Octave Specialty Group Inc
WKN: A1T95E / ISIN: US0231398845Ambac Rocky Balboa oder chapter 11
| eröffnet am: | 14.05.09 22:36 von: | pacorubio |
| neuester Beitrag: | 25.04.21 01:14 von: | Petraqnvka |
| Anzahl Beiträge: | 7708 | |
| Leser gesamt: | 1556894 | |
| davon Heute: | 81 | |
bewertet mit 40 Sternen |
||
|
|
||
22.09.09 21:24
#227
nothin_
btw ...
... Washington Mutual derzeit 32% im Minus ... ein Zock und nichts dahinter - da ist mir ein langsamer stetiger Anstieg erheblich lieber.
22.09.09 22:06
#228
Olly D
ich vergleiche Sie ja gar nicht...
ich hätte einfach nur gern selbigen prozentualen Anstieg...
aber ich sehe es ähnlich wie du...ein längerfristiger Anstieg ist mir allemal lieber..:-)
aber ich sehe es ähnlich wie du...ein längerfristiger Anstieg ist mir allemal lieber..:-)
23.09.09 00:09
#229
Friends
@Olly D
Dann jammer nicht so.
Langfristig sehen wir die 10 Dollar(binnen der nächsten 6 Monate)
Bei kaum einer anderen Aktie wirst Du diese Performence sehen bei dem Risiko(geringer als bei WAMUQ)
Langfristig sehen wir die 10 Dollar(binnen der nächsten 6 Monate)
Bei kaum einer anderen Aktie wirst Du diese Performence sehen bei dem Risiko(geringer als bei WAMUQ)
23.09.09 11:28
#230
Marlboromann
Gestern wurden über 1/3 aller Aktien gehandelt
Geht man jetzt von den Zahlen aus, dann sind noch ca. 6% im freien Umlauf, wenn man an eine Buy and Hold Strategie ausgeht. Nehmen wir den Aktienhandel vorher noch dazu begrenzt sich die Anzahl freier Aktien bei AMBAC auf ca. 4%.
Gestern sind alleine über 107 Millionen AMBAC-Aktien gehandelt worden, die ihren Besitzer gewechselt haben.
Allgemein kann man jetzt von einer positiven Entwicklung mit größerer Wahrscheinlichkeit ausgehen: Anders gesagt haben die Bullen das Ruder bei AMBAC gänzlich übernommen.
Gruß Marlboromann
Gestern sind alleine über 107 Millionen AMBAC-Aktien gehandelt worden, die ihren Besitzer gewechselt haben.
Allgemein kann man jetzt von einer positiven Entwicklung mit größerer Wahrscheinlichkeit ausgehen: Anders gesagt haben die Bullen das Ruder bei AMBAC gänzlich übernommen.
Gruß Marlboromann
23.09.09 20:52
#231
Olly D
friends
ich jammer hier nicht rum...lach..
sondern versuche..hier den threat mal etwas ans Laufen zu bekommen...da ausser uns ja keiner mehr postet..:-)
sondern versuche..hier den threat mal etwas ans Laufen zu bekommen...da ausser uns ja keiner mehr postet..:-)
24.09.09 09:17
#232
pacorubio
@ollyD
der Thread lebt nicht durch postings von Dir der thread lebt von höhren Kursen
bei abk braucht man Sitzfleisch das dauert halt ein bißchen länger....
bei abk braucht man Sitzfleisch das dauert halt ein bißchen länger....
27.09.09 15:42
#233
Friends
AMBAC liegt voll im Plan
Es läuft alles so wie wir es doch erhofft hatten.
Kann leider hier kaum noch reinschauen da ich gänzlich in ein anderes Board gewechselt bin.
Aber eines ändert sich nicht und zwar meine Meinung zu AMBAC.
Ich schätze weiterhin das wir die 10 Dollar binnen der nächsten 6 Monate sehen werden es sei denn es kommen noch gute NEWS bezüglich irgendwelcher Klageerfolge dann sehe ich die 10 Dollar wesentlich eher.
Mit AMBAC ist gut Geld verdienen in der kommenden Zeit.
