Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Fed forcing big bank down this week?!
- This topic has 72 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by Ricechex.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 25, 2008 at 10:15 PM #275576September 25, 2008 at 10:19 PM #275848underdoseParticipant
I posted this to another thread about WaMu. I think it is relevent here too. Did this JPMorgan takeover really just happen today?
I have a checking account at WaMu, and have run out of checks. My wife sent some money to a friend a week ago, and, lacking paper checks at home, used online bill pay to send the money. Online bill pay cuts hard paper checks to recipients that can not accept electronic transfers. Today, the friend acknowledged getting the check, deposited it right away, but before hand noticed that the date of issue on the check was 9/19, and the bank issuing the check was JPMorgan, not WaMu. Sadly, the friend did not xerox the check first, so we have no hard evidence. But I believe my friend. I suspect some kind of a deal went through a week ago, but there was a big cover up and the story was allowed to break today. It seems sloppy of JPMorgan to have issued the check, but considering most recipients of online bill pay are institutions that have no idea who their customers normally bank with, it seems reasonable that they (JP) expected it would go completely unnoticed. It all seems awfully sinister to me.
September 25, 2008 at 10:19 PM #275851underdoseParticipantI posted this to another thread about WaMu. I think it is relevent here too. Did this JPMorgan takeover really just happen today?
I have a checking account at WaMu, and have run out of checks. My wife sent some money to a friend a week ago, and, lacking paper checks at home, used online bill pay to send the money. Online bill pay cuts hard paper checks to recipients that can not accept electronic transfers. Today, the friend acknowledged getting the check, deposited it right away, but before hand noticed that the date of issue on the check was 9/19, and the bank issuing the check was JPMorgan, not WaMu. Sadly, the friend did not xerox the check first, so we have no hard evidence. But I believe my friend. I suspect some kind of a deal went through a week ago, but there was a big cover up and the story was allowed to break today. It seems sloppy of JPMorgan to have issued the check, but considering most recipients of online bill pay are institutions that have no idea who their customers normally bank with, it seems reasonable that they (JP) expected it would go completely unnoticed. It all seems awfully sinister to me.
September 25, 2008 at 10:19 PM #275597underdoseParticipantI posted this to another thread about WaMu. I think it is relevent here too. Did this JPMorgan takeover really just happen today?
I have a checking account at WaMu, and have run out of checks. My wife sent some money to a friend a week ago, and, lacking paper checks at home, used online bill pay to send the money. Online bill pay cuts hard paper checks to recipients that can not accept electronic transfers. Today, the friend acknowledged getting the check, deposited it right away, but before hand noticed that the date of issue on the check was 9/19, and the bank issuing the check was JPMorgan, not WaMu. Sadly, the friend did not xerox the check first, so we have no hard evidence. But I believe my friend. I suspect some kind of a deal went through a week ago, but there was a big cover up and the story was allowed to break today. It seems sloppy of JPMorgan to have issued the check, but considering most recipients of online bill pay are institutions that have no idea who their customers normally bank with, it seems reasonable that they (JP) expected it would go completely unnoticed. It all seems awfully sinister to me.
September 25, 2008 at 10:19 PM #275899underdoseParticipantI posted this to another thread about WaMu. I think it is relevent here too. Did this JPMorgan takeover really just happen today?
I have a checking account at WaMu, and have run out of checks. My wife sent some money to a friend a week ago, and, lacking paper checks at home, used online bill pay to send the money. Online bill pay cuts hard paper checks to recipients that can not accept electronic transfers. Today, the friend acknowledged getting the check, deposited it right away, but before hand noticed that the date of issue on the check was 9/19, and the bank issuing the check was JPMorgan, not WaMu. Sadly, the friend did not xerox the check first, so we have no hard evidence. But I believe my friend. I suspect some kind of a deal went through a week ago, but there was a big cover up and the story was allowed to break today. It seems sloppy of JPMorgan to have issued the check, but considering most recipients of online bill pay are institutions that have no idea who their customers normally bank with, it seems reasonable that they (JP) expected it would go completely unnoticed. It all seems awfully sinister to me.
September 25, 2008 at 10:19 PM #275917underdoseParticipantI posted this to another thread about WaMu. I think it is relevent here too. Did this JPMorgan takeover really just happen today?
I have a checking account at WaMu, and have run out of checks. My wife sent some money to a friend a week ago, and, lacking paper checks at home, used online bill pay to send the money. Online bill pay cuts hard paper checks to recipients that can not accept electronic transfers. Today, the friend acknowledged getting the check, deposited it right away, but before hand noticed that the date of issue on the check was 9/19, and the bank issuing the check was JPMorgan, not WaMu. Sadly, the friend did not xerox the check first, so we have no hard evidence. But I believe my friend. I suspect some kind of a deal went through a week ago, but there was a big cover up and the story was allowed to break today. It seems sloppy of JPMorgan to have issued the check, but considering most recipients of online bill pay are institutions that have no idea who their customers normally bank with, it seems reasonable that they (JP) expected it would go completely unnoticed. It all seems awfully sinister to me.
September 25, 2008 at 10:32 PM #275637capemanParticipantFrom what I am hearing JP Morgan won WaMu through FDIC auction at least a week ago. If that is the case I’m sure WaMu was spending that time trying to find a better deal but couldn’t and wouldn’t give up the carkeys. It likely took full insolvency before management gave up and FDIC forced receivership then just handed the keys right over to JP Morgan.
There is no way this deal was fully brokered at the last minute to run so seamlessly. There is also no way that Jamie Dimon wasn’t positioning for this well prior to it happening.
It’s most definitely a huge conflict of interest to have Jamie Dimon on the Board of Directors at the NY Fed then feed his company multiple great acquisitions through market manipulation.
