This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Denials Begin: Interactive Brokers Is First To Claim It Has Not Engaged In Commingling Rehypothecation
Now that the rehypothecation bogeyman has been let loose, and the question of just how many paper (and apparently physical) assets have been double, triple, and n-counted (where n can be a number up to "infinity") by the infinitely daisy-chained modern global financial system in which one's liability is someone else's asset....apparently up to infinity times, the next logical step was for the firms named in the original Reuters article to step up and begin denials they had anything to do with anything. Sure enough, below is the first (of many) such response, by Interactive Brokers, claiming it has been greatly misunderstood and unlike MF Global, it has done nothing wrong at all. Of note is that IB was simply one of many brokers mentioned in the Reuters piece, where we read that "Engaging in hyper-hypothecation have been Goldman Sachs ($28.17 billion re-hypothecated in 2011), Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (re-pledged $72 billion in client assets), Royal Bank of Canada (re-pledged $53.8 billion of $126.7 billion available for re-pledging), Oppenheimer Holdings ($15.3 million), Credit Suisse (CHF 332 billion), Knight Capital Group ($1.17 billion),Interactive Brokers ($14.5 billion), Wells Fargo ($19.6 billion), JP Morgan($546.2 billion) and Morgan Stanley ($410 billion)." Sure enough, we predicted a firm would have to promptly step up and "deny all charges." To wit: "Oh Jefferies, Jefferies, Jefferies. Barely did you manage to escape the gauntlet of accusation of untenable gross (if not net) sovereign exposure, that you will soon, potentially as early as tomorrow, have to defend your zany rehypothecation practices." As it turns out Jefferies, and all the other mentioned banks tried to avoid this festering can of worms by completely ignoring the topic... until Interactive Brokers' response now demands that every single named bank has to do the same and come out with an outright explanation of why it has billions in hyper-hypothecation, or else not journalists and bloggers, but the market itself will suddenly start asking questions. Something tells us it will not be nearly as easy enough for the others to deny all charges... Incidentally, if this indeed becomes "the next big thing", what the potential collapse of (re) hypothection means is that PBs will be unable to lend out shares anymore, in effect collapsing stock shorting as there is one giant short stock recall/forced buy in. Ironicaly the unwind of the biggest market fraud could result in the entire market pulling one last "Volkswagen"style hurrah, before all hell breaks loose.
From Interactive Brokers
Mr [REDACTED],
Below the response we have put forth regarding the Thomson Reuters article:
Recently, much has been written about the safety of customer assets held by brokers and we believe that customers are justified in their concerns. And so, we are writing to help clarify your understanding of how brokers are permitted to operate and, in particular, how Interactive Brokers protects its customers assets while servicing their needs to trade on margin.
To start, and so as not to leave any confusion as to the position of IB vis-à-vis the Thomson Reuters news article, IB DOES NOT, in any way:
1. Circumvent U.S. securities or commodities rules at the expense of our customers;
2. Invest customers’ segregated funds in foreign sovereign debt or utilize in-house repurchase agreements;
3. Commingle or utilize customer segregated assets for proprietary operations;
4. Enter into agreements which are designed to take advantage of supposedly unrestricted U.K. re-hypothecatio n rules; or
5. Engage in transactions deemed as “hyper-hypo thecation”.
More specifically, regarding hypothecation and the level of such activity at IB: - The hypothecation and re-hypothecation of customer assets is a standard and essential practice, which U.S. brokers employ in the course of financing customer activity. The rights to do so are longstanding, have been explicitly provided by regulation and one should not be surprised to see boilerplate consent language in each broker’s customer agreement acknowledging this.
For example, a customer who incurs a margin debit by virtue of the fact that they have purchased securities with only partly their own money, thereby relying upon the broker to lend them the funds to pay the balance at settlement, subjects a portion (up to 140% of the amount borrowed, also referred to as the margin debit) of those securities to a lien on behalf of the broker. The lien is also known as hypothecation. The broker, in turn, may pledge or re-hypothecate the securities upon which they have a lien to replace the cash.
In the case of IB, this re-hypothecatio n typically takes place in the form of a stock loan. In simple terms, IB borrows money from a third party, using the customer’s margin stock as collateral, and it lends those funds to the customer to finance the customer’s purchase. -
Similarly, a customer who carries a futures position must place a margin deposit with IB. IB may pledge the customer’s cash deposit to a futures clearing house in support of the margin required on that position.
While IB is not in a position to comment on the practices of others and whether they comply or fail to comply with these regulations, or do so in a manner which introduces unwarranted risk to the firm and its customers, we can state that we comply with all regulations and utilize investment policies that tend to be more conservative than those permitted under the regulations.
