Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: robert b furman who wrote (9635)	7/10/2008 1:01:47 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33421

I have no problem with throwing the pimps in jail. Well.. my point is that it could present a respite for the re-insurers if they can litigate and assert that any defaulted MBS/CDO's were fraudulently over-rated by Moody's/S&P/Fitch.. In other words, passing the buck to the rating agencies which are clearly being found to have involved in malfeasance and/or negligence. I can understand their liability being limited so long as they follow best practices in assigning credit ratings on those instruments. But if they are involved in fraud, I think that opens them up to some tremendous lawsuits from the investors who purchased, and re-insured the products they rated. Was wondering if that might have been part of the early pop in the re-insurers (which fizzled along with the rest of the market later on).. Hawk