Feeds

back to article SEC doesn't do a Moody

The Securities and Exchange Commission is dropping an investigation into alleged fraudulent behaviour at ratings agency Moody's because it is not sure if it has legal jurisdiction over the company. Moody's was accused of awarding wrongly high ratings to various constant proportion debt obligation notes - the infamous structured …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Happy

AC Obviously

I run a small company that is rated by Dun and Bradstreet in the US. They basically call you up on the phone once a year and ask questions ... and I make up answers. We have an excellent rating.

It's possible that if we were larger they'd ask to see some supporting documentation but that could be easily arranged.

0
0

not so sure

Are you sure that information is being published by DnB? Unless you have a DnB membership it's a sales call and they should be asking you to join for $500+/year.

If your a member already and have a LLC/INC alot of the information collected is from credit and consumer reports.

I think they are just chatting it up with you to make you feel good fella.

0
0

What about criminal charges?

Surely this is fraud on a large scale?

Oh, I forgot, the banks did nothing wrong it's all the fault of poor people taking up the credit card and loan offers that were shoved down their throats -- nothing to do with large scale fraud at all.

0
0
Thumb Up

Fraud too strong of a word?

I'm not sure if there's any other way to describe it. For anyone interested in the subject, this is probably the best overview I've seen (heard):

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/355/the-giant-pool-of-money

0
0
Silver badge
Grenade

Computer error ..... my ****. The SEC have no Balls and the System is Easy Prey

Methinks the following is also appropriate here.

amanfromMars

Today 07:20 AM

Methinks the markets are bound to suffer quite appalling future losses, as investors take fright and flight in the wake of this monumental miscalculation ...... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11147475

A view shared because if one suspects that the computer glitch is just a most convenient excuse to hide a systemic weakness which is easily exploited and gross human incompetence, fueled by ethical and moral bankruptcy and selfish greed, does it still remain to be sublimely exploited and to crash the system ....... which is proving itself to be more of a Ponzi with every passing [zero] day.

A house of cards built upon lies and fabrications has no substance to weather a buffeting storm or simple questioning of its base stock value and structural integrity.

Good news for the likes of an Amsterdam EuroNext though.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/7974211/US-markets-suffer-their-worst-August-in-almost-a-decade.html

How long before Al Qaeda are blamed for economic collapse and financial mayhem and catastrophic ruin, and that would be a fabulous morph for a caveman operation, although difficult, bordering on impossible without a smarter intelligence in the field to spin as a true tale for the sheep and lemmings and the great unwashed to believe.

[Red Team White Hat Penetrations BetaTest #XSSXXXX100901]

0
0
Gold badge

The creator of the derivates knew they were risky

"debt obligation notes - the infamous structured debt products which turned out to be not much more than bundles of dodgy US mortgages re-packaged to look like they were almost risk-free."

Well, actually, I read an interview of the main guy that developed the software that was used to make credit default swap derivatives. (There were some made before that, but they were built "by hand" and not very common -- this software automated things so they could churn out as many as they wanted.)

Basically, he told the company he worked for that they were using the derivatives wrong -- they were treating a 33% default rate over 100 years as meaning about 3% per year, and figured they were just lucky that the defaults were nearly 0 while they were trading them. He flat out told them, no, the default rate will be near 0 when the economy is good, and very high (20%+) when it's bad, that they're RISKY! They told him to piss off because they were making so much money. (Eventually the first firm fired him over it. Then he worked for a SECOND company, telling them the same thing, and THEY told him to piss off as well.) Then they acted all shocked when the default rate skyrocketed on them and basically bankrupted them. Frankly, the gov't should not have bailed these jerks out, other investment firms DID analyze these properly and avoid the risks.

He did point out during the interview, he didn't come out of this with any money -- most of his pay was in stock options, and even though he knew his options were going to become absolutely worthless eventually (since they were abusing derivatives) he was not allowed to cash in his stock options for some number of years, and by then they WERE absolutely worthless.

0
0

i love it

the government doesn't know if it has jurisdiction over our food safety or ratings companies but one thing it knows is it could start up it's own police force larger than the military & better funded and also it can takeover your health care system.

it also knows it can bailout banks and corporations and takeover car companies.

hey, at least it knows where the boundaries are.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.