Ausbruch über 2 Dollar wird sehr schnell geschehen und das nachhaltig.
Vielleicht sieht man sich ja auch bald in einem anderen Board bis denn.
Kann leider hier kaum noch reinschauen da ich gänzlich in ein anderes Board gewechselt bin.
Aber eines ändert sich nicht und zwar meine Meinung zu AMBAC.
Ich schätze weiterhin das wir die 10 Dollar binnen der nächsten 6 Monate sehen werden es sei denn es kommen noch gute NEWS bezüglich irgendwelcher Klageerfolge dann sehe ich die 10 Dollar wesentlich eher.
Mit AMBAC ist gut Geld verdienen in der kommenden Zeit.
Ausbruch über 2 Dollar wird sehr schnell geschehen und das nachhaltig.
Vielleicht sieht man sich ja auch bald in einem anderen Board bis denn.
29.09.09 10:57
#234
ambac
bin auch mal wieder dabei zu 1,25
Chart könnte nicht besser aussehen, Kursziel 3$ bis Freitag
01.10.09 09:49
#236
pacorubio
so abk Depot
ist wieder voll genug zum versilbern beim Kurzfristzock und vergolden lass ich mir irgendwann einmal die longshares
Grüße
Paco
Grüße
Paco
01.10.09 09:53
#237
pacorubio
auch deswegen
Moody’s Didn’t Do Its Job, Insider Claims
Says It Did No Surveillance of Ratings
Thursday, October 1, 2009
By Andrew Ackerman
Print Email Reprints
Related Links
Kanjorski: Congress Should Weigh Bill Allowing Lawsuits Against Raters - May 20, 2009
House to Discuss Muni Rating Legislation - September 30, 2009
WASHINGTON — Moody’s Investors Service conducts “virtually no surveillance” of its municipal bond ratings, despite its claims to the public and Congress that it robustly monitors all the securities it rates, a former chief compliance officer warned the Securities and Exchange Commission in a March letter.
The letter, which was publicly released yesterday by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, could have broad implications as state and local finances continue to plummet during the recession.
“In the current economic environment, this failure could have far-reaching systemic consequences,” Scott McCleskey, a former senior vice president and head of Moody’s compliance department, wrote in a March 12 letter to the SEC’s Michael Macchiaroli. “I am writing to urge the SEC to include a rigorous review of public finance rating surveillance in its annual examination of Moody’s and the other NRSROs.”
“Municipal authorities have been taking drastic measures — cutting their capital budgets to zero, laying off employees in critical sectors, etc. — just to keep afloat,” he wrote. “There is a real probability that there will be a wave of municipal defaults in the coming year. In the meantime, the ratings on their debt remain at the same level as when the debt was issued. Investors may think they are holding investment-grade bonds when in fact the issuer is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.”
The letter was disclosed during the first of two hearings held to focus on the credit rating agencies. The first, before the oversight committee, focused on rating agency compliance failures, while the second, before the House Financial Services capital markets panel, dealt with a draft bill to mandate credit rating reforms.
The bill, sponsored by the panel’s chairman, Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., would make it much easier for investors to sue rating agencies designated by the SEC as nationally recognized statistical rating organizations, or NRSROs.
The Kanjorksi bill also would require NRSROs to rate muni and other debt on the same scale. Specifically, the agencies would need to use standardized rating symbols for all securities that would be based on the same levels of assumed or expected loss. Expected loss is defined as the expected probability of default multiplied by the loss once the default occurs.
McCleskey — who testified during the first hearing and served as Moody’s head of compliance from April 2006 to September 2008 — said he was “pushed out” of Moody’s after officials “lost confidence” in him. But he said he was not terminated for whistleblowing, and wrote his letter to the SEC after he left the rating agency.
“I wanted to flag an issue to [the SEC] to make sure they were aware of it when they conducted their examination” of Moody’s, he said.
McCleskey said there were “tens of thousands” of munis that were “not getting the same level of scrutiny that you would expect” and that is received by corporate debt and other securities. He told the lawmakers that Moody’s may need “algorithms that will pop up alerts” when ratings should be reevaluated.
