SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (90910)9/30/2007 1:01:20 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favorRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 306849
 
Message 23926289



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (90910)9/30/2007 1:24:50 PM
From: Giordano BrunoRead Replies (3) | Respond to of 306849
 
Got your golden boy right here latimes.com



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (90910)9/30/2007 3:51:19 PM
From: RockyBalboaRespond to of 306849
 
CR, maybe Tanta has made some valid points as Morgenson made unclear and suggestive remarks (particularly when it comes to the nebulous suspense account issue).

One thing must not be overlooked and gives rise to much touted pseudo "workouts". In fact they work out something else and this is why I dubbed it the workout fraud, as a new contagious subtype of an old accounting shenanigan:

Per IAS, lenders and related servicers are required to test their revenue recognition. Once an underlying claim gets 90 days plus past due, revenue may no longer be recognised and aperiodic revenue must be reversed. By trying some sort of credit repair, (at least) servicers can overcome this hurdle. By renaming revenues as workout servicers can eeke out revenues from a principally failed mortgage they otherwise never "get" recognised.

Otherwise, lenders would be forced to reverse interest income, services would wipe $millions of uncollected service fees.

(The rest is econ101: The customer shalleth pay. Few customers went over T&Cs regarding the extra fees for their eternal hope those fees are never assessed).

Morgenson never gets to the point and Tanta didn´t take it up yet. Believe me, it will come home to roost.



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (90910)9/30/2007 4:19:21 PM
From: Lizzie TudorRespond to of 306849
 
I don't like Morgenson's reporting of the high tech backdating scandal either. Just a lot of bad stats and facts. Any reporter can be on one side of the other on an issue but to sensationalize based on non-facts is just reprehensible.