The Thomson Reuters news article alleged that IB, among other brokers, engaged in a practice that the author categorizes as “hyper-hypo thecation” (apparently a term used to describe a process in which a broker alters the risk of one financial instrument into the exposure of multiple other instruments and perhaps multiple counterparties through a daisy-chain series of pledges) at an amount of $14.5 billion.
While we are not sure of the author’s source for this number, we would refer interested parties to footnote 10 (“Collateral ”) on page 17 of our June 30, 2011 financial statement, which is posted on the IB website (http://www.interactive brokers.com/d...Unaud_Finls .pdf) and reads as follows:
“At June 30, 2011, the fair value of securities received as collateral, where the Company is permitted to sell or repledge the securities was $16,817,859,287, consisting of $13,022,386,422 from customers, $2,886,934,605 from securities purchased under agreements to resell and $908,538,260 from securities borrowed. The fair value of these securities that had been sold or repledged was $4,526,153,369, consisting of $2,583,920,633 deposited in a separate bank account for the exclusive benefit of customers in accordance with SEC Rule 15c3-3, $761,740,278 securities loaned, $877,478,486 securities borrowed that had been pledged to cover customer short sales and $303,013,972 securities that had been pledged as collateral with clearing organizations.”
A closer examination of this $16.8 billion balance reveals the following:
1.$13.0 billion represents the amount IB is authorized to pledge (largely based upon 140% of customer debit balances), of which only $0.8 billion has been repledged, largely through stock lending.
2.$2.9 billion represents the investment of customer’s cash balances in reverse repurchase agreements where the underlying collateral is U.S. treasury securities. These transactions are conducted with third parties and guaranteed through a central counterparty clearing house (FICC). $2.6 billion of this collateral, technically a repledge (i.e., part of the $4.5 billion “sold or repledged”), is not re-hypothecated and it remains in the possession of IB and held at a custody bank in a segregated Reserve Safekeeping Account for the exclusive benefit of customers. The remaining $0.3 billion represents collateral pledged to clearing organizations.
3.$0.9 billion represents short sale transactions whereby the sales proceeds have been pledged as collateral to fully secure the borrowed securities. These transactions are classified as securities sold (i.e., part of the $4.5 billion “sold or repledged”).
Based upon this information, which reflects prudently risk-managed broker financing transactions, we believe a fair-minded author would have drawn a different conclusion regarding IB and hyper-hypotheca tion given a minimum level of investigation and contact.
Regards,
IB
»
- 61877 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
IB never denied that some of the assets they have might have been hyper-re-hypothecated to them by others!!!!
If they deliberately miss the point, the real point and don't address it you know they're scared and bunch of liars.
They are sounding like politicians. Everything is fiiiiinnne. Nothing to see here. Business a usual. Piss off.
good doctor I believe that even if they followed US regs and had NO London office there's a very good chance that some of their "assets" they think they have have been re-hypothecated to them. In other words 4, 5 or even more individual(s) or organizations own the same share certs. Or should I say potentially and allegedly?
edit: I replied to myself rather than to Doctor Katanga up above
IB's main office is in CT but I think a lot of ops are in Chicago? Chicago = Rahm and our muslim.
freddie, I don't know what you've got against the muzzies, but could you please replace muslim, with douchbag. obama is what they tell him to be. nothing more. he is no more muslim, than you are. quit beating a dead horse, and expand your understanding. have a nice day.
IB DID NOTHING ILLEGAL....! ...oh wait the banks paid lackeys in congress wrote laws protecting their theft so the banks can legally steal.....wonder why some of these politicians are retiring (like frank)....wait til the public at large learn that congress has legallized the theft of all their saving accounts.....sving..!...or is that swing (by a lamp post).
I re-hypothecate to you, you re-hypothecate to me.... sounds like a stable financial system to me.
How many chairs did you say we have in the system ????
What's the old saw about cockroaches? Where there's one there's....n?
The music just stopped. There are a fixed number of chairs. Many people want a seat..............
I thought there was only one seat, and GS was sitting in it...
Sorry pal, your seat has been hypothecated.
Chairz bitchez!! Bullish! Very bullish
Lets not forget National Financial Services LLC which clears some of the giants like Fidelity and many smaller brokers. If i'm not mistaken they engage in Re-hypothhoclusterfukation too... can anyone confirm this please ?
