Bank of America
Just because it worked so well the first time around... We can't wait for the totally unexpected mortgage reduction program announced by Bank of America... in 2012.
Breaking from Diana Olick: Bank of America will start offering principal forgiveness programs for most at risk mortgages. The bank will target subprime, pay option, and prime 2 year ARMs, no 30 year loans. Loans must have principal balance at least 120% of the value of the home. As the bank has over 1 million delinquent loans. The hit to BofA's balance sheet will be over $3 billion as the firm will need to write down its existing mortgage book (probably still at 99%) to fair value. Surely this is dictated by the government's desire to add some investor-funded oomph to its taxpayer-funded HAMP disaster. And with that, debt forgiveness for all begins! Max out all your credit cards now because the bank, per Barney Frank, will forgive it all. Oh wait, you already have... Carry on then.
I have a strong feeling that if you dig deep enough into the BofA innards, you will find some stinky stuff. Hey, it's just a feelin'.
Bank Of America Can Not Deny It Used Repo 105, Response From PricewaterhouseCoopers Pending; The BofA QSPE'sSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/23/2010 22:50 -0400
A day after the Lehman Repo 105 scandal erupted, one, just one bank stepped up and said it had never used Repo 105-type transactions. The bank was Goldman Sachs. Of course, Goldman's claim is completely useless without a context as the proper refusal would be for Goldman's counsel to say that the firm had not used anything "substantially similar" to a Repo 105. The difference between that and the verbatim phrasing is like night from day. But at least the soundbite chasers bought it, and the whole topic of Goldman and Repo 105 promptly died away. We'll let that be... for now. Yet one bank which not only has not provided voluntary disclosure, but which has now gotten itself bogged down in semantics, after recently speculation had emerged that BofA had used "substantially similar" devices to Repo 105. Today, BofA provided a response on the record as to whether it had (ab)used Repo 105s and it appears, that inasmuch the firm is unable to say no, the answer is a resounding yes.
One of the world's largest pension funds is suing Bank of America for more than $90m over its 2008 takeover of Merrill Lynch, claiming the banking giant failed to disclose the full extent of losses at the US investment bank. It's about time pensions got tough, but is it too little, too late?
- Bank of America Considers Request to Halt Foreclosures for HAMP
- FORECLOSURE HALT PERTAINS ONLY TO BANK-CONTROLLED LOANS
- BOFA'S DESOER CONSIDERS FORECLOSURE REQUEST, SPOKESMAN SAYS
- BOFA'S DESOER MET WITH HOUSING ADVOCATES SEEKING HAMP REVIEWS
- BOFA CONSIDERS REQUEST TO SUSPEND SOME HOME FORECLOSURES
A review of Bank of America's 4th Quarter Call Reports reveals obvious shift of Delinquency Liability to Taxpayers.
We have previously discussed the maturity cliff in Treasuries, Commercial Real Estate, Financials and High Yield. Focusing on the latter, a recent report from Moody's, indicated that there is roughly $800 billion in high yield bonds maturing by 2014. Today, Bank of America jumped on the HY maturity warning bandwagon, discussing the "maturity wall" which while alarming, is estimated by BofA to be $600 billion, or materially less than Moody's estimates. So while not in any way novel, Bank of America does provide a rather convincing view of therelative maturity schedule in HY currently versus the historical average in both loans and bonds. The results should be troubling to all CFOs and PE-owners of highly indebted organizations: absent raising equity rapidly, the ability to roll these loans in a rising interest rate environment will be next to impossible. Because with 89% of loans maturing in under 5 years (compared to 36% on average), and 50% of bonds (37% average), the maturity cliff,whether defined by Moody's or by Bank of America, is fast approaching.
Standard and Poor's whacks Citi and Bank of America, revising its outlook on both firms from Stable to Negative, cites "increased uncertainty about the U.S. government's willingness to provide additional extraordinary support to highly systemically important financial institutions in a way that will benefit debt holders."
After today's ban on prop trading, the bulk of the attention has been focused on Goldman Sachs and for good reason: without the ability to commingle trading information from the biggest flow operation in the world, with its own principal risk exposure, Goldman becomes just another B-grade bank, which has a solid balance sheet, a massive inventory of products in its flow business it must offload regularly (and unable to capitalize on, by taking the opposite side of the trade), and is eagerly anticipating the "boom" in M&A and underwriting advisory deals that is "just around the corner." While we wish Goldman well, having to compete on a fair basis with the remaining banks should make for a novel departure from its traditional, monopoly-facilitated business model. Is the current stock price fair? Absolutely not, and if indeed Goldman finds no way to prevent the prop ban, it is very much overvalued here. Yet speaking of overvalued companies, and the prop trading ban impact, one company that may have well slipped under the radar today is none other than Bank of America. Ironically, after fooling around with the most recent BAC model by none other than Goldman's Richard Ramsden, we have uncovered just what a huge impact on the bottom line BAC's "trading account profits" aka prop trading has. If we zero out the revenue contribution from this line item, 2011P EPS goes from $2.25 to... $1.25. This may be relevant information for all those massive hedge funds who believe that Bank of America is a slam dunk double from here. It will be poetic justice if the stock price is indeed mispriced by 50%...in the wrong direction.
WSJ reports that the president of Consumer & Small Business Banking for Bank of America has been named CEO. Yet will the track record of the new CEO be spotted from the beginning: recall that Moynihan served as emergency General Counsel replacement after then GC Tim Mayopoulos was suddenly fired in December 2008, presumably for objecting to the Merrill deal. With the lawsuit on the Merrill debacle yet to come, courtesy of Judge Rakoff, will Moynihan be implicated, in addition to lame duck Ken Lewis?
"When I asked Ken Lewis, Bank of America’s CEO, about why he had not disclosed the mounting losses to shareholders before the shareholder vote, he told this Committee that he relied on the advice of counsel. Protecting shareholders is often, in the final instance, the practical responsibility of corporate General Counsels and their outside counsel. The Subcommittee’s investigative findings demand the question, “Where were the lawyers?” The glaring omissions and inaccurate financial data in the critical November 12 Forecast
make Bank of America’s decision not to disclose to shareholders unsupportable. Furthermore, the flaws in the forecast document were so obvious that they should have alerted the attorneys to the necessity of a reasonable investigation before making a decision on Bank of America’s legal duties to disclose. The apparent fact that they did not mount such an investigation makes the decision not to disclose Merrill’s losses to shareholders an egregious violation of securities laws." - Dennis Kucinich
Ken Lewis may think everyone has forgotten about him... But we haven't. Tomorrow's hearing before the House Oversight Committee will see the SEC's Robert Khuzami field questions about BofA's "criminal" acquisition of Merrill, which according to Dennis Kucinich represented an "egregious violation of securities laws." Consider it an appetizer ahead of the full blown jury trial before one Judge Jed Rakoff, coming soon to a publicly accessible courtroom near you.
Bank Of America Prices 1,286 Billion Wierd Ass Securities At $15/Weird Ass Security For $19.3 Billion In Total ProceedsSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 12/03/2009 18:45 -0400
First dumb taxpayers, now even dumber investors: your money is much appreciated. In other news: use of proceeds - meet black hole. Black hole - meet use of proceeds.
In addition to paying back its $45 billion portion of TARP, the Bank, in what will be Ken Lewis' last act, will also raise incremental capital. $18.8 billion of new "common equivalent securities" to be issued, or the equivalent of 1.2 billion shares. And even as the firm is set to payout humongous bonuses ala Goldman, the firm will not touch its $44.5 billion in TLGP backed issues.