A.I.G payback timeline

jeffkrol · 09-30-2010, 07:49 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/business/01aig.html?src=mv

Quote:

The A.I.G. chief executive, Robert H. Benmosche, said in a statement that the plan would allow the company to “remain on track to emerge with one of the largest, most diversified property and casualty companies in the world.”

The Treasury issued a statement Thursday saying the agreement “dramatically accelerates the timeline for A.I.G.’s repayment and puts taxpayers in a considerably stronger position to recoup our investment in the company.”

In the statement, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said: “While there is a lot of work ahead to execute this agreement, today we are much closer to seeing a clear path out.”

Go TARP.......

Of course some are unhappy.................

Quote:

Converting at a discounted price could position taxpayers to reap a profit, but it also could put pressure on the stock price, making it harder for the government to sell its shares. Converting at a higher price—such as one above the current market price for AIG shares—would result in the government taking a smaller stake in AIG and would potentially generate profits for private shareholders at the expense of U.S. taxpayers.

Treasury officials, including chief restructuring officer James Millstein, have told company officials they don't want to set a price that would present a bonanza for hedge funds or other private investors including former chief executive Maurice R. "Hank" Greenberg, according to people familiar with the matter.

"I think that's disgraceful to say they don't want me or shareholders to make money," said Mr. Greenberg, AIG's longtime leader who left in 2005 amid an accounting probe.

Mr. Greenberg remains one of the company's private shareholders and most-vocal critics of AIG's government bailout.

He also challenged the view, held by some federal officials, that it will take around a year and a half for the U.S. government to completely dispose of its stake.

"I think it's going to take years, maybe a decade or more, for [the government] to sell down over 90% of the company," Mr. Greenberg said in an interview.

"As soon as they try to sell the stock it will go down," making further sales more difficult, he predicted on Wednesday.

Analysts acknowledged Treasury's dilemma.

"They don't want to damage the stock yet again, as that could hurt the company's value and introduce additional uncertainty, but they also cannot look like they are protecting private shareholders," says Angelo Graci, an analyst at Chapdelaine Credit Partners in New York. He says that many steps that AIG and the government have taken in the past two years have been aimed at improving AIG's value in the eyes of investors, to facilitate future sales of the government's shares.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704116004575521800691552756.html

Nesster · 09-30-2010, 08:11 AM

AIG has had interesting connections - i.e. during the bail out Goldman et al got dollar on the dollar for their contracts (instead of what should have made sense: less than a dollar on the dollar)... And shareholders, they ought to be glad they aren't wiped out 100% (Lehman, eg) or 90% (Citi)... If holding shares is actual ownership, yeah, they should have a long slog back. After all, they are lucky to have any value at all.

Re. government share sales - Citi's stock seems to do a little better during the times the treasury's selling shares. These traders do know their job.

Parallax · 09-30-2010, 10:58 AM

Quote:

The A.I.G. chief executive, Robert H. Benmosche, said in a statement that the plan would allow the company to “remain on track to emerge with one of the largest, most diversified property and casualty companies in the world.”

Isn't that what caused the problem in the first place?

GeneV · 10-01-2010, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

AIG has had interesting connections - i.e. during the bail out Goldman et al got dollar on the dollar for their contracts (instead of what should have made sense: less than a dollar on the dollar)... And shareholders, they ought to be glad they aren't wiped out 100% (Lehman, eg) or 90% (Citi)... If holding shares is actual ownership, yeah, they should have a long slog back. After all, they are lucky to have any value at all.

AIG did very well at socializing their losses.

Nesster · 10-01-2010, 06:32 AM

Or rather, Deutche Bank, Goldman Sachs, et al did very well at privatizing their bailout.

09-30-2010, 07:49 AM	#1
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	A.I.G payback timeline http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/business/01aig.html?src=mv Quote: The A.I.G. chief executive, Robert H. Benmosche, said in a statement that the plan would allow the company to “remain on track to emerge with one of the largest, most diversified property and casualty companies in the world.” The Treasury issued a statement Thursday saying the agreement “dramatically accelerates the timeline for A.I.G.’s repayment and puts taxpayers in a considerably stronger position to recoup our investment in the company.” In the statement, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said: “While there is a lot of work ahead to execute this agreement, today we are much closer to seeing a clear path out.” Go TARP....... Of course some are unhappy................. Quote: Converting at a discounted price could position taxpayers to reap a profit, but it also could put pressure on the stock price, making it harder for the government to sell its shares. Converting at a higher price—such as one above the current market price for AIG shares—would result in the government taking a smaller stake in AIG and would potentially generate profits for private shareholders at the expense of U.S. taxpayers. Treasury officials, including chief restructuring officer James Millstein, have told company officials they don't want to set a price that would present a bonanza for hedge funds or other private investors including former chief executive Maurice R. "Hank" Greenberg, according to people familiar with the matter. "I think that's disgraceful to say they don't want me or shareholders to make money," said Mr. Greenberg, AIG's longtime leader who left in 2005 amid an accounting probe. Mr. Greenberg remains one of the company's private shareholders and most-vocal critics of AIG's government bailout. He also challenged the view, held by some federal officials, that it will take around a year and a half for the U.S. government to completely dispose of its stake. "I think it's going to take years, maybe a decade or more, for [the government] to sell down over 90% of the company," Mr. Greenberg said in an interview. "As soon as they try to sell the stock it will go down," making further sales more difficult, he predicted on Wednesday. Analysts acknowledged Treasury's dilemma. "They don't want to damage the stock yet again, as that could hurt the company's value and introduce additional uncertainty, but they also cannot look like they are protecting private shareholders," says Angelo Graci, an analyst at Chapdelaine Credit Partners in New York. He says that many steps that AIG and the government have taken in the past two years have been aimed at improving AIG's value in the eyes of investors, to facilitate future sales of the government's shares. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704116004575521800691552756.html

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Timeline on Pentax film cameras	Jake21209	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	18	07-08-2012 04:45 PM

09-30-2010, 08:11 AM	#2
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	AIG has had interesting connections - i.e. during the bail out Goldman et al got dollar on the dollar for their contracts (instead of what should have made sense: less than a dollar on the dollar)... And shareholders, they ought to be glad they aren't wiped out 100% (Lehman, eg) or 90% (Citi)... If holding shares is actual ownership, yeah, they should have a long slog back. After all, they are lucky to have any value at all. Re. government share sales - Citi's stock seems to do a little better during the times the treasury's selling shares. These traders do know their job.

09-30-2010, 10:58 AM	#3
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Quote: The A.I.G. chief executive, Robert H. Benmosche, said in a statement that the plan would allow the company to “remain on track to emerge with one of the largest, most diversified property and casualty companies in the world.” Isn't that what caused the problem in the first place?

10-01-2010, 06:27 AM	#4
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Nesster AIG has had interesting connections - i.e. during the bail out Goldman et al got dollar on the dollar for their contracts (instead of what should have made sense: less than a dollar on the dollar)... And shareholders, they ought to be glad they aren't wiped out 100% (Lehman, eg) or 90% (Citi)... If holding shares is actual ownership, yeah, they should have a long slog back. After all, they are lucky to have any value at all. AIG did very well at socializing their losses.

10-01-2010, 06:32 AM	#5
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Or rather, Deutche Bank, Goldman Sachs, et al did very well at privatizing their bailout.