National Financial is Fidelity. I am wondering which brokerages are safe. All the bank ones which are Merrill(Bank of America), Smith Barney, Morgan Stanley, Wells are total shit. They all love the Muslim and the muslim's pal Buffert owns billions of stock in BAC and Wells. I thought Fidelity would be pretty safe but looks like they suck. I wonder if Schwab is doing this. I think Schwab is not a supporter of the muslim.
I called Fidelity yesterday to make my individual account non-marginable, takes about 2 days. I spoke first with a customer service rep and had to be sent to a trader, young lady. Neither understood what I was talking about, bring up the MF and re-hypo. I have a decent amount in cash, not taking any chances, will transfer to my credit union. I assume 401k's are not hypo'ed, but the bankers and feds have their claws on that.
Also, saw a perfect quote on infowars:
Bankers are the dictators of the west.
you think 401k's and pension funds, are not being violated?
they sure are. what matters is who is running the 401k/pension. in most cases a bank has its claws in them.
Schwab hypothecates and re-hypothecates its customers' margin account - see Section 12 of your Schwab One brokerage account agreement. Better not have anything margined or hold any futures options at Schwab.
the rehypothecation, besides,multiplying leverage,creates a diversion, while the funds disappear. the assumption, that the funds cover trading losses, is another ruse. it's just theft.
What about Options Xpress? It's been taken over by Schwab. I have an IRA at OX.
+1 for coining the term Re-hypothhoclusterfukation (apologies if someone else did it first)
I see your $14B and raise you $2billion, bitch.
are you trapping because that is a weak raise
"
Ironicaly the unwind of the biggest market fraud could result in the entire market pulling a "Volkswagen."
wow
Fahrvergnügen bitchez!
Fucking Groovin !!!
"He who sells what isn't hisn must buy it back or go to prisn".
YesweKahn, I had never considered that great point.
Let the "Santa CLAWS" rally begin!
Prison? What's a prison? "Prison" isn't in the vocabulary of the TBTF because Congress and the Executive Branch have made the "Too Big to Fail" muthafuchas "Too Big To Jail".
The equivalent is Sadaam's Iraq, his sons kidnapped women on their wedding day and raped them, sent them back. The state was OK with it, since their family owned the police, media, military. Same here, bankers own the media, congress, President, many judges, write the laws for congress. It can only get worse, right now there is massive banker looting, next is the military crackdown, camps, internet shutdown.
The Law and Justice are strangers to each other.
...unless you are swallowing a congressman's jizzem
If banks,governments, people are all losing their money, then who is taking it? In a zero sum game someone is getting very very rich.
In the short run, marginal reserve banking is not zero sum- look to the assets at the TBTF and the Fed.
In the long run, "assets" must earn. Then you can start counting your zeros.
Anyone know if Democrat Bill Clinton was skimming more than $50,000 a month of MF Worldwide after Democrat Jon Corzine too over? Clinton, Corzine, Madoff & the muslim = all Dems.
Sure, all we need to do is get rid of those pesky democrats and everything will be fine, right?
You fuckin' idiot.
What do you expect from a simpleton whose wordview is based entirely on what CONMedia (Corporate Owned News Media) have spoon-fed to him? Little Freddie is a good example of what happens to people that believe television reflects reality.
All media, TV and Hollywood are shit and you are obviously a moron if you think any of it is different. TV is for morons like you. You must be a voter for the muslim.
Sorry, little Freddie, but your constant bleating about "the muslim" reveals that you're a CONMedia believer. You're just too dim to see that it's just another wedge issue propagated by America's one-party system. Keeping people focused on and bickering about nonsensical wedge issues makes it easier for the Party to rob everyone blind.
Your obsession with wedge issues like "the muslim" and "the dems" (as if more than one party really existed) indicates that you're either a dupe of or a shill for the Party. Which is it?
:crickets:
freddy, for god's sake, they are illuminatti, and they are godless creatures, all of them, including Obama
Freddie
Barry is just another, in a long string of puppets. Ask how much Honk Paulson slipped to him in the fall of 2008.
Calling him a Muslim, is no different than calling him a Christian. It is a diversion from the real game that the Puppet Masters want you to play.
If Barry was a Muslim wouldn't his wife, daughters, and Momma be required to wrap themselves in sack cloth ?
Call Barry a stooge.
The Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, and the CIA are controlled by muslims????
http://thewhiteroseresistance.blogspot.com/2009/02/tim-geithners-dad-barack-obamas-mom-and.html
Freddie's in the garment industry and means "muslin".
