Skip to comments.JPM Crashing After It Convenes Emergency Call To Advise Of "Significant Mark-To-Market" Losses
Posted on 05/10/2012 2:47:31 PM PDT by tcrlaf
Out of nowehere, JPM announced 40 minutes ago that it would hold an unscheduled 5pm call to coincide with the release of its 10-Q. Rumors were swirling as to why. The reason is as follows:
JPMORGAN SAYS CIO UNIT HAS SIGNIFICANT MARK-TO-MARKET LOSSES - "Fortress balance sheet" at least until Bruno Iskil gets done with it. JPMORGAN SAYS LOSSES ARE IN SYNTHETIC CREDIT PORTFOLIO - but, but, net is NEVER, EVER Gross. JPM WOULD NEED $971M ADDED COLLATERAL IF RATINGS CUT ONE-NOTCH JPM WOULD NEED $1.7B ADDED COLLATERAL IF RATINGS CUT 2 NOTCHES - how about three notches? JPMORGAN: MAY HOLD SOME SYNTHETIC CREDIT POSITIONS LONG TERM - "Level 3 CDS FTW" "As of March 31, 2012, the value of CIO's total AFS securities portfolio exceeded its cost by approximately $8 billion"
As a reminder, the CIO unit is where Bruno Iksil was making $200 billion-sized bets. Basically JPM has suffered massive losses at its CIO group most likely due to its IG/HY positions held by Iksil.
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
Like in Goodfellas, "F U, Pay Me!"
What’s funny is all the regs put in place were suppose to end this crisis.
Time for another crisis.
Oh for Crisis sake.
Yes, and this is obviously the real reason the money got stolen.
Foolish peon! Don't you know it's their cookie jar? They just allow us to fill it!
Obama blames this on Bush/Romney/Wall Street in 5...4...3...2...
We need a preemptive Tea Party press release, No Bailouts!
The noise should bring gas prices down a whole dime or so. Tourists, laden with government incomes, will all drive out at once to spend their debt in our “service economy” and elicit more loans from Uncle Jintao. Keep the USD artificially high for our idle political regulator class. Have fun. Enjoy the slide. Don’t mention our lack of manufacturing.
Here is the problem. What is the real value? A mortgage that is current is a contract and the value of the contract is what the home owner agreed to pay, not the underlying value of the asset.
However, if it is show that the contract is not being followed (late payments, etc) then the contract is devalued down to a new level. What is that new level? Mark to market establishes the current value of that contract as the current retail value of that asset.
But the value of a house that just sold in the neighborhood is not likely to be the value of that asset. There is now cost associated with administration of the sale of that asset. The proper way should be to value the asset lower than current market by some amount that represents the cost of selling that asset.
I am of the opinion that valuation should be mark to contract until the home owner falls behind. Then mark to less than market (say 10% less) once there is a late payment of say 60 days or more.
Isn’t the Morgue Bernanke’s designated silver market manipulator?
A CYA memo will not suffice this time! HooRah!
This seems to me like the biggest news all day, all week, bigger than anything on breaking news. Am I wrong, right? The repercussions of this would affect all other stories.
I’m no financial wizard, but I think the brown stuff is about to hit the fan.
conference call shortcut .. http://bit.ly/KTDygZ