I cannot find the post that suggested that Capstone Acenden are NOT in trouble because they have just had a clean bill of health from one of the ratings agencies. Please accept my apologies for this. Perhaps the poster would like to give us the latest assessment in full. (copyright permitting of course).
Well, anyway, thanks for the gilt edged reassurance in these times of growing rumours that they are dropping like a stone.
Without the post to hand I do not wish to speculate which one of these stellar ratings organisations it was – with no conflict of interest with the industry that pays their way – that saw fit to declare Acenden in a robust state of health.
I do wonder though whether it was the same agency that was paid handsomely to minimise the risk and upgrade the toxic assets that these sub – prime garbage peddlars were dumping on the world markets. After all it is beyond dispute that the toxic poison spread by Lehmans was the singular and most significant cause of the turmoil that has engulfed the world economy since September 2008.
I ask this only because it is clear that from an article in today’s Times -
The article goes on to state that they face potential civil charges for approving a package of mortgages (CDO Delphinus 2007-1) that then turned toxic. And who is suing them? No less than the US Government, forced to quintuple the federal deficit in order to bail out these banks who hitherto had been telling governments to keep an arms length approach. A return to Glass-Steagal anyone but note that this is fiercely resisted by our own banks.
When it comes to the office golf playing, pizza munching rating agencies, almost in total hock to the industry and the related securities they represent, it is far from clear that these professional assessments were reliable leading up to the crunch. It is even less certain that we can rely upon them now. Acenden may have been given a clean bill of health by the rating agency in question, but history should tell us that this can’t mean very much. Once bitten, twice shy?
What really annoys me though is the idiocy of such posts – that they think we are just going to be able to rely on this “fact” as hard evidence of the health of increasingly anaemic Capstone Acenden. Acenden have tried to pretend that they are nothing to do with Lehmans when they are in fact the SPAWN of Lehmans.
Please try harder and raise your game a bit.
This kind of “so and so said Acenden were upgraded” with the implication that we should just accept this really is nonsense.
It’s nonsense because even if it were a reliable assessment, and one with which anyone could take confidence, it is equally true that anything the ratings agencies tell us should, from bitter experience, be treated with a great deal of caution.
OVER A THIRD OF THE MORTGAGE BOOK GONE IN 3 YEARS AND NOT REPLACED, WILL SEND YOU THE STATS.
You don’t need to post the stats TVSNL. They’ve been posted on this site a few times . Raw data from S&P ( them again) dated October 2010 stated number of mortgages/ loans 107,339 in August 2007. No specifics for October 10 but widely publicised as 79000. Whatever the missing 28000 went is anybody’s guess. I guess they all just moved on or paid up in full.
Remember also that oct 2010 was the height of the daily decimation campaign here. S&P could not have been up to speed on the 140 per week that were happening last autumn.