I do recall one Chuck Prince saying 'we're still dancing in the market' as the CEO at Citgroup after others were already really pulling back, or trying to. Prince was later forced out from his job after Citi lost untold sums and had to shed something like 100,000 jobs.Yeeb wrote: Thu May 08, 2025 10:59 amPretty muchRhubarb & Custard wrote: Thu May 08, 2025 10:25 amThey managed to finagle a legal Ponzi scheme, and an awful lot of the bosses were very well rewarded for doing so.Yeeb wrote: Thu May 08, 2025 9:22 am
Absolutely it was rogue compliance and those financial WMD. Actually worked as RM on several funds holding funky collatoralised auto financial loans, the valuations never made sense to me and was soon apparent why when the house of cards fell. Takes smarter people than I to package a bunch of stinky turds as an asset and sell for an inflated imaginary price. There were actually sub classes tranches of loans that had failed , again repackaged and resold to some other mug.
It does take real skill though to collect a bunch of stuff that is bad, and sell it as something new and good - and a real lack of skill to buy such utter shite.
One fund I can still recall it’s system code HKQX with a shudder , as it broke daily nearly every breach, limit, exposure etc TPS and WENUS report going , my job was to inform the clients who always responded ‘thanks, it’s fine’. These clients were large pension funds , Alt investments, hedge funds, fund of funds , sovereign funds etc all of which in theory have their own governance and monitoring teams.
*shrugs*
My experience up till that point had been in equities and fund of funds, so I freely admit to knowing then bugger all about debt products - seems I was far from alone on that.
And sadly for Prince all he got was a $128 million dollar compensation packaged for some of the worst strategy ever seen anywhere not just in finance. One wonders how on earth he was expected to survive on such a miserly sum, and actually one wonders too what would he have been paid had he been a success, or even just borderline competent.
Telling too just how quick re-remics were being sold after the remics failed. And telling too the banks have changed the vehicles they're selling debt via, but they far from having changed selling debt as a model, if anything the've upped the scale. What could go wrong.