Can we block users, like on other sites? I wouldn't block RobotTrader, because of his comedic value. But Freddie is getting tedious...
repoing to maturity junk sovereign bonds, hyper-hypothecation, and creating a derivative/CDS bubble that is somewhere in the range of 1 quadrillion dollars...could some bankster shill please restore my confidence in 10 words or less? Thanks.
What IB cleverly did not mention is that the firm that they rehypothecate with, the one that supposedly lends them the money on behalf of the customer to buy the security, do they then rephypothecate and begin the daisy chain. They alse cleverly did not say whether they do that themselves, namely rehypothecate on an already rehypothecated loan.
client of IB: Hi I understand you guys don't re-hypothecate?
IB: Yes that correct sir
client: Excellent could you please send me the share certs, I have 100 shares of ABC in my account?
IB: Well we'll have to clear that with GS, RBC, HSBC and JPM because they also have ownership of those 100 shares of ABC
...not to mention Cede & Co., who actually own the stock for you (for your convenience and security, of course).
The more I read the more I'm confused!
You are starting to understand.
this is THE best fucking response i have EVER seen....sums up the entire 30 year bubble in financial 'products'.....!
You know what they say about official denials.
In communist russia they said rumors are to be ignored until they are officially denied.
I am going to be calling my broker tomorrow, and so will millions of people.
A gigantic short squeeze is too cute by far, but if the market doesnt start levitating this may be the pin that bursts the liquidity bubble and brings on the greater depression.
It is now print or die if millions of people do what I plan to do.
long "T" (symbl)
topcallingtroll
I am going to be calling my broker tomorrow,
DUDE............................
You actually think your Broker is gonna LEVEL w/you?.
I have some swampland for sale.If you smart, you will get every dime you have there.
Talk about CONTAGION?????.............sheeeesh, if this is NORMAL operating/business practice, you have to be insane to do it,esp if your the last one to get funded.
Yeah, TCT is a little late on the "he who panics first" timeline. On second thought, probably not. I can not find one person at work who has heard of fractional reserve banking, EZ crisis, or gold, let alone rehypothication.
Panic, TCT.
Uuhh. I wasnt planning to ask my broker any questions. I was planning to give instructions.
Uuhh. I wasnt planning to ask my broker any questions. I was planning to give instructions.
Can the rehypothecate cash that I have in my fidelity account or can they only do securities.
I have re read my fidelity agreement and yes they can, even plain jane mutual funds.
I always wondered why vanguard always ends with " your account balance may include uncollectable shares"
Time to get out of the game. I had no idea by giving them my money I became an unsecured creditor.
cash is especially a loan
They can come to your house and rape your daughter if they feel like it. Didnt you read the prospectus?
Always read the fine print. Like the Apple EULA (warning: disgusting) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynpnYh4o_Qo
Reasonable response by IB. I look forward to The Squid's.
OT: Finnish chairman of the Parliamentary Financial Committee Mauri Pekkarinen says Finland should start the preparations for euro-exit and deepen the relations with the other Nordic countries
Google translated story from finnish press:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=...
The Finns are very smart and practical. They have also not let muslims flood in like Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The Finns also would not elect a muslim to ru(i)n their country. This means the euro is finne.
call them gypsies, at least that would be entertaining
You forgot to mention that the evil muslims own all our banks, governments, lobbyists and media in the western world. I wonder why we haven't invaded them?
Nice interview, beginning 1 min in German, rest in English. Food for thought.
http://www.kontext-tv.de/english
SZ
A very watchable Richard Wolff(Professor of Economics Emeritus, UMass) with a 'big picture' perspective.
Worth a 10-16 minute investment.
If not counted ad infinitum then at least counted to some number larger than any other number picked (to count to). Oh, and never use a preposition to end a sentence with bitchez.
Bitchez, what, with that, is up?
+1 for the proper manner, with which, you used English.
How ironic.
The biggest commodity firm blowup in history ends up causing a world record meltup in stocks.
All the doomers pre-positioned for the crash end up going broke by being blowtorched by a 1500 point rally in 2 weeks.
My observations show that the CRB Index, coal stocks, solar stocks, gold stocks, and oil service stocks are sold out and showing the weakest relative strength since 2005.
Lots of guys stuck shorting these equities based on a China meltdown are going to get hosed.
Commodities may be the place to be, but withdrawal of liquidity may more than make up for the short squueze.
The explanation of a market meltup is too cute. I cant see it, but what do I know. I am just a troll.
Robo
Perhaps you missed the co-ordinated CB intervention.
Now that unpayable private banking debts have been morphed into unpayable public debts, the party has started. But no one is left to borrow the booze (from).
Best to leave early.
