Battle Between Fitch and MBIA Heating Up

Wow, Fitch won't just go away quietly. The battle between MBIA and Fitch is getting heated by the minute. Here are some headlines from MarketWatch.com:

1 minute ago - Fitch calls MBIA info destruction request 'disingenuous' - by Wallace Witkowski

11 minutes ago - Fitch asks if MBIA seeking equal S&P, Moody's concessions - MarketWatch

14 minutes ago - Fitch: MBIA requested destruction of key portfolio info - MarketWatch

16 minutes ago - Fitch willing to waive rating fee for MBIA - MarketWatch

22 minutes ago - Fitch sees conflict in MBIA partial rating withdraw request - MarketWatch

23 minutes ago - Fitch 'considering' MBIA request to withdraw IFS ratings - MarketWatch


Fitch is calling MBIA's bluff (the excuse that the fees are too high) and says it will waive its fee... Fitch also seems to suggest that there is a conspiracy between MBIA and the other two big rating agencies.

As an Ambac shareholder, I personally feel that Fitch isn't of much use and maybe Ambac should consider dumping Fitch as well. I will note however that this is a risk that can be backfire if some feel that the ratings of the other two aren't adequate. For what it's worth, those that don't trust the current ratings won't care one way or another; and those that do trust the rating are more likely to believe Moody's or S&P since they are more respected and have better brand recognition and analytical resources.

Comments

  1. UnknownMarch 12, 2008 at 1:10 AM

    those that do trust the rating are more likely to believe Moody's or S&P since they are more respected and have better brand recognition...

    Not to be glib, but I believe you meant:

    those that do trust the rating are less likely to believe Moody's or S&P since they were more respected and had better brand recognition...before their independence was compromised for structured product rating fees.

    Long Fimalac :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sivaram VMarch 12, 2008 at 9:38 AM

    heh :) Hey, as a Fitch shareholder you surely admit that even Fitch is kind of messed up. Their models are very flaky. How come they can't come up with a solid number?

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownMarch 12, 2008 at 1:17 PM

    Agreed, Fitch is far from a wartless frog. But flaky model's are an industry wide issue - unless I'm mistaken, I don't S&P or Moody's even had negative YoY HPA as a possible scenario as recently as a year ago.

    Also, the business is one of reputation. Because S&P and Moody's were the big dogs, they will (rightfully) being taking the most heat.

    ReplyDelete
  4. UnknownMarch 12, 2008 at 1:17 PM

    ...flaky models...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Thoughts on the stock market - March 2020

Image
Right now, DJIA has a P/E of 16.8 and forwand P/E of 15.1, whereas S&P 500 is at 20.1 with forward P/E of 15.8. Source: WSJ market Data If you ignore interest rates and inflation expectations--both of these influence valuations but depends on your macro call-- the market is not cheap. Long-term P/E is around 15. Trailing P/E is around 20% (Dow) to 40% (S&P500) higher than average. Forward P/E is in line with long term average but that assumes a strong V recovery. Consensus forecast is for profits to drop 1.2% in 2020. In 2008, it dropped 25.4% so current forecast is a very mild recession. Covid-19 coronavirus is not going to last more than a few months but these forecasts are still too rosy in my opinion. So I wouldn't rely on forward P/E. The richly valued (mostly tech or high quality) have not fallen much but the distressed ones have. So if you want to outperform in the long run, I think one’s choice right now is to: • Wait for market to fall another, say
✖ READ MORE >>>

Warren Buffett's Evolution and his Three Investment Styles

Image
A Young Warren Buffett In a comment to one of my posts , Mark Carter, who incidentally appears to have a  good blog worth checking out , asked: "Buffett Prime is 1970's to early 1990's" Could you elaborate? I have vaguely indicated how I view Warren Buffett in the past, but I thought I would detail my view of his investing behaviour. This is more of an opinion piece and many others would disagree with me (if you do, I'm curious to hear your thoughts). I don't follow Warren Buffett as closely as many value investors so I may get some facts wrong. My view is that Warren Buffett went through three different phases, with each consisting of different investment techniques. The overall investment theory remained the same—what people call value investing—but his execution, tactics, and strategy differs across the three phases. Some people may break up his career into additional periods but my feeling is that the three I will describe essentially capt
✖ READ MORE >>>

Charlie Munger: Stock market as a pari-mutuel betting system

The model I like to sort of simplify the notion of what goes o­n in a market for common stocks is the pari-mutuel system at the racetrack. If you stop to think about it, a pari-mutuel system is a market . Everybody goes there and bets and the odds change based o­n what's bet. That's what happens in the stock market. —Charlie Munger, "Art of Stock Picking" Although I don't share the same views on politics, I am probably closer to Charlie Munger than Warren Buffett when it comes to how we view the world. Warren Buffett is almost singly focused on business and investing, and is not very opinionated, indeed possibly not knowledgeable, in other areas. In contrast, I am closer to Charlie Munger in the sense that I have diverse interests—you can probably tell by the articles I link to or write about—and have an opinion on almost anything. There is one big difference though: I am not into the field of psychology quite like Munger. So it may be surprising to see me rarely
✖ READ MORE >>>