1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Citigroup near collapse, guy on Bloomberg Tv predicts bailout for Citi

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Chandu, Nov 21, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Chandu

    Chandu Hall Of Fame

    Oct 2, 2005
    I guess that seems to be in fashion these days, asking for a bailout!!! :sure:

    I don't know if there is a youtube/flash based link for this, but all I could find is a Windows Media link.


    This guy Phillipe Gijsels from Fortis speaking on Bloomberg TV thinks a bailout (or at least a request for bailout) may be in Citi's near future.

    At this point, cue in the commercial: Your dreams, never sleep, Citi never sleeps.
  2. smiddy

    smiddy Tain't ogre til its ogre

    Apr 5, 2006
    I overheard my mother-in-law talking with another lady and saying they should bailout the entire US, the people that is. Give all that money to all the people who could use it to really infuse the economy. On the surface that sounded better than bailing out all these companies... ;)
  3. Draconis

    Draconis New Member

    Mar 16, 2007
    Las Vegas, NV
    No arguments here.
  4. kocuba

    kocuba Icon

    Dec 29, 2006
    Can't be any worse than what we are doing right now. I have some fairly strong opinions about the whole thing but currently don't have the time or desire to type them up. But basically help the people not the corporations.
  5. Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule! DBSTalk Club

    Mar 22, 2004
    Interesting development. Just a short while ago, Citigroup was favored by the feds to take over Wachovia. Wells Fargo eventually won the race there, and Citi is still pursuing a suit against Wells as a result. It now comes out that if the bailout had come earlier, Wachovia would probably have maintained its independence.
    Naturally, people here in the Charlotte area would have wanted Wachovia to be included in the bailout, being that the bank is headquartered here.
  6. Chandu

    Chandu Hall Of Fame

    Oct 2, 2005
    Ahh, the Wachovia fiasco, thanks for reminding of that! What level of hypocrisy Citi must have for pursuing Wachovia (to the extent of going into court), when it is clear their own house isn't in order. :mad:

    The crisis in the Citi continues over the weekend. Everything that is happening with Citi is very similar to what was happening with Lehmann and Bear Stearns. Problems at Citi are systemic in nature, just like those 2.






    The world doesn't have stomach for yet another catastrophic failure for likes of Citi. With the GM/Ford/Chrysler crisis not getting resolved, it seems very unlikely any more bailout talks will be entertained either. It would be best if Citi disintegrates into pieces (like Solomon Smith Barney being one, citibank another etc.), and individual fragments are snapped by various buyers. There seems to be nobody interested yet in buying all of Citi in whole.
  7. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    Mar 25, 2002
    From your first article:
    How did a financial business end up with more "software developers" than the worlds largest software company???

    Maybe Wells Fargo should buy Citi. ;)
  8. jclewter79

    jclewter79 Hall Of Fame

    Jan 8, 2008
    I would like to bail on the car payment I have with Citibank. Doubt that is a option though. :)
  9. BubblePuppy

    BubblePuppy Good night dear Smoke... love you & "got your butt

    Nov 3, 2006
    ah...part of the problem.......don't take responsibility for ones spending.
    Sorry, but if you can't afford it, then don't buy it.:nono2:
  10. jclewter79

    jclewter79 Hall Of Fame

    Jan 8, 2008
    I can afford it just fine there Bubble, just a joke kinda making fun of how I take care of my resonsibilites owned to them they should take care of theirs.
  11. wilbur_the_goose

    wilbur_the_goose Hall Of Fame

    Aug 16, 2006
    First - mortgate defaults

    Next - credit cards. This could be the news story of 1Q09. It could make mortgages look tame.
  12. Chandu

    Chandu Hall Of Fame

    Oct 2, 2005
    Now, this makes me mad:


    Taxpayers are looking like will be made unwilling owners of more toxic junk. If this passes it will be nothing but infuriating. I wonder if there still are any Hank Paulson backers around here. No, never mind, I know the usual suspects will stand up for him and call it "the cyclical part of down cycle, just a usual bear market".

    "CNBC Reports: Saving Citi" Tonight, Sunday Nov. 23rd, 8pm - 9pm EST
  13. Chandu

    Chandu Hall Of Fame

    Oct 2, 2005

    Wow, how lucky we all are that our government gets this incredible opportunity to guarantee $306 billions of junk loans and securities, and do a $20 billion bailout!!!!
  14. russdog

    russdog Godfather

    Jul 31, 2006
    I'm not smart enough to understand high finance, goofy or otherwise... but one thing I never understood about all the bad mortgage stuff is why the gov't has to actually come up with 700+ $billion. If instead of promising to actually pass money into all the dang banks, if they had just guaranteed the mortgages, then those mortgages would be just as good as money (maybe better), simply because of the federal guarantee backing of them... and then banks could have just keep on buying and selling them like crazy... in which case the credit would not have dried up... plus all the CDS's would never have kicked in, so AIG would not have gone broke... plus the gov't wouldn't have had to actually go another 700+ billion into debt by borrowing it from China (or whoever they're gonna get it from). All they had to do was just promise that the mortgages were good.

    They did the same thing with guaranteeing the money market funds, and that worked fine.
    So why didn't they do the same damn thing with the mortgages?
    (Perhaps a rhetorical question, I'm not really sure.)
  15. Chandu

    Chandu Hall Of Fame

    Oct 2, 2005
    In layman terms, the biggest difference between bailing out mortgages vs. bailing out banks is saving bunch of deadbeats vs. saving bunch of high profile lying thieves. What a fantastic decision to make, having to choose among deadbeats vs. lying thieves!!

    Talking seriously: One way or another we were doomed anyway. I don't see how things would've worked out fine by bailing out mortgages. Because the genuine supply of money wasn't there, it would need to be "manufactured" in either case. To make up for it, either the real estate prices would have come crashing down severely (not that they haven't crashed already) OR we would've been faced with soaring inflation due to devaluation of currency. It is debatable whether it could've helped keep unemployment numbers in check, by keeping money exchanging hands. It is easy to play armchair quarterback with these theories, but none of these were pleasant choices to be selecting from.

    One big advantage of having credits slashed is that finally lots of people have awoken to understanding the concept of money, and starting to learn something they should've learnt from their parents or elementary school teachers.
  16. russdog

    russdog Godfather

    Jul 31, 2006
    Because there wasn't that many of them.
    Nothing like the $$$ that's at issue because of all the CDS's (which total more than the whole world's GDP).
  17. durl

    durl Hall Of Fame

    Mar 27, 2003
    It's like being forced to hire a contractor that does lousy work and charges extra for it, to boot. I don't like having to pay for other people's mistakes.

    And we have to remember that everytime they say "government" bailout, they mean a bailout paid for by our tax dollars.
  18. Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    Jun 18, 2006
    I'm closing this thread ... although it hasn't gotten political yet, I have a feeling it's about 1 post away, and it's getting to be that time of day when can't watch the forum constantly.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page