Removing funds from Barclays

Debt_Free_Chick

danm wrote: »

Barlcays reported £1.3bn losses. They had already announced 500mm so another 800m is pretty good going comparatively

Do you think we should mention that the losses are within Barclays Capital, the investment banking arm?

or will the retail savers and borrowers panic, regardless :rolleyes:

devils_advocate

danm wrote: »

Level 3 assets are typically structured illiquid assets for which there is no active secondary market. In your example, it is obviously liquid:p i

And it looks like valued at exit price !

Now things are going to get interesting with the SEC's decision today that non US Banks dont have to adopt FAS 157.

SquatNow

devils_advocate wrote: »

And it looks like valued at exit price !

Now things are going to get interesting with the SEC's decision today that non US Banks dont have to adopt FAS 157.

FAS 157/159 is irrelevant thanks to that new fund they just created.

If you have to price assets based on market value, what you need is someone prepared to buy them at full "price". That someone doesn't actually have to BUY them, they just need to be PREPARED to buy them. The "buyer" is willing to buy but the "seller" the refuses to sell.

I get the impression the reason it took them so long to sort out this fund was they had to make sure they all agreed not to suddenly decide to sell and take the $75bn.

The fund will probably buy up a few billion dollars worth to show it really is prepared to buy, and may use the rest of the $75bn to buy up junk from any small funds going bust so it doesn't get sold on the open market and cause a cascade.

If that happen the big banks who setup the fund will end up buying even more junk at FULL PRICE through their ownership of the fund, but that doesn't matter, they just need to make sure no-one sells in the open market which would force them to write down hundreds of billions of dollars from their assets.