JPMorgan Chase Blows Away Analysts’ Estimates, Lies Beyond Expectations

Martin Andelman, ML-Implode

Last Thursday, I woke up extra early to hear Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase lie through his teeth about his mega-bank’s quarterly earnings.  Analysts were expecting a lie of around 70 cents a share, but Mr. Dimon exceeded all expectations for lying, reporting earnings of $1.09 a share.  Now, to be fair, some of that was made up of one-time items, and some of it was just plain made up.  But even so, taking away the one-time events, JPMorgan Chase would have reported earnings of 87 cents a share.  Fabulous, isn’t he?  And handsome too.

To be entirely honest about the whole thing, it made me queasy for half an hour or so, and I had to get up and walk around.  I didn’t need a part time job last week, I had more than enough on my plate as it was.  And here was Dimon telling me I would soon have to spend a good six hours trying to figure out how to separate the wheat from the bank’s chaff.

I know what you’re thinking… “Oh, goodie… an accounting article… I just love these.”  Yeah, well don’t worry, their not exactly my favorite kind to write either, but this one’s important.

JPMorgan Chase’s earnings report was all sunshine and flowers, the bank reported a drop in net revenue of 8%, which was in line with what Wall Street was expecting.  But the bank’s investment banking and fixed income securities trading, both fell in Q2, as compared with Q1.  So, where did all that money come from that allowed JPMorgan Chase to report such astonishing quarterly results?

It’s really quite simple… Dimon took $1.5 billion out of the bank’s account that’s labeled “reserves for future losses,” which is obviously supposed to be there in anticipation of future losses on bad loans, and called it “profits,” by taking it to the bottom line.  Nice, huh?  Losses… hmmm… now why on earth would anyone worry about losses at JPMorgan Chase at a time like this?

Actually, the whole thing was confusing because Dimon also cautioned analysts that the bank’s “losses from bad loans remain elevated.”

But, I suppose as long as Geithner doesn’t make the mega-bank write down any losses in the future, everything will work out just fine and dandy.  What, me worry?  No chance of that.  Besides, I don’t know why anyone would have a hard time believing anything a bank said these days.  I mean, these guys wouldn’t lie, right?  Flourish the thought.

Read more here: http://mandelman.ml-implode.com/2010/07/jpmorgan-chase-blows-away-analysts’-estimates-lies-beyond-expectations/

Share

House GOP Wants “Nanny State” To Target Underwater Homeowners For Banks

Ryan Grim, Huffington Post

The House GOP launched an assault Thursday on homeowners who walk away from underwater mortgages, arguing that such foreclosed-on former homeowners are using the money they save to dine out and go on cruises.

The Wall Street Journal has reported on families that have chosen to stop paying their mortgage and instead use the extra money they are saving each month to ‘buy season tickets to Disneyland…take a Carnival cruise to Mexico…’ and go out to dinner more often,” says House Republican leadership in an e-mail to colleagues explaining the anti-strategic-default effort.

In other words, consumers with more money tend to spend it, spurring demand — exactly what the economy needs. More than a few economists argue that the ongoing jobless crisis is a direct result of a lack of consumer demand. A homeowner stuck in an underwater mortgage is, each month, paying off a mortgage that is worth more than their home. The increased cost of housing means that money that could otherwise could be circulated through the economy – at restaurants, Disneyland, or on cruises, for instance – is sent off to Wall Street, whose profits have been soaring despite the economic downturn.

The GOP offered its provision as “motion to recommit,” which is one of the minority party’s few ways to amend a bill on the floor. Known as an MTR, the motion is generally stripped out in the Senate if it is adopted in the House. Such measures are put forward more to score political points than to craft policy, but the mood of the House can sometimes be gleaned from the vote’s outcome. In this case, Democrats chose not to fight, and accepted the motion with a simple voice vote.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com and an adviser to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, says that strategically defaulting is “a form of stimulus, a little tax cut.” Estimates of the number of homeowners are underwater range from 10 to 15 million.

