Common shareholders, however, will be out of luck. CIT said all existing common and preferred stock will be cancelled upon emergence from bankruptcy protection. That would likely include preferred stock from the $2.3 billion in funding from the U.S. government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) the company received in its efforts to stay afloat

In case you were wondering that that meant, CIT just stole $2.3 billion dollars of US taxpayer money.

Weaver95: Common shareholders, however, will be out of luck. CIT said all existing common and preferred stock will be cancelled upon emergence from bankruptcy protection. That would likely include preferred stock from the $2.3 billion in funding from the U.S. government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) the company received in its efforts to stay afloat

In case you were wondering that that meant, CIT just stole $2.3 billion dollars of US taxpayer money.

All thanks to chairman Obamao....

We are the CITs so pity us.
The kids are brats; the food is hideous.
We're gonna smoke and drink and fool around.
WE'RE NOOKIE BOUND!
We are the North Star CITs!

Weaver95: In case you were wondering that that meant, CIT just stole $2.3 billion dollars of US taxpayer money.

A federal judge has to approve it first. Should be interesting. Smart money is one the judge converting TARP PS shares into a straight loan, but still canceling the actual shares.

NeauxFear: A federal judge has to approve it first. Should be interesting. Smart money is one on the judge converting TARP PS shares into a straight loan, but still canceling the actual shares.

FTFM

Fark It: Weaver95: Common shareholders, however, will be out of luck. CIT said all existing common and preferred stock will be cancelled upon emergence from bankruptcy protection. That would likely include preferred stock from the $2.3 billion in funding from the U.S. government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) the company received in its efforts to stay afloat

In case you were wondering that that meant, CIT just stole $2.3 billion dollars of US taxpayer money.

All thanks to chairman Obamao....

Wow, he is good. He got not only CIT but AMEX approved for TARP funds on December 23, 2008 ^.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Aktr-yq6Huo/R0Lgovx0YNI/AAAAAAAAACU/e0Otbwxe8bA/s1600- h/Double-dip.gif

or this..

NeauxFear: Weaver95: In case you were wondering that that meant, CIT just stole $2.3 billion dollars of US taxpayer money.

A federal judge has to approve it first. Should be interesting. Smart money is one the judge converting TARP PS shares into a straight loan, but still canceling the actual shares.

the way we've been running lately, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a federal judge sign off on the plan.

Was there ever any doubt?

dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

Weaver95: But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

Well of course. This is Fark, where it's absurd until it's common knowledge.

Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

What about Citi? You know which one I'm talking about, even though subtards in multiple threads don't. I don't think they're much better off than BoA, but they have sold quite a bit of their stuff (Morgan Stanley getting a majority piece of Smith Barney, for example).

Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

According to the petition, CIT's largest unsecured claim holders were Bank of America Corp., as collateral agent for a $7.5 billion claim, and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., as a trustee for retail bonds with a claim of $3.2 billion. Canadian senior unsecured notes have a claim for $2.1 billion, and Citigroup Inc. also has a $2.1 billion claim as an administrative agent to bank debt due 2010.

source (new window)

Hender: Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

If it were up to me, I'd have used the leverage to reorganize the corporation from the ground floor on up. I'd have fired every single f*cking idiot on that board of directors, tossed the CEO and CFO out on their asses and done a complete audit of the bank. Anyone caught with their hands in the cookie jar would be facing jail time. Anyone complaining about it wouldn't get a bailout.

By the time I was done, there would be 4 new, smaller and more efficent companies with brand spanking new managment. the government would be a majority stake holder in the companies (with voting stock), and absolutely nobody on wall street would be happy with me at all. But they'd learn the price of being 'too big to fail'...and that price is that they get reduced to a more manageable size.

canetguy: Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

According to the petition, CIT's largest unsecured claim holders were Bank of America Corp., as collateral agent for a $7.5 billion claim, and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., as a trustee for retail bonds with a claim of $3.2 billion. Canadian senior unsecured notes have a claim for $2.1 billion, and Citigroup Inc. also has a $2.1 billion claim as an administrative agent to bank debt due 2010.

source (new window)

ugggg. source (new window)

Weaver95: Hender: Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

If it were up to me, I'd have used the leverage to reorganize the corporation from the ground floor on up. I'd have fired every single f*cking idiot on that board of directors, tossed the CEO and CFO out on their asses and done a complete audit of the bank. Anyone caught with their hands in the cookie jar would be facing jail time. Anyone complaining about it wouldn't get a bailout.

By the time I was done, there would be 4 new, smaller and more efficent companies with brand spanking new managment. the government would be a majority stake holder in the companies (with voting stock), and absolutely nobody on wall street would be happy with me at all. But they'd learn the price of being 'too big to fail'...and that price is that they get reduced to a more manageable size.