He said he wasn’t concerned about big issuers like New York City, but rather small school districts and municipalities.
In his letter, McCleskey stressed that senior Moody’s management was unwilling to tell the public that virtually all municipal ratings were out of date, contrary to their representations in congressional hearings and public statements, a source of great concern in the current economy. Moody’s rates 29,000 issuers, he wrote.
Though most of his concerns were initially ignored, Moody’s did take some small but insufficient steps at addressing the problems after the financial crisis began and rating agencies were put under additional scrutiny, McCleskey said. A Moody’s spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.
Asked if the SEC staff responded to McCleskey, a spokesman said: “We are focusing carefully on the tips and complaints we receive and following up, where appropriate, with examinations targeting suspected problems.”
Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va., noted McCleskey told the SEC that Moody’s officials did not want any concerns to be put in writing and said the agency appears to have “a culture of avoidance of having anything in writing that’s traceable.”
The hearing also focused on claims from a former Moody’s analyst, Eric Kolchinsky, who testified that rating agency violated the securities fraud laws by knowingly issuing misleading ratings on structured finance products and that analysts were more concerned about revenues than quality ratings.
Connolly was furious that lawyers from Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, the outside law firm Moody’s hired to investigate Kolchinsky’s claims, found no merit in Kolchinsky’s charges but did not want to put its findings in writing.
“This [secrecy] might be alright if the credit rating agencies hadn’t played a starring role in the collapse of the financial system. For that reason, this cannot continue. It’s very clear to me at this point that effective legislation is needed, along with effective oversight,” said committee chairman Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y.
During the first hearing, Floyd Abrams, the First Amendment expert and senior partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, who is also outside legal counsel for Standard & Poor’s and its parent company, the McGraw-Hill Cos., testified on behalf of himself and not his firm or clients.
He warned it would be wrong and inconsistent to lower the so-called pleading standards in a 1995 law to permit private parties from filings securities fraud lawsuits against the rating agencies based on allegations that they acted “unreasonably” rather than with “scienter,” or bad faith, which is the standard that applies to other market participants.
“Under such a framework, if a plaintiff’s lawyer were to bring a securities fraud suit against three defendants, a securities analyst, an auditor and an NRSRO, the plaintiffs would have to allege that the securities analyst and auditor acted in bad faith but, with respect to the NRSRO, would argue that it need to allege only that the NRSRO acted unreasonably,” Abrams said.
During the second hearing, Kanjorski said that by giving unduly high ratings to mortgage-backed structured finance ratings, the rating agencies “betrayed” investors that had come to rely on their judgement, “but also their special status under our laws.” Currently, the securities laws shield the firms from litigation.
“We can promote accountability in credit ratings through the threat of liability,” he said.
But New Jersey Rep. Scott Garrett, the ranking Republican on the panel, said he does not believe that “the solution to all of society’s ills is simply more lawsuits.”
He also noted with particular concern a provision that would institute collective liability among NRSROs.
“I am very concerned about the practicality of this provision, not to mention the constitutionality as well,” Garrett said. “I don’t see what positive can be attained by holding all of the NRSROs accountable for the bad actions of one.”
Standard and Poor’s president Deven Sharma said the provision would be anti-competitive.
Though they said that they welcomed some legislative proposals or regulatory changes, the heads of the top three NRSROs — Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch — said they are deeply concerned about the joint liability proposal, which would require them to each verify other NRSROs information and be liable for the actions of their competitors even if they did not rate a bond that defaults.
“There is simply no truth to the popular notion that CRAs are somehow 'immune’ from liability,” said Moody's chairman and CEO Raymond McDaniel. “Moody’s and other NRSROs are in fact being sued as we speak in numerous cases in federal and state courts around the country. So, under the existing law, there is already substantial accountability.”
More articles in Washington
Says It Did No Surveillance of Ratings
Thursday, October 1, 2009
By Andrew Ackerman
Print Email Reprints
Related Links
Kanjorski: Congress Should Weigh Bill Allowing Lawsuits Against Raters - May 20, 2009
House to Discuss Muni Rating Legislation - September 30, 2009
WASHINGTON — Moody’s Investors Service conducts “virtually no surveillance” of its municipal bond ratings, despite its claims to the public and Congress that it robustly monitors all the securities it rates, a former chief compliance officer warned the Securities and Exchange Commission in a March letter.
