Standard and Poor's are SCUMBAG TRAITORS

[Guest Pissed Off]

Once their scam email and instant message is released to the media they will be be branded as traitors to the USA.

 

These ignoramus buffoons do nothing and actually think they are something. Their day is coming. They might as well be on America's most wanted list.

 

What S&P did not realize is that instead of hurting treasuries, they hurt alot businesses around the world.

 

The debt ceiling always has split support, but gets raised. It did again this time as well. They know nothing about politics. These beltway outsiders are too dangerous to be a credit rating agency.

 

They need to go down.

 

[Pissed Off]

[Pissed Off]

The head of Standard & Poor's sovereign ratings, David Beers told “Fox News Sunday” he did not expect "that much impact" when global markets open on Monday due to what he called a "mild deterioration" in the U.S. credit standing to AA-plus from top-tier AAA. Well dumbshit, you were wrong. You guys are always wrong.

 

 

[Guest Fedup]

Here is the exact quotes. The news pundits like MSNBC and FOX tend to embelish the argument in their behalf.

 

In an April 2007 instant message, an S&P analyst offered this cynical comment:

"[W]e rate every deal[.] t could be structured by cows and we would rate it." - 4/5/2007 instant message exchange between S&P analyst Shannon Mooney and Rahul Dilip Shah, Hearing Exhibit 4/23-30a.

 

One S&P senior manager, frustrated by an inability to get an answer on the retesting issue, sent an email to a colleague complaining: "Lord help our f**king scam ... this has to be the stupidest place I have worked at." - 11/23/2005 email from Elwyn Wong to Andrea Bryan, Hearing Exhibit 4/23-64.

 

 

 

http://hsgac.senate....risisReport.pdf

[Guest Honen]

Once their scam email and instant message is released to the media they will be be branded as traitors to the USA.

 

These ignoramus buffoons do nothing and actually think they are something. Their day is coming. They might as well be on America's most wanted list.

 

What S&P did not realize is that instead of hurting treasuries, they hurt alot businesses around the world.

 

The debt ceiling always has split support, but gets raised. It did again this time as well. They know nothing about politics. These beltway outsiders are too dangerous to be a credit rating agency.

 

They need to go down.

 

 

You are angry at them. Love the energy. Here is what Mike Norman, a former employee at S&P has to say about them. להנות

 

http://mikenormaneco...gencies-on.html

 

I worked at S&P back in 2000 and was basically fired after getting into an argument with chief auto analyst Scott Sprinzen after I wrote a highly negative article about General Motors, whose stock was trading at 80 per share at the time. I questioned GMs outlook and the rosy assumptions that they were making for their finance unit. Sprinzen took exception to this saying that GM was strong and would not have any problems. Well, I was forced to resign.

 

Fast forward: GM went bankrupt and had to be saved by taxpayers. Sprinzen is still there at S&P. I am not.

 

These agencies have been conducting business for years despite the fact that they operate with huge conflicts of interest. They are paid by the entities they rate so there is massive incentive to make things look rosy when they are not. They are protected by the government and have no competition. This has made them arrogant to an extreme, as exhibited by the jerk being interviewed on CNBC. Sadly, nothing will be done to reign them in or make them more accountable for their ratings.

[Guest Arthur L.]

I am happy that people are starting realize that Standard and Poor's is just a big scam. Now they are inadvertently hurting the reputation of Moody's and Fitch. Their value is going to drop soon.

 

http://www.profi-forex.us/news/entry4000001779.html

 

The US and EU authorities have started a big-scale campaign against Standard & Poor's, Moody’s and Fitch. The reason is obvious: the 3 rating agencies have turned into a supra-government union, that can easily change the investment attractiveness of any country in the world by upgrading or downgrading the country’s credit rating, thus making it lose or acquire multi-billion investments. Finally the affected finance ministries and central banks started questioning the competence and objectiveness of those rating agencies and decided to strike back.