Your constant allusions to the 'meltup' in stocks and equities in general have led me to now realize that you are an actual mindless robot. To think, this whole time I've been junking you...
It's a machine. The words aren't human.
"It" is one of Skynet's algo robots posting "buy stocks" happy messages.
"It" is one of Skynet's muslim algo robots
There, I fixed it for ya.
I love freddie, but that was really funny.
Freddie's like the kid in 6th grade that isn't quite retarded enough to be in the special education class. You want to see him understand, and at times he almost does, but just as he comes close to understanding, he flips you the bird and then shits his pants, and you just can't keep yourself from laughing at him.
Yeah, it was really funny.
1. They aren't denying rehypotheation, just hyperhypothecation. (i.e. your assets are only lent out once; apparently, they are saying that in the UK it is within the rules to lend out the assets of a client to multiple other brokerages?)
2. it sounds like any trading account with any brokerage that has margin is subject to rehypothecation as a means of funding the margins
3. besides rehypothecation, what other sources are there for shorting?
4. So if this collapses, besides a massive universal short squeeze, wouldn't this also cause universal margin hikes, back to zero margin?
A further thought on this; in the past, margin hikes on precious metals have been implemented, causing gold and silver prices to drop. If there is a collapse in rehypothecation, leading to a cycle of margin hikes, wouldn't this cause the paper price of gold (and silver) to drop like a stone?
Of course, once gold is only available at zero margin, it might bring an end to the big pullbacks in price, so it could be a steady ramp from there. Without hypothecation, I suspect there would also be a major reduction in silver shorts.
and theres the rub...IB's assets are lent out only once to someone else, who, also only once, lends it out to someone else....IB did not say that it new the assets it had lent to someone else were in turn always in that someone elses hands.
Is that why it takes three days for settlement when I sell something? So they can unwind the hypothecation chain?
Probably. This shit looks like a chain letter.
no
heh!
So USD crushed, EURO to the moon and the Christmas rally miracle?
Big fun.
Oh, the expletives I so long to unleash!
So like a mushroom cloud, first everything violently expands/goes up? Then it is even more violently manifested to a devastated pre detonation 'new normal'?
Maybe I'm not following this accurately, but that seems to me the coming events suggested.
Jefferies, plural of Jeffrey. Consisting of financial ingredients rehypothicated, where 90% of the ingredients are unknown.
Edit: I mean who would be afraid of a Jefferies, do you have a furry wall anywhere?
Monday should be interesting.
I always knew if the end of the financial world as we know it happened we would hear it on zerohedge first. We just have to wade thru a bunch of false alarms.
The remedy is hugely deflationary unless it is going to be balls to the wall monetization, and central bankers being a naturally conservative lot will not be temperamentally able to gamble it all on one roll of the dice.
false alarms?
we got out of the building years ago with all our belongings and have set up shop nearby to watch from a safe distance and all the while tyler dances around said building with a loudspeaker telling everyone the building is on fire and is about to explode.
Hehe.
I am still in the building attempting to loot the now vacant offices. Getting a bit warm in here.
I could use a short squeeze to sell into.
As part of a reach around? Hey me too.
You know the old saying there is no fire without a smoke, and clearly the smoke is starting to get thicker and thicker, if we were to consider the press releases.
I am just wondering why from all of the above noted, IB is the FIRST ONE, to reiterate something that is "supposedly" (and as we have seen supposedly has quite a vague meeting this days) a written standard for the industry. It immediately came to my mind the old saying "the person who has stolen the money, is the first one to say I did not steal it". In this situation, clearly, there is not on only one Money Abuser in the System - MBiS, and maybe the fist one to start defending is the one who can not withstand much turbulence associated with the fundamental suspicion starting to diffuse tie industry. It is up to everyone to make his own conclusion.
...They want all the business?
Goodbye Mr. Market, it's my money and I'm going to park it
In something I can really touch and see
Ready to buy the farm, and live up in the barn
where my assets are staying there with me.
Lucky enough to marry a smart, beautiful woman who was a farmer's daughter. We now own the farm debt free - 240 acers.
I’m trying to get this image out of mind of a bunch of bankers locked in a room marked ” hypothecation” and the lights go out.
IB=Investor Beware.
istening to Jon Corzine testify Thursday, it’s hard to come to but one conclusion:
The man may have a penthouse in Hoboken, but he lives in the state of denial.
That missing $1.2 billion?
He “simply has no idea where it is.” But he hopes it will still be found.
Did his bets on European debt cause the firm’s bankruptcy?
