<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
		<description>Discuss MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</description>
		<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:47:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="https://boombustblog.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11835</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The most recent MBIA press release brings up a number of questions, two of which are asked below. First, will the losses completely deplete Channel Re's equity? If so, how can the rating agencies avoid slashing Channel Re's ratings immediately. How can you have a company rated AAA with negative equity? And if Channel Re's ratings get slashed, my understanding is that MBIA would then be required to take large rating agency capital charges on the exposures ceded to Channel Re. Second, does anyone know how the MTM increase on the CDOs increased from $850M as of 10/31/07 to $3.3B as of year-end? MBIA's press release mentioned something about an accounting change, so maybe this explained part of the increase. And is the $3.3B the real MTM loss or is it one-third or some fraction of the real MTM loss? I would guess that no one has answers to these questions, because MBIA did not provide this information, but ask just in case.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mark Edmunds</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 05:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11835</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11831</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We are all speculating. I actually forgot about the nature of surplus notes since I have been out of the insurance industry for so long, but an associate reminded me. The issue is so much about the seniority of the notes (which take precedence over the debt of the holding company, it appears) but about the fact that the State Ins. Dept. has final say on much, if no most, of what goes on in companies in which it grants licenses to operate. The big loophole that allowed MBI and Ambac to profit as much as they did and get into this much trouble is that they danced in between the rules of the Ins. Dept. and the SEC. They were part insurer, and part I bank. Now that feces has hit the fan blades and so much publicity surrounds this issue, I am sure the insurance dept. is much less willing to allow loopholes to be manipulated and will execute on their mandate to protect the public, who is the insured in this case. The dept.'s powers include the ability to force funds into reserve until it believes the company is adequately capitalized to meet the demand of the claims from its insureds. Ackman appears to have done a lot of work and research in this space and has benefited handsomely for it. I had my analysts cross check and verify his findings and we found nothing that he claims to be out of order. The only thing that we may not see eye to eye on is the potential risk of Ambac, which seems to be much more than that of MBIA. This is academic, since both companies are in quite the bind. I invite all to participate in extended discourse in the discussion forums that I have just reopened today. Just click the discuss button at the bottom of every post.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Reggie Middleton</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:54:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11831</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11830</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In this video posted on seeking alpha and on yahoo under blog posts, Bill Ackman seems to be saying what you are about the release of capital, but I would like more clarification. Is Ackman correct that no funds will likely be paid on the 14% bonds and in fact they will wind up working like zero coupon bonds? What is the seniority of these bonds -- not that there is likely to be anything left to distribute -- but of course these sorts of facts are not being widely publicized and could effect the stock price if they are accurate. here is the link http://seekingalpha.com/article/59872-bill-ackman-video-speaking-on-mbia-ambac-and-bond-reinsurers]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jon Pearlstone</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:10:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11830</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11829</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was just reminded that surplus notes, in addition to their preferential treatment as quasi-equity, share the equity like attribute of being 2nd tier to superior claims - such as that brought down from the NYS Department of Insurance, whose mandate is to protect the public, vis-a-vis the insureds. It is a significant risk to the note buyers, assuming any of them believe my analysis, for if I am anywhere close to being accurate there is no way the Insurance Commissioner is going to allow capital to leave the insurance subsidiary at 14% plus (even a reduced) dividend with the amount or risk, exposure, and losses at bay for MBIA. With just a cursory look, it appears as if 14% (@ 5yr callable) was actually too cheap. Think about it. Where will the future revenue streams come from? Not CDOs. If you were a municipality, who would you buy insurance from, Warren Buffet or MBIA? These guys are pretty much done. I would really like to get a good look at Ambac's books to create a more sophisticated position against them, for if things are this bad for MBIA, they are worse for Ambac who has less capital and an inferior book of business. As it stands now, I have released significant research, and I am contemplating performing and releasing more if the share prices moves above $30 again.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Reggie Middleton</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 15:59:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11829</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11828</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have to admit, I would have a pretty tough time defending them. This last incident, with 14% bonds going out with an investment grade rating sounds like a bad joke. I just may take a closer look at Moody's, but I will need some specialized legal assistance that I don't have on staff to qualify and quantify their liability, which should be increasing day by day. They have an out, by stating that they don't give advice, but offer opinions only and are not a fiduciary. Yeah, right. Well, they get paid, and don't publicly divulge the many conflicts that are inherent in their opinions to the public. I, personally, hate litigation but I think some of these agencies are pushing the envelope as if they believe there are no more lawyers left in the country. BTW, take a look at your profile. I have added a MySpace type URL that allows you to link back to your profile from anywhere on the web. Think of this as the investment world's grown up version of myspace.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Reggie Middleton</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:26:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11828</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: MBIA in the news recently... I am not going to say I told you so.</title>
			<link>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11827</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Reggie great write up, and feel free to say you told us so -- you have more than earned that right. I continue to believe that MOODY'S will wind up blowing up just as hard as MBIA and AMBAC as a result of their insane justifications for AA and AAA ratings. Their ratings have proven to be a sham at best and criminal at worst and from what I am hearing, the investigations and lawsuits will prove that Moody's was perhaps the biggest single key to the entire credit crisis -- along with S and P and Fitch or course -- but Moody's is the only public company and has an even greater obligation to adhere to the rating criteria they themselves have established. I suppose the Blog ID I have chosen could have said all I said just as quickly but I don't mind venting on Moody's whenever I can. They have very likely knowingly significantly contributed to the greatest financial crisis of all time. I hope you devote some more time in your posts to Moody's, you have earned great credibility and I am sure can spell out their wrongdoings and let the public know about their long term demise better than I can. thanks again for the best blog of it's kind on the internet.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jon Pearlstone</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 06:53:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://boombustblog.com/blog/item/106-mbia-in-the-news-recently-i-am-not-going-to-say-i-told-you-so#comment-11827</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