[Guest LAW]

Congresswoman Waters (CA), Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises, today wrote two letters calling for action following Standard & Poor’s (S&P) historic downgrade of U.S. government debt on Friday, August 5th.

 

In her first letter, Congresswoman Waters wrote to House Financial Services Committee Chairman Spencer Bachus, and Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett, calling for a hearing examining the implications of S&P’s downgrade on the still-fragile U.S. housing market, interest rates on consumer loans, and the borrowing costs for some state and local governments. Congresswoman Waters also called on the Chairmen to examine the impact of an S&P calculation error included in their downgrade analysis, potential conflicts of interest at the ratings agency, and the extent to which the downgrade was based on subjective political analysis from S&P, among other areas of interest.

 

In her second letter, Congresswoman Waters wrote to Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro, asking her to investigate whether the credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s (S&P) selectively disclosed information about a downgrade of U.S. government debt to certain financial institutions before that information became available to the public. This request is in response to several news reports indicating that various banking industry executives held meetings with S&P on Thursday and Friday, before S&P’s Friday night public announcement of the downgrade. News reports have also raised questions about heavy trading volume and a large sell-off of equity securities during the day on Friday.

 

“Credit ratings agencies, including S&P, have a track-record of poor performance leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, rating mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations as AAA, often without scrutinizing the underlying loans. And even when they knew their analysis was faulty, they continued to crank out favorable ratings in order to preserve and increase their profits. Famously, an email from an S&P employee to a colleague noted, ‘let's hope we are all wealthy and retired by the time this house of cards falters.’ Given their history of consistently and significantly inaccurate ratings, as well as conflicts of interest, I think it is appropriate for the Financial Services Committee to take a look at S&P’s recent action regarding the sovereign credit rating of the U.S.,” Congresswoman Waters noted.

 

###

 

The text of both of Congresswoman Waters’ letters are below:

 

 

August 10, 2011

 

The Honorable Spencer Bachus

 

Chairman, House Committee on Financial Services

 

The Honorable Scott Garrett

 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Capital Markets

 

and Government Sponsored Enterprises

 

United States House of Representatives

 

2128 Rayburn House Office Building

 

Washington, DC 20515

 

 

 

Dear Chairmen Bachus and Garrett:

 

 

 

I am writing to request that when the House of Representatives reconvenes after its August district work period, the House Financial Services Committee (the Committee) hold a hearing, or a series of hearings, on Standard & Poor’s (S&P’s) decision to downgrade the sovereign credit rating of the United States of America to ‘AA+’ from ‘AAA.’

 

As you know, the decision by S&P to downgrade the sovereign credit rating of the U.S. has had an impact on the U.S. economy and the world’s capital markets. On Monday, August 8th, the first trading day following S&P’s announcement, U.S. stocks experienced their worst declines since the 2008 financial crisis. And questions remain about what the impact of the downgrade will be on the still-fragile U.S. housing market, as well as interest rates on credit cards and car loans, and the borrowing costs for some state and local governments.

 

 

I believe it is appropriate to carefully scrutinize S&P’s August 5th downgrade of the U.S. not only because of the implications of such a downgrade, but also because of S&P’s recent failures in the lead-up to the financial crisis. S&P, as well as other credit rating agencies, consistently provided inaccurate ratings of asset-based securities, acting as “essential cogs in the wheel of financial destruction,” as the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission noted in their report earlier this year. Additionally, the record of the 2008 financial crisis demonstrates that S&P was not merely an independent evaluator of the credit risk of financial products, but actively used their power over the mortgage finance market to defeat state-level anti-predatory mortgage lending laws.