It is pretty well known that immediately before Bear Stearns collapsed the Fed cut off their access to the discount window rendering them immediately insolvent. Then JP Morgan was there to immediately pick up the pieces at expense to the taxpayer. Shame on them!
September 25, 2008 at 10:32 PM #275957capemanParticipantFrom what I am hearing JP Morgan won WaMu through FDIC auction at least a week ago. If that is the case I’m sure WaMu was spending that time trying to find a better deal but couldn’t and wouldn’t give up the carkeys. It likely took full insolvency before management gave up and FDIC forced receivership then just handed the keys right over to JP Morgan.
There is no way this deal was fully brokered at the last minute to run so seamlessly. There is also no way that Jamie Dimon wasn’t positioning for this well prior to it happening.
It’s most definitely a huge conflict of interest to have Jamie Dimon on the Board of Directors at the NY Fed then feed his company multiple great acquisitions through market manipulation.
It is pretty well known that immediately before Bear Stearns collapsed the Fed cut off their access to the discount window rendering them immediately insolvent. Then JP Morgan was there to immediately pick up the pieces at expense to the taxpayer. Shame on them!
September 25, 2008 at 10:32 PM #275939capemanParticipantFrom what I am hearing JP Morgan won WaMu through FDIC auction at least a week ago. If that is the case I’m sure WaMu was spending that time trying to find a better deal but couldn’t and wouldn’t give up the carkeys. It likely took full insolvency before management gave up and FDIC forced receivership then just handed the keys right over to JP Morgan.
There is no way this deal was fully brokered at the last minute to run so seamlessly. There is also no way that Jamie Dimon wasn’t positioning for this well prior to it happening.
It’s most definitely a huge conflict of interest to have Jamie Dimon on the Board of Directors at the NY Fed then feed his company multiple great acquisitions through market manipulation.
It is pretty well known that immediately before Bear Stearns collapsed the Fed cut off their access to the discount window rendering them immediately insolvent. Then JP Morgan was there to immediately pick up the pieces at expense to the taxpayer. Shame on them!
September 25, 2008 at 10:32 PM #275890capemanParticipantFrom what I am hearing JP Morgan won WaMu through FDIC auction at least a week ago. If that is the case I’m sure WaMu was spending that time trying to find a better deal but couldn’t and wouldn’t give up the carkeys. It likely took full insolvency before management gave up and FDIC forced receivership then just handed the keys right over to JP Morgan.
There is no way this deal was fully brokered at the last minute to run so seamlessly. There is also no way that Jamie Dimon wasn’t positioning for this well prior to it happening.
It’s most definitely a huge conflict of interest to have Jamie Dimon on the Board of Directors at the NY Fed then feed his company multiple great acquisitions through market manipulation.
It is pretty well known that immediately before Bear Stearns collapsed the Fed cut off their access to the discount window rendering them immediately insolvent. Then JP Morgan was there to immediately pick up the pieces at expense to the taxpayer. Shame on them!
September 25, 2008 at 10:32 PM #275888capemanParticipantFrom what I am hearing JP Morgan won WaMu through FDIC auction at least a week ago. If that is the case I’m sure WaMu was spending that time trying to find a better deal but couldn’t and wouldn’t give up the carkeys. It likely took full insolvency before management gave up and FDIC forced receivership then just handed the keys right over to JP Morgan.
There is no way this deal was fully brokered at the last minute to run so seamlessly. There is also no way that Jamie Dimon wasn’t positioning for this well prior to it happening.
It’s most definitely a huge conflict of interest to have Jamie Dimon on the Board of Directors at the NY Fed then feed his company multiple great acquisitions through market manipulation.
It is pretty well known that immediately before Bear Stearns collapsed the Fed cut off their access to the discount window rendering them immediately insolvent. Then JP Morgan was there to immediately pick up the pieces at expense to the taxpayer. Shame on them!
September 26, 2008 at 8:01 AM #27590634f3f3fParticipantHas anyone ever doubted that WaMu was next. If one source has been consistently accurate, it’s been the grape vine, and given all the speculation, I can’t understand why anyone would still have an account there. With three times the deposit holdings of FDIC reserves, I’m sure the FDIC will be relieved if it is bailed out. But if it not, and the FDIC needs to cover depositors, and goes cap in hand to the treasury, the tax payer still ends up having to foot the bill.
September 26, 2008 at 8:01 AM #27622634f3f3fParticipantHas anyone ever doubted that WaMu was next. If one source has been consistently accurate, it’s been the grape vine, and given all the speculation, I can’t understand why anyone would still have an account there. With three times the deposit holdings of FDIC reserves, I’m sure the FDIC will be relieved if it is bailed out. But if it not, and the FDIC needs to cover depositors, and goes cap in hand to the treasury, the tax payer still ends up having to foot the bill.
September 26, 2008 at 8:01 AM #27615834f3f3fParticipantHas anyone ever doubted that WaMu was next. If one source has been consistently accurate, it’s been the grape vine, and given all the speculation, I can’t understand why anyone would still have an account there. With three times the deposit holdings of FDIC reserves, I’m sure the FDIC will be relieved if it is bailed out. But if it not, and the FDIC needs to cover depositors, and goes cap in hand to the treasury, the tax payer still ends up having to foot the bill.
September 26, 2008 at 8:01 AM #27616134f3f3fParticipantHas anyone ever doubted that WaMu was next. If one source has been consistently accurate, it’s been the grape vine, and given all the speculation, I can’t understand why anyone would still have an account there. With three times the deposit holdings of FDIC reserves, I’m sure the FDIC will be relieved if it is bailed out. But if it not, and the FDIC needs to cover depositors, and goes cap in hand to the treasury, the tax payer still ends up having to foot the bill.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.