No, the marketplace lost faith in the firm; his trades were “prudent.” Besides, the firm had bad management before he got there.
Were the missing customer funds used to shore up the firm?
It was “never his intention” to break any laws.
But could it have happened?
Well, it’s possible that his orders were misunderstood.
And so it went.
Listening to Corzine testify, we were reminded of the governor who liked to parse words when he was asked questions. We used to say that Corzine would speak in parseltongue – in the Harry Potter books, parseltongue described a person who could speak in snake language. In New Jersey, parseltongue describes a politician who parses his words – and Corzine was a master at it.
Like when he was asked about Carla Katz and the emails. Or about government borrowing, or that infamous toll road hike.
That’s why our ears perked up when he said it was “never my intention” to break any laws. Or that if any one did so, it was a “misunderstanding” of what he wanted.
We’ve had to break out our parseltongue decoder too many times to think that those phrases were just happenstance.
Throughout his pained, and sometimes halting, testimony Thursday, it was clear that Corzine was haunted by the collapse of the firm, and the loss of customer funds.
We have no doubt that his anguish is real.
But in listening to Corzine, to accept his testimony, you would have to believe that he was a hands-off CEO, who had no idea what his underlings were doing.
Does that sound like the Jon Corzine we knew in New Jersey?
At one point, one lawmaker remarked how Corzine asserted that he left New Jersey with a $500 million surplus, but that Gov. Chris Christie said he actually left him a $2.2 billion deficit. Corzine was asked if he wanted to respond to what Christie said.
Corzine responded that he thought his treasurer had responded at the time. And then he said he would have to go back and check the records.
Really? You think a $2.7 billion swing in state finances might be something Corzine might want to address.
Even if only to say that it was never his intention to leave the state with a budget deficit.
Corzine is scheduled to testify two more times next week under subpoena. The investigations into the missing money are continuing.
And so we can expect Corzine to continue to assert that he was as shocked as anyone that the money was missing. Stunned, in fact, was his word.
Probably not as stunned though, as the farmers, ranchers and small businessmen who lost their life savings, however.
And those are the folks who need answers. And need their money found.
Now......inthelobby
"We have no doubt that his anguish is real." Is that a joke, I hope?
no...i think some of these bankers are starting to wipe out larger and larger groups of peoples wealth....and some of these pople have to be organized crime...has to be. it is just a matter of time before we see some of these bankers just disappear...and they know that.
i think he is actually scared shitless......
So we go from relying on a cellmate named Bubba to be the ultimate arbiter of justice to organized crime usurping his role. Why does that not make me feel comfortable? Either of them?
when we have a population of mouthbreathers that think watching american idol is more important than electing responsible leaders...well yes. mob rule, whatever you want to call it, will be the end result of this......chaos always rules in the end.
That's what happens when you let illegal mexicans like Corzine into the USA.
Hmm...wait a minute....
"Now......inthelobby"
Jack Ruby II?
Incredible how Democrat Jon Corzine, who looted NJ, allowed fellow Democrat Bill Clinton to loot MF Worldwide to the tune of $50,000 a month. I would guess the muslim approved this.
It doesn't matter - Republican or Democrat - Both parties keep kissing the Wall Street ring.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/07/moore_wall_street_already_has_their_man_and_his_name_is_barack_obama.html
damn it freddie, yer fuckin trollin. stop fuckin trollin.
Bill Clintons 50,000 dollar per month consulting fee charged to mf global doesnt interest you?
we all know about it and fred is just perpetuating the hegelian dialectic
he said rules, not laws. setting up the scenario, where he may concede to breaking a rule, resulting in a regulatory penalty, and not a criminal charge. probably try to make it look noble, for him to step up, and take responsibility, for the poor decisions, of others, in the firm. who knows, maybe he can parlay this into another run in politics.
The customer funds were rehypothecated into nothingness.
Dude, if you REALLY believe his "anguish" is real, then you're part of the problem- dupes that Corzine realizes will NEVER be able to touch him......
I am spoiled.. We here are spoiled..
You dont hear enough Thank You(s)! Tyler!!
The World Owes You, Tyler a Great Deal for making the truth available.. for shinning a light down on those cockroaches.. then tracking where they run home too.
God Bless You, God Love You and I Pray God Keeps You Safe.
Sincerely, JW
This shit (financial armageddon) cannot be fixed and only run its course because no one knows what the fuck is going on in the system. Scam after scam after scam and yet no one is in jail because apparently it is not a crime to be an idiot in Wall Street and yet the main street folks get thrown in jail for being ignorant of the law.