*applause*

canetguy: canetguy: Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

According to the petition, CIT's largest unsecured claim holders were Bank of America Corp., as collateral agent for a $7.5 billion claim, and Bank of New York Mellon Corp., as a trustee for retail bonds with a claim of $3.2 billion. Canadian senior unsecured notes have a claim for $2.1 billion, and Citigroup Inc. also has a $2.1 billion claim as an administrative agent to bank debt due 2010.

source (new window)

ugggg. source (new window)

hmm. now why does that not make me feel any better...

Weaver95: Hender: Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

If it were up to me, I'd have used the leverage to reorganize the corporation from the ground floor on up. I'd have fired every single f*cking idiot on that board of directors, tossed the CEO and CFO out on their asses and done a complete audit of the bank. Anyone caught with their hands in the cookie jar would be facing jail time. Anyone complaining about it wouldn't get a bailout.

By the time I was done, there would be 4 new, smaller and more efficent companies with brand spanking new managment. the government would be a majority stake holder in the companies (with voting stock), and absolutely nobody on wall street would be happy with me at all. But they'd learn the price of being 'too big to fail'...and that price is that they get reduced to a more manageable size.

OMG Socialist!

Hender: OMG Socialist!

Nah - you make a deal with the devil, it should have consequences. Wall street needs a kick in the nads. And the ONLY thing those farking bastards respect is ruthelessness. CEOs only care about something when it costs them money. Not their company money - THEM personally. So when they run their corp into the ground, I feel it's only fair to make a memorable example out of their violated corpse as a warning to others who might be a bit confused about the proper role of government in the financial sector.

Weaver95: Hender: Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

If it were up to me, I'd have used the leverage to reorganize the corporation from the ground floor on up. I'd have fired every single f*cking idiot on that board of directors, tossed the CEO and CFO out on their asses and done a complete audit of the bank. Anyone caught with their hands in the cookie jar would be facing jail time. Anyone complaining about it wouldn't get a bailout.

By the time I was done, there would be 4 new, smaller and more efficent companies with brand spanking new managment. the government would be a majority stake holder in the companies (with voting stock), and absolutely nobody on wall street would be happy with me at all. But they'd learn the price of being 'too big to fail'...and that price is that they get reduced to a more manageable size.

see, now someone like Teddy Roosevelt would have had the stones to do this. Truman, most likely. Eisenhower and Kennedy maybe. LBJ, maybe even Nixon would have done this.

None of the presidents we've had since Nixon would have had the stones to do this. Sadly, Even Obama falls into that group.

Weaver95: So when they run their corp into the ground, I feel it's only fair to make a memorable example out of their violated corpse as a warning to others who might be a bit confused about the proper role of government in the financial sector.

Words to live by. I love hearing people biatch about the government setting executive pay for companies who took bailouts. Hey, guess what? You took our money, you abide by our rules. You don't pay out billions in bonuses when you've taken billions in bailouts. Suck it up.

SilentStrider: None of the presidents we've had since Nixon would have had the stones to do this. Sadly, Even Obama falls into that group.

Setting executive bonuses is a start. I'm curious to see if it goes beyond that if Wall Street continues to flaunt its new-found money.

Hender: Setting executive bonuses is a start.

which of course will have the "conservatives"^* thrown into a screaming fit about socialism.

And quite frankly I'm just sick of their constant yapping and whining.

I just wish Obama would do something spectacularly good, so spectacular, that the morons would be left absolutely sputtering and speechless, unable to come up with even the slightest negative spin.

*Not to be confused with people who think small government is a good thing.

Hender: SilentStrider: None of the presidents we've had since Nixon would have had the stones to do this. Sadly, Even Obama falls into that group.

Setting executive bonuses is a start. I'm curious to see if it goes beyond that if Wall Street continues to flaunt its new-found money.

The bad part about this is that setting executive bonuses and pay is the *only* thing that has been done. There have been no other changes made in a year since these "geniuses" came crying with their hands out, needing bailout money after they ran their companies into the ground. And now they're lobbying against any and all reforms, decreasing available credit overall and upping consumer credit card rates before they're forced to adhere to new credit card regulations?

The brass balls on these assholes should be marketed to rednecks as replacements for their current truck nutz.

The USA is getting so farking scary.

Send lawyers, guns, and money!

/went home with a waitress
//the way I always do
///how was I to know
////she was with the Russians too

jake_lex: Send lawyers, guns, and money!

/went home with a waitress
//the way I always do
///how was I to know
////she was with the Russians too

I am so glad I did not have to make that reference. Kudos to you.