The letter, which was publicly released yesterday by the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee, could have broad implications as state and local finances continue to plummet during the recession.
“In the current economic environment, this failure could have far-reaching systemic consequences,” Scott McCleskey, a former senior vice president and head of Moody’s compliance department, wrote in a March 12 letter to the SEC’s Michael Macchiaroli. “I am writing to urge the SEC to include a rigorous review of public finance rating surveillance in its annual examination of Moody’s and the other NRSROs.”
“Municipal authorities have been taking drastic measures — cutting their capital budgets to zero, laying off employees in critical sectors, etc. — just to keep afloat,” he wrote. “There is a real probability that there will be a wave of municipal defaults in the coming year. In the meantime, the ratings on their debt remain at the same level as when the debt was issued. Investors may think they are holding investment-grade bonds when in fact the issuer is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.”
The letter was disclosed during the first of two hearings held to focus on the credit rating agencies. The first, before the oversight committee, focused on rating agency compliance failures, while the second, before the House Financial Services capital markets panel, dealt with a draft bill to mandate credit rating reforms.
The bill, sponsored by the panel’s chairman, Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., would make it much easier for investors to sue rating agencies designated by the SEC as nationally recognized statistical rating organizations, or NRSROs.
The Kanjorksi bill also would require NRSROs to rate muni and other debt on the same scale. Specifically, the agencies would need to use standardized rating symbols for all securities that would be based on the same levels of assumed or expected loss. Expected loss is defined as the expected probability of default multiplied by the loss once the default occurs.
McCleskey — who testified during the first hearing and served as Moody’s head of compliance from April 2006 to September 2008 — said he was “pushed out” of Moody’s after officials “lost confidence” in him. But he said he was not terminated for whistleblowing, and wrote his letter to the SEC after he left the rating agency.
“I wanted to flag an issue to [the SEC] to make sure they were aware of it when they conducted their examination” of Moody’s, he said.
McCleskey said there were “tens of thousands” of munis that were “not getting the same level of scrutiny that you would expect” and that is received by corporate debt and other securities. He told the lawmakers that Moody’s may need “algorithms that will pop up alerts” when ratings should be reevaluated.
He said he wasn’t concerned about big issuers like New York City, but rather small school districts and municipalities.
In his letter, McCleskey stressed that senior Moody’s management was unwilling to tell the public that virtually all municipal ratings were out of date, contrary to their representations in congressional hearings and public statements, a source of great concern in the current economy. Moody’s rates 29,000 issuers, he wrote.
Though most of his concerns were initially ignored, Moody’s did take some small but insufficient steps at addressing the problems after the financial crisis began and rating agencies were put under additional scrutiny, McCleskey said. A Moody’s spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.
Asked if the SEC staff responded to McCleskey, a spokesman said: “We are focusing carefully on the tips and complaints we receive and following up, where appropriate, with examinations targeting suspected problems.”
Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va., noted McCleskey told the SEC that Moody’s officials did not want any concerns to be put in writing and said the agency appears to have “a culture of avoidance of having anything in writing that’s traceable.”
The hearing also focused on claims from a former Moody’s analyst, Eric Kolchinsky, who testified that rating agency violated the securities fraud laws by knowingly issuing misleading ratings on structured finance products and that analysts were more concerned about revenues than quality ratings.
Connolly was furious that lawyers from Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, the outside law firm Moody’s hired to investigate Kolchinsky’s claims, found no merit in Kolchinsky’s charges but did not want to put its findings in writing.
“This [secrecy] might be alright if the credit rating agencies hadn’t played a starring role in the collapse of the financial system. For that reason, this cannot continue. It’s very clear to me at this point that effective legislation is needed, along with effective oversight,” said committee chairman Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y.