Here is EXACTLY what is going on in the System.. get a pencil, a piece of paper and use the pause button as often as needed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eforYw3mdL0&feature=relmfu
Keiser Report: Gold-for-Bonds & Debts-for-What?! (E221)
Uploaded by RussiaToday on Dec 10, 2011
This week Max Keiser and co-host, Stacy Herbert, discuss central banks and governments 'saving the day' and hostage taking paper silver markets and gold for bonds in Japan. In the second half of the show, Max talks to Satyajit Das, author of Extreme Money, about the European debt crisis.
KR on FB: http://www.facebook.com/KeiserReport
Sweet and Sugary Wet indeed - don't think (think) the Tyler swings that way - don't know `bout the others - but - and amazingly - I'm getting a semi-stiffy - same mens room same park same time you bring the K&Y(?).
PS : ("Cockroaches" is that the best you got - you been working that rhetorical shtick for years - use the taxonomic classification and blog sissies will only have eyes for your posts!)
Don't feed the Mohels. Ta ta!
You take my Sincere Kindness towards Tyler as some kind of "Broader Feeling" that would encompass the Genetically Inferior as well?
I believe in defending the weak, the defenseless and the Un-Loved.. because that is what real men should do.. I have no need to benefit from the suffering or stupidity of others.
I as well believe in holding those responsible, accountable for their far reaching treacherous acts against Humanity as a whole.
Those who suffer from any form of psychosis, that allows for a lack of feeling.. a lack of caring for the condition of their fellow man.. are a plague upon Humanity. Empathy is one of the Greatest Gifts God bestowed upon Humanity. The Genetically Inferior who are incapable of grasping or prioritizing these feelings.. or maybe are just able to suppress those feelings.. are the single largest reason why the World is such an Un-Godly Place that must be suffered by ALL!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g
You must be new.
Welcome to the Light and the Truth.
Sincerely, James Edward Workman
"I believe in defending the weak, the defenseless and the Un-Loved...."
so you defend the bankers....WELL FUCK YOU....!
Excellent expression JW n FL
I 100% agree, thank you Tyler.
ok, now let's all keep clicking on the ads throughout the page so his dilligent work will be rewarded too.
JW in FL amazing posts!!!!
I was going to say their rebuttal made sense until I realized what they were actually saying is that "we strictly comply with rules and regulations". That they do may be true, but what is not defensible is the nature of those rules and regulations.
Up until 2008's crisis, mortgage refi's and other "equity" home loans (exceeding 100% of inexistent equity) were viewed as legitimate and unharmful business. Only when a crisis hits that we say: "Repledging? What were we thinking?".
When you start to believe that repledging in any environment is a sin, and that repledging an asset that is backed by infinite layers of leveraged counterparty liability chains is a greater evil, and that doing it in low quality and scarce true (productive) assets is capital offense that even Satan himself would not dare inducing, and find out that this is the essence and probably only game left in banking and financial town, admittingly using different terminologies for it, one would inevitably come to the conclusion that we live in a pure evil system.
And if you believe in judgement then you should also expect that we are destined to economic, financial and monetary hell. That we were just "complying" with rules and regulations is no excuse.
As of June 30, 2011 IB's response is a lot more than just saying that "we strictly comply with rules and regulations". It is detailed by numbers and is reassuring if that were the end of the story. However, it is the ability to hyper-hypothecate, among other things that is an ongoing problem in entrusting IB with your assets. The PB of Lehman in the UK sent customer assets to the likes of JP Morgan days before bankruptcy. Just because IB had not sent all possible customer assets down the worm-hole as of June 30, 2011 doesn't mean they won't. And then there is the risk of MF Global outright theft. I know of no way to achieve the safe custody of financial assets. The agreements of the "safest" Trust Companies are full of loopholes. That is what makes Gold and hard assets the only real solution.
“They lifted the money, but legally. The world was a jungle, but if you were really smart you always ran with the hunters. Then all the money you nicked was legal. Amass enough and they made you so respectable they anointed you Sir or Lord or Duke. Make a billion out of the sweat of others and you became Lord Muck and people rushed to shake your hand.” – Jeffrey Ashford, Consider the Evidence
"That we were just "complying" with rules and regulations is no excuse"
The Nuremberg defense. People have a hard time learning from history. Or from the mistakes of others. I never understood why. Seems to me Nuremberg made a very clear statement, victor's justice notwithstanding.
The more modern defense is simply to defy rules and regulations, a la mode de Netanyahu’s Declaration of No Peace: I don’t need no stinkin’ excuses, I mean, “I didn’t come to make excuses….”