Kelbel: The USA is getting so farking scary.

You know, I think that almost every day.
Seriously.

And CIT gets to rework a loan it got from Goldman Sachs.

Funny, I can't rework the 30 percent interest rates on my debt. If only I was a huge conglomerate.

The bailout was a horrible idea, I've said so from the start.

I TOLD YOU SO!

I feel better now.

I was just wondering. If they have $71B in assets and $64.9B in liabilities how can they be bankrupt?

It seems to this layman that they are $6B away from being bankrupt.

Hender: SilentStrider: None of the presidents we've had since Nixon would have had the stones to do this. Sadly, Even Obama falls into that group.

Setting executive bonuses is a start. I'm curious to see if it goes beyond that if Wall Street continues to flaunt its new-found money.

If we made these bail-outs farking hurt in the manner Weaver suggests then that kind of interference would be unnecessary. If the big stake-holders knew that running the company into the ground would wipe them out, they'd claw that shiat back from the incompetents themselves. Instead, we made it clear that you can take as much risk as you want if you're "too big to fail" and you won't feel any pain. There was some lip-service paid to moral hazard at the beginning of the crisis, but apparently the powers that be just said "fark it."

devioustrevor: I was just wondering. If they have $71B in assets and $64.9B in liabilities how can they be bankrupt?

It seems to this layman that they are $6B away from being bankrupt.

That extra $6.1 Billion is for executive bonus and performance pay!

/hot

Why the fark is the dow futures going up????

devioustrevor: I was just wondering. If they have $71B in assets and $64.9B in liabilities how can they be bankrupt?

It seems to this layman that they are $6B away from being bankrupt.

Christmas is coming. Surely you don't think that $6B is enough to cover the executive performance bonuses. Or perhaps you'd rather they receive a year-long membership to the Jelly Of The Month club?

Notabunny: Christmas is coming. Surely you don't think that $6B is enough to cover the executive performance bonuses. Or perhaps you'd rather they receive a year-long membership to the Jelly Of The Month club?

I think they're worried they won't be able to buy their sons the GIJoe with the kung-fu grip.

Well, that was money well flushed.

Unknown_Poltroon: Why the fark is the dow futures going up????

because the market is run by idiots.

What I want to know is, after the experience of last year why it's even possible for an investment bank to file for bankruptcy. If an institution is insolvent, it should be taken into receivership by the government and put into a known to be solvent position. That should already be part of US law.

In fact, I would say it should have been made law decades ago. We have known how to deal with a banking crisis for a very long time, yet it's not part of how we manage our economy.

SpinStopper: We are the CITs so pity us.
The kids are brats; the food is hideous.
We're gonna smoke and drink and fool around.
WE'RE NOOKIE BOUND!
We are the North Star CITs!

Thank you.

Fark It: All thanks to chairman Obamao....

Situations like this explain why we need a public option. It's terrible to trust our health to large corporations. If they are willing to try fractional banking, why wouldn't they try fractional transfusions?

Hender: Out of curiosity, though, would you have preferred that the Feds do nothing to begin with? Or at least try and prop them up?

BofA was in pretty good shape until the Feds forced them to buy Merrill Lynch, so yes, in that case.

Weaver95: dprathbun: Was there ever any doubt?

of course not. But every time I told people that CIT and BoA were due for a collapse, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist or alarmist kook.

So far i'm half right. Now I'm waiting for BoA to go under and leave the taxpayers another couple billion in the hole.

I'm quite torn over this. I want to see BoA fail sooo bad. Their schemes are full of corporate shenanigans, and they screw customers over beyond recognition.

Then again, their failing means taxpayers lose money.

/Citibank customer
//Never had an issue
///Probably will now? Not sure

Wow... a whole lot of crazy in this thread.


OMG Dunkin' Donut's lender went under! We're all gonna die!

Seriously, CIT is not that big of a deal. Relax, the apocalypse is not upon us, yet.

devioustrevor: I was just wondering. If they have $71B in assets and $64.9B in liabilities how can they be bankrupt?

It seems to this layman that they are $6B away from being bankrupt.

My understanding is this:
1. Not all of those assets are cash. In order to convert loans, CDs, etc. to cash the bank has to find a buyer and if no one is buying then you're farked.
2. They might not have $71B in assets. You'd be amazed by the tricks creative accountants can use, just ask Hollywood.

/Not an accountant but I do play one on Fark
//I may be wrong on my above points

NewportBarGuy: Wow... a whole lot of crazy in this thread.


OMG Dunkin' Donut's lender went under! We're all gonna die!

Seriously, CIT is not that big of a deal. Relax, the apocalypse is not upon us, yet.

115 banks so far this year. i'm a bit concerned.