During the first hearing, Floyd Abrams, the First Amendment expert and senior partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, who is also outside legal counsel for Standard & Poor’s and its parent company, the McGraw-Hill Cos., testified on behalf of himself and not his firm or clients.
He warned it would be wrong and inconsistent to lower the so-called pleading standards in a 1995 law to permit private parties from filings securities fraud lawsuits against the rating agencies based on allegations that they acted “unreasonably” rather than with “scienter,” or bad faith, which is the standard that applies to other market participants.
“Under such a framework, if a plaintiff’s lawyer were to bring a securities fraud suit against three defendants, a securities analyst, an auditor and an NRSRO, the plaintiffs would have to allege that the securities analyst and auditor acted in bad faith but, with respect to the NRSRO, would argue that it need to allege only that the NRSRO acted unreasonably,” Abrams said.
During the second hearing, Kanjorski said that by giving unduly high ratings to mortgage-backed structured finance ratings, the rating agencies “betrayed” investors that had come to rely on their judgement, “but also their special status under our laws.” Currently, the securities laws shield the firms from litigation.
“We can promote accountability in credit ratings through the threat of liability,” he said.
But New Jersey Rep. Scott Garrett, the ranking Republican on the panel, said he does not believe that “the solution to all of society’s ills is simply more lawsuits.”
He also noted with particular concern a provision that would institute collective liability among NRSROs.
“I am very concerned about the practicality of this provision, not to mention the constitutionality as well,” Garrett said. “I don’t see what positive can be attained by holding all of the NRSROs accountable for the bad actions of one.”
Standard and Poor’s president Deven Sharma said the provision would be anti-competitive.
Though they said that they welcomed some legislative proposals or regulatory changes, the heads of the top three NRSROs — Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch — said they are deeply concerned about the joint liability proposal, which would require them to each verify other NRSROs information and be liable for the actions of their competitors even if they did not rate a bond that defaults.
“There is simply no truth to the popular notion that CRAs are somehow 'immune’ from liability,” said Moody's chairman and CEO Raymond McDaniel. “Moody’s and other NRSROs are in fact being sued as we speak in numerous cases in federal and state courts around the country. So, under the existing law, there is already substantial accountability.”
More articles in Washington
01.10.09 13:18
#238
Olly D
mich wundert es doch
dass trotz der hohen stückzahlen in Amerika hier nur ganz wenige STücke gehandelt werden
02.10.09 09:08
#239
pacorubio
@ollyD
Monoinsurer sind in Deutschland noch nicht endeckt worden
hier wurde nie viel auf abk gehandelt schau Dir mal den Chart von 2000-2006 an da könnte man meinen das selbst abk ein müder Hund in Amiland war immer irgendwo sehr stabil ogne große Schwankungen
wer weiss olli ob wir nicht irgendwann zu den dicken Gewinnern gehören mal schauen
ich habe diesesmal mit meinem Zukauf daneben gelegen dachte eigentlich wir würden anziehen jetzt besteht auch Gefahr dass wir nochmal kräftig abgeben heute sollte man aufpassen
nur meine Meinung
kann gut zum Kaufen als auch noch zum verkaufen vielleicht sehen wir bald Kurse unter 1,40 oder die Kiste geht durch die Decke
Grüße
Paco
hier wurde nie viel auf abk gehandelt schau Dir mal den Chart von 2000-2006 an da könnte man meinen das selbst abk ein müder Hund in Amiland war immer irgendwo sehr stabil ogne große Schwankungen
wer weiss olli ob wir nicht irgendwann zu den dicken Gewinnern gehören mal schauen
ich habe diesesmal mit meinem Zukauf daneben gelegen dachte eigentlich wir würden anziehen jetzt besteht auch Gefahr dass wir nochmal kräftig abgeben heute sollte man aufpassen
nur meine Meinung
kann gut zum Kaufen als auch noch zum verkaufen vielleicht sehen wir bald Kurse unter 1,40 oder die Kiste geht durch die Decke
Grüße
Paco
02.10.09 15:50
#240
Olly D
paco
Die Konsolidierung nach den ganzen Gewinnen stand ja an. Natürlich wäre bessere Häuserzahlen und Arbeitsmarktdaten sicherlich besser gewesen und die Konsolidierung wäre nicht so heftig ausgefallen.