Seems to me this "denial" says "well, OK, maybe we do it, but we were only following orders, and other guys do it more, so surely we ain't so bad". Sorta like only putting it a little way in. Or only killing a few jews.
Tyler:
If I understand the structure of the markets, there is much more leverage (borrowing of funds) on the long side than on the short side, because it's principally a world of owning assets with overall a modest percentage of that involved in short-selling said assets. So under your reasoning, why wouldn't margin buying dry up as least as fast as short-selling?
why wouldn't margin buying dry up as least as fast as short-selling?
Exactly what I was thinking, end of the Skynet buy-bot melt-ups.
umm no, the market has to function with both sides of a trade. short sellers need to borrow stocks so that they can sell it, and hope the price drops. buyers need to lend stocks to fund their short cash positions. the trick here is that you use another stock to start the ball rolling, as security, for both the stock and the cash, rather than the stock you sold in the first place (and which you didnt have) or the cash you didnt have to buy the stock. now you may well ask, if i have to borrow stock to cover the short sale i made in the first place to the guy who bought the stock who used that stock to secure the cash he borrowed to buy the stock...you may be on the right track....until the buyer of the stock lends the stock to someone else because he needs it to fund the short position he had on another short sale he made ....because it was a relative value trade between two stocks...then of course he may hav e been hedging his delta on an option strangle, in which case he may have just need to borrow stock to make up a basket of stocks that cover the delta of a sold call position or indeed he could have been the other way round and be trying to cover delta on a long postion expressed as a sold put....or.....he could have been selling the middle and buying the wings and then using something very fancy to cover off collateral needs to secure the naked postions he was running..or....HE MIGHT BE GUESSING! /sarc off
Traders are generally dim no matter how long they try and read ZH. However, in Tyler's scenario the short-squeeze would occur first and stocks could rocket. Then the resultant risk imbalances would result in net selling and send the market back down, most likely.
How does it go?..."that evil web we weave, when we practice to deceive"
I'ts not hard to see CRIMINALS, are dizzy, from all their criminal acts!
Remember, NO MERCY!!
When first we practise to deceive!"
Scottish author & novelist (1771 - 1832)
Mark Twain said if you always tell the truth you dont have to remember anything.
Yet Clare's sharp questions must I shun
Must separate Constance from the nun
Oh! what a tangled web we weave
When first we practise to deceive!
A Palmer too! No wonder why
I felt rebuked beneath his eye
I doubt Sir Walter Scott could have imagined the tangled web of deceit and criminality that we call our Financial System.
"I didn't INTEND to participate in criminal behavior. I will have to check my (recently shredded) records. "
Sadly, the heavy-weight criminals remain untouched.
no, no, no...don't play that song to me...It brings back memories; of days, that I once knew...the days I rehypothecated you...Baby, you lie...
These guys only smoke their cigars for Billions of bucks of rehypo...nothing less.
well i am sure they didnt INTEND to......so of course that makes it all OK
To think that the available supply of money, the medium of exchange, originally was related to the actualization of a country’s productivity. What producer of wealth can compete with the owners of a printing press?
Given the 1913 takeover of the money supply and the treasury in 1913 by enactment of the USFed and the income tax amendment it is easy to see “how the financiers came to occupy their present dominant position” in the world, not only over industry and all commerce, but life and social order itself.
On November 8, 2002, Ben Bernanke closed his speech at the University of Chicago conference to honor Milton Friedman: “I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.”
JR
"What producer of wealth can compete with the owners of a printing press"
The Feds power was always a function of the productive might of America. As we relegate ourselves to being solely a producer of digital money, sleight-of-hand, and infantile propaganda, the Fed becomes more desperate.
Even the Bernank has admitted that all the knob turning in the world has not achieved the "usual" response.
The European disease is coming to our shores.
Regards
K
cmon JR, you just jelaous cos if you print money its fraud cos it would be a free lunch and a ticket to never work again! but if they do it..its a free lunch and a ticket to never work again cos its legal!
Hey, you’re right, hooligan2009; this’s startin’ to make me mad. I feel like good-natured Lennie Pike (Jonathan Winters) in It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World when he finds out Mrs. Marcus’ (Ethel Merman) been using him in a greed-run-rampant fortune hunt for stolen loot, and he discovers the secret of the big “W.” How’d that movie end, anyway? Did the USFed get it all?
AmeriCON'd in for an epic melt up to catastrophic meltdown. Spectacular to watch but a horrendous amount of financial cleanup thereafter. We'll need more body bags for western bankstering rat bastards.