I'd like to be able to by my loan and only my loan at .30 on the dollar.

The Shop

xewbx
Posts
717
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
9/25/2008 3:47pm
Wow........holy shit. I agree both with BMSOB and Nuck.

One problem Titan, is that right now, there is nothing in the bail out that expressly defines exactly what the government will be buying. It's not all "scratch and dent". One of my concerns is.........picking up crap in the form of derivatives.

If it was as simple as picking up the tab for real assest that will eventually recover and return a profit to the taxpayer..........it would have been a done deal already, but it's not that simple.

I believe that there is huge potential in this bail out prolonging and actually worsening a correction.

I believe that those crying the "sky is falling" are predominantly made up of

1. The same folks who created the mess.
2. The same folks who will lose their ass because of it.
3. The same folks who will benefit the most from a bail out.
Titan
Posts
1743
Joined
8/30/2007
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
9/25/2008 3:59pm
xewbx wrote:
Wow........holy shit. I agree both with BMSOB and Nuck. One problem Titan, is that right now, there is nothing in the bail out that expressly defines...
Wow........holy shit. I agree both with BMSOB and Nuck.

One problem Titan, is that right now, there is nothing in the bail out that expressly defines exactly what the government will be buying. It's not all "scratch and dent". One of my concerns is.........picking up crap in the form of derivatives.

If it was as simple as picking up the tab for real assest that will eventually recover and return a profit to the taxpayer..........it would have been a done deal already, but it's not that simple.

I believe that there is huge potential in this bail out prolonging and actually worsening a correction.

I believe that those crying the "sky is falling" are predominantly made up of

1. The same folks who created the mess.
2. The same folks who will lose their ass because of it.
3. The same folks who will benefit the most from a bail out.
I have the same concerns...There are still alot of unanswered questions, and no gaurantees...as I said, I'm against these bail outs.

But everything I've been reading is saying it's buying up these companies "bad" mortgage debt.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/25/news/economy/deal_reached/index.htm?pos…

"Earlier in the day, congressional negotiators agreed to a set of principles on revisions to the rescue plan, which calls for the Treasury Department to buy up bad mortgage securities from banks in an effort to get them to lend again.

Now, they are also talking about helping the consumer with certain BK filing resticitions and limitations. So no part of me thinks all $700Billion is set aside for bad mortgage debt, but I do believe a large portion of it is.

The problem is the banks can't lend any more money, because they can't securitize the mortgages they've got (to raise more capital), nobody wants to invest in banks that are writing off billions of dollars and their lines of credit are maxed out (again because they can't clear these "bad" loans off their books). So they can't lend money...the entire economy is clogged with bad mortgage debt. If the government steps in and buys their "bad" loans, even at a discount, it gives them capital, opens up their lines of credit it will essentially be clearing the arteries so money can flow freely from one bank to the next and to the companies that need it to grow.

Rooster
Posts
4432
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton, CA
9/25/2008 3:59pm
I thought it wasn't the mortgages they were buying. I thought it was the CDOs they were looking at buying. My understanding is that these are backed by no real assets and the lead lender in the mortage still retains the title to the home the mortgage is for. In which case they are worthless.

Has this changed with a new plan?
Titan
Posts
1743
Joined
8/30/2007
Location
Lehi, UT, USA
9/25/2008 4:02pm
Rooster wrote:
I thought it wasn't the mortgages they were buying. I thought it was the CDOs they were looking at buying. My understanding is that these are...
I thought it wasn't the mortgages they were buying. I thought it was the CDOs they were looking at buying. My understanding is that these are backed by no real assets and the lead lender in the mortage still retains the title to the home the mortgage is for. In which case they are worthless.

Has this changed with a new plan?
They would be buying the securities...or the notes...the lead lender will maintain the servicing of the loans.

It's common practice that when a loan is funded, the servicing stays with one bank, and the note goes someplace else. But the name on the title is the bank that holds the servicing.

So the feds will not be buying the servicing of the mortgages (people won't have to make their mortgage payment to the federal government), just the paper...and at a discounted value. (How much discounted I dont' think anyone knows.)
Rooster
Posts
4432
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edmonton, CA
9/25/2008 5:02pm
Aren't the notes they're buying just the insurance on the mortgage?

As I understand it what they're buying doesn't give them the ability to restructure any of the debts. It just buys up the paper that gives the bank insurance on the mortgages they have and they retain complete control of the mortgage itself. Basically guaranteeing them the profit and doing nothing about being able to restructure the actual mortgages to help out the home owners if necessary.

Buying up insurance even at a discount rate after a claim has been made is not going to be cheap or offer any real solution. All the experts are saying the CDO's are worthless. They have zero actual value and no assets to back them. Any kind of bail-out should be for something of actual value. Not that crap.
bsm121
Posts
1833
Joined
10/5/2006
Location
New Braunfels, TX, USA
9/25/2008 7:10pm
I'd like to be able to by my loan and only my loan at .30 on the dollar.
no shit...the good guys get fucked.Evil

Post a reply to: Bailout exit strategy

The Latest