Aber nach der Ralley der letzten Monate...muss man ja froh sein, dass wir überhaupt schon wieder hier sind.
Die meisten Kurse haben sich ja mehr als verdreifacht. Somit musste ja mal eine Konsolidierung her. Zumal ja jetzt wieder die Wintersaison anbricht..und man letztendlich in den USA so die letzten ein bis zwei Quartale mit schlechten Zahlen erwartet.
Aber nach der Ralley der letzten Monate...muss man ja froh sein, dass wir überhaupt schon wieder hier sind.
Die meisten Kurse haben sich ja mehr als verdreifacht. Somit musste ja mal eine Konsolidierung her. Zumal ja jetzt wieder die Wintersaison anbricht..und man letztendlich in den USA so die letzten ein bis zwei Quartale mit schlechten Zahlen erwartet.
05.10.09 15:14
#241
pacorubio
abk-shares
gekauft fettes Depot jetzt muss es nur noch nach oben laufen
16.00 wissen wir mehr
16.00 wissen wir mehr
05.10.09 17:01
#242
pacorubio
dringend ins bid schauen
hier werden mio Stücke reingestellt:
http://datasvr.tradearca.com/arcadataserver/...ookData.php?Symbol=abk
http://datasvr.tradearca.com/arcadataserver/...ookData.php?Symbol=abk
05.10.09 17:59
#243
Olly D
parcorubio
ohne Überschriften ist so eine Tabelle leider sehr schwierig lesbar.
Ich sehe zwar allerhand Stückzahlen und Kurse..kann sie aber ohne header nicht in Zusammenhang bringen
Ich sehe zwar allerhand Stückzahlen und Kurse..kann sie aber ohne header nicht in Zusammenhang bringen
05.10.09 21:12
#244
pacorubio
@ollyd
was meinst du mit Überschriften??????
gib oben in der url die ami Lürzel ein und immer auf aktualisieren drüchen
geht mit jeder ami Aktie
aig bac cit c etc.
gib oben in der url die ami Lürzel ein und immer auf aktualisieren drüchen
geht mit jeder ami Aktie
aig bac cit c etc.
06.10.09 10:22
#245
pacorubio
heute ist ambac Tag
abwarten und Tee trinken oder Bier oder Wein egal wie auch immer
abk wird anziehen nachdem die Banken ihre Ergebnisse präsentieren
Grüßé
Paco
einsteigen ist angesagt Stück für Stück Schritt bei Schritt
Mühsam ernährt sich das >Eichhörnchen
Grüße
Paco
abk wird anziehen nachdem die Banken ihre Ergebnisse präsentieren
Grüßé
Paco
einsteigen ist angesagt Stück für Stück Schritt bei Schritt
Mühsam ernährt sich das >Eichhörnchen
Grüße
Paco
06.10.09 12:48
#246
Olly D
ich kann warten
trotzdem fehlen einfach Fakten, die ja wohl erst Anfang November zum 3. QT kommen.
Aber spätestens ein bis zwei wochen vorher, wird der Kurs aufgrund der Spekulationen wieder anziehen.
Aber spätestens ein bis zwei wochen vorher, wird der Kurs aufgrund der Spekulationen wieder anziehen.
06.10.09 13:58
#247
Olly D
parcorubio
ich nehme mal an, dass die ASK und BID Zahlen in tsd angezeigt werden..?
Somit sieht es im Moment mit 1,58 zumindest als Einstieg nicht schlecht aus...
schauen wir mal
Somit sieht es im Moment mit 1,58 zumindest als Einstieg nicht schlecht aus...
schauen wir mal
06.10.09 14:23
#248
Olly D
10.8 Mio Aktien im ask für 1,57 in der Pre Börse
das kann ja ein heisser Tag werden...
06.10.09 15:24
#250
pacorubio
wieso mio
z.Zt. habe ich 5000 im bid bei 1,58 und ca. 17000im ask
zumindest auf traderarca
zumindest auf traderarca