Dean Baker, an economist with the progressive-leaning Center for Economic Policy and Research, agreed that strategic defaults are good for the economy, but also noted the irony that the GOP effort interferes with the market.

When Democrats were pushing to enact “cram down,” which would allow judges to rewrite mortgage contracts in bankruptcy court, conservative Democrats and the GOP argued that it would violate the “sanctity of the contract.”

There is only sanctity, however, for one side of that contract. “It also disgusts me that the Republicans would use Big Government to interfere with the sanctity of contract,” said Baker in an e-mail. “Those who do a strategic default are complying with their contract. The deal was that the banks get back the house if the homeowner doesn’t pay the mortgage. Now, the Republicans are arguing that the nanny state has to look out for the little boys and girls at the big banks who are too dumb to understand contracts. They are going to use the power of the government to punish people because they acted on the terms of the contract to the disadvantage of the banks.”

Read more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/10/republicans-target-underw_n_607800.html

Share

Sheila Bair, FDIC Chair, Calls For Better Lending Standards

John Milburn, Huffington Post

The head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said Monday that the U.S. needs better lending standards and greater transparency in the markets to avoid a recurrence of the 2008 financial crisis.

FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair, speaking to an audience at the University of Kansas’ Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics, said the U.S. needs to return to the sort of monetary values she learned while working at a Lawrence savings and loan after graduating from the university. She recalled that customers weren’t taking on too much debt, took pride in repaying their loans and saved for a rainy day.

“Those were great days in banking. I hope that when we come out of this crisis we reacquaint ourselves with those values,” Bair said in a question and answer format presentation.

Bair, a native of Independence, Kan., said the financial crisis had its origins in the shadow credit markets that went unregulated despite their risk, preying on vulnerable Americans who quickly became in over their heads. Larger institutions abandoned their traditional lending and investment values, Bair said, hoping to recapture some of the market share they were loosing to the shadow lenders.

Bair said she saw the evidence of such questionable practices in 2001 when lenders in Baltimore made mortgages that led homeowners quickly toward foreclosure. The homes where then snatched up at a low rate, she said, and resold at profit.

Credit was extended to individuals based their home equity, she said, meaning the more the home was worth, the bigger the loan and the more profit for the finance and mortgage firms. The cycle eventually burst, leading to the collapse of the housing market and recession.

Share

Volcker: Regulators Can’t Be Trusted To Act

Shahien Nasiripour, Huffington Post

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul A. Volcker criticized bank regulators Wednesday, saying Congress needs to specifically act to rein in Wall Street and the nation’s megabanks because the regulators won’t do it on their own.

Testifying before the House Financial Services Committee, the chairman of President Barack Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board was asked to comment on the need for legislation banning banks from trading securities with their own funds and from owning or investing in hedge funds and private equity firms. Volcker has repeatedly called for such a ban, even saying that banks with Wall Street trading and Main Street lending operations need to choose between the two.

“In my opinion, it’s very unlikely that the regulators and supervisors would evoke a strict prohibition until a crisis came and then it’s too late,” Volcker said. “That’s why you want it in legislation.”

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd released the latest version of his financial reform bill on Monday. The legislation leaves it up to bank regulators to enact such a ban, and only after the Government Accountability Office conducts a “study.” The Obama administration has pushed for an outright ban.

For regulators, “there’s a lot of pressure not to do it,” Volcker told reporters during a break in the hearing. That’s why it needs to be in the legislation, specifically directing regulators to take action, he said.

In a mocking tone, Volcker said the banks would tell regulators, “‘Don’t touch us’…’What did we do wrong?’… You know, ‘Leave us alone.’”

Dodd’s bill, to the disappointment of reformers and consumer groups, leaves a lot of discretion in regulatory matters to bank regulators like the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Treasury Department.

Read more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/17/volcker-regulators-cant-b_n_503304.html

Share