 

 

Therefore, I think it is appropriate for the Committee to hold a hearing, or hearings, on both the implications of S&P’s actions, and how the historical performance of S&P interacts with their August 5th downgrade. Additionally, I think it would be useful for the Committee to examine the extent to which S&P’s downgrade was based upon an objective analysis of U.S. debt dynamics versus subjective political analysis; the impact of S&P using the incorrect Congressional Budget Office assumption in determining their credit rating of the U.S.; the firewalls and internal controls S&P, and their corporate parent, the McGraw-Hill Companies, have in place to insulate activities related to lobbying the federal government and the United States Congress from credit rating activities; and whether S&P selectively disclosed its downgrade of United States government debt to certain financial institutions before it made that information available to the public.

 

 

According to news reports, the Senate Banking Committee has already “begun collecting information about Standard & Poor’s decision to downgrade the U.S.,” and may hold a hearing in September.[2] Given the historic nature of S&P’s action, I believe that the Committee should likewise begin an examination of this issue, and hold hearing(s) upon Members returning to Washington, D.C.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

/s

 

 

 

Maxine Waters

 

Ranking Member

 

Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee

 

 

 

 

 

August 10, 2011

 

 

 

The Honorable Mary L. Schapiro

 

Chairman

 

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, NE

Washington, DC 20549

 

 

 

Dear Chairman Schapiro:

 

 

I am writing to request that you conduct an investigation into whether the ratings agency Standard & Poor’s (S&P) selectively disclosed its downgrade of United States government debt to certain financial institutions before it made that information available to the public.

 

 

As you know, late in the day on Friday, August 5th, S&P lowered the long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to ‘AA+’ from ‘AAA.’ This historic step contributed to significant market turmoil on Monday, August 8th, the first trading day following S&P’s announcement, with U.S. stocks experiencing their worst declines since the 2008 financial crisis.

 

In the days following the downgrade, news outlets have reported that various banking industry executives held meetings with S&P on Thursday and Friday, before S&P’s Friday night public announcement of the downgrade. News reports have also raised questions about heavy trading volume and a large sell-off of equity securities during the day on Friday.

 

I believe that these reports raise certain questions about the conduct of S&P that deserve further scrutiny by the Securities and Exchange Commission, including an examination into whether any regulatory violations took place. Rule 17g-4 promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 states that “the written policies and procedures a nationally recognized statistical rating organization establishes, maintains, and enforces to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information pursuant to section 15E( g )( 1 ) of the Act must include policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent…the inappropriate dissemination within and outside the nationally recognized statistical rating organization of a pending credit rating action before issuing the credit rating on the Internet or through another readily accessible means.”

 

 

Given the historic nature of S&P’s downgrade, and the tremendous market volatility experienced after that downgrade, I feel it is appropriate for the Commission to conduct an investigation into whether S&P selectively disclosed information related to the U.S. government debt downgrade to any financial institutions, and whether any institutions that had that non-public information traded on that information prior to the official announcement.

 

 

If you have any questions about this request, please contact Amanda Fischer of my office at (202) 225-2201. I appreciate your swift attention to this important matter.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

/s

 

 

 

Maxine Waters

 

Ranking Member

 

Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises

[Guest Kevin]

I read this in the Wall Street Journal. Here is another link for you.

 

The SEC plans to scrutinize the model S&P used to downgrade U.S. debt, people familiar with the matter said last week. The SEC's examination unit also wants to know which S&P employees knew in advance about the downgrade, these people said.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903639404576516561097613114.html

[Guest Chuck]

Looks like S&P is getting paid to spread fear in the markets. Now they have downgraded Italy to A/Negative/A-1. It appears that their end game is the demise of the US dollar.

 

Strengths:

· High levels of per capita GDP.

· Strong household and corporate balance sheets.

· Limited external imbalances.

Sovereign Credit Rating

A/Negative/A-1

Weaknesses:

· Weakening real and nominal growth prospects.

· What we view as significant political impediments to growth-enhancing reforms.

· High gross and net general government debt.

· Limited commitment to expenditure cuts under the current medium term fiscal programme.

 

http://img.en25.com/...blicofItaly.pdf