Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

folks, most of AIG is healthy....it holds $19 trillion of life insurance policies in the US

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:37 PM
Original message
folks, most of AIG is healthy....it holds $19 trillion of life insurance policies in the US
Edited on Fri Mar-20-09 01:48 PM by amborin
don't have time to find cites now

but research it yourself

it's only the London office that screwed up with credit default swaps and CDOs......

most of AIG is okay and healthy......

plus----it simply cannot be allowed to fail.....


it is the issuer of a HUGE % of all the life insurance policies held in the US

there is NO OTHER guarantor that can take over, and neither can the US gov't


here:

"....The reason the federal government just rescued American International Group for the fourth time in six months with taxpayer money has a lot to do with a terrifying potential consequence of letting A.I.G. fail: the possibility of a run on on the insurance industry.

It’s a little-discussed but highly unnerving aspect of the crisis at A.I.G., Andrew Ross Sorkin writes in his latest DealBook column.

In the United States, A.I.G. has more than 375 million policies with a face value of $19 trillion. And if policyholders lost faith in A.I.G. and rushed to cash in their policies all at once, the entire insurance industry could falter, he says....

the dangers lurking below A.I.G.’s seemingly stable, highly regulated life insurance business. In the United States, A.I.G. has more than 375 million policies with a face value of $19 trillion.

<snip>

"If policyholders lost faith in A.I.G. and rushed to cash in their policies all at once, the entire insurance industry could falter.

“A ‘run on the bank’ in the life and retirement business would have sweeping impacts across the economy in the U.S.,” according to the A.I.G. document. “In countries around the world with higher savings rates than in the U.S., the failure of insurance companies would be a catastrophe....”


<http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/the-case-for-saving-aig-by-aig/?scp=24&sq=aig%20life%20insurance&st=cse>



here's part:

"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. "only the London office"
I highly doubt that and I further doubt that "the London office" went off and did something as wild as these default swaps on their own.

Otherwise, I agree, I don't think people realize how many insurance companies are owned by AIG. And that they sold annuities too, and that they're invested in a lot of other companies which means a bankrupt AIG would drive the stock down on solid businesses.

Which is why they never should have been allowed to any of this in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I believe that a seperate hedge company was set up by AIG that
was run independent of AIG's regular business. Hardly anyone in AIG would have been involved with this except the Board of Directers and the CEO, CFO etc.

Your other points about AIG are correct and I think it was a pretty sound company outside of the above mentioned hedge fund.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. That is what I heard as well. And it is the hedge fund guys who are in line
for those outrageous "bonuses".

It's main business was insurance...on the level of Lloyd's of London.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Congress, nedia need to tone down rhetoric and inform.
Obama tried on Leno and town Hall by saying AAA business until CDSs. If he mentioned this liability, would people start running to cash in policies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. No, because they have the money to pay insurance claims.
It's the CDOs and CDS they DON'T have the money to pay out, which dropped their rating from AAA to AA and then, A, which is the point where they came to the Gov't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. So not just the "London office"?
That was what I was wondering. It didn't make sense to me that one office could go off doing something that has the potential of bringing the whole company down. Yes, I think the Boards of Directors and CEOs, CFOs, of all these companies need to ALL be sent to housing projects across the country. If they're so smart and worth all their millions, solve some real problems for some real people as penance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. my general impression is that the people who were responsible for the problem
are long gone and the people catching the flack are the people who came back to try and sort it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. There were articles posted this week
saying their insurance division is not healthy. The various insurance companies under the AIG banner guaranteed eachothers reinsurance and are not able to pay up if necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Good information to have. Thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Experts say half of AIG is healthy and half isn't
Edited on Fri Mar-20-09 01:48 PM by truedelphi
And no one seems to know how deep the exposure exists as to the half of AIG that "insured"
the hedge funds. Whom do we even ask for the bottom line figures? Liddy? I am now of the opinion that those heading Companies such as AIG are nothing more than criminals in three piece suits. Expensive three piece suits at that, but a whitened seplechure is still a stinky bunch of dead meat.

Look, there were people who all along the way tried to tell management that these toxic assets were just that. That the party would not go on forever, and that when it came crashing down, the economy would go down the toilet with it.

Those people were usually fired or told to go back to their cubicle and shut up.

We need to someonw obtain a full accounting beofre we continue bailing out AIG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. Pretty sweeping statement: "there is NO OTHER guarantor that can take over neither can the US govt"
Proof?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wildewolfe Donating Member (470 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. There was some post yesterday
that said that the rest of AIG isn't nearly as healthy as it seems. When looking at the annual report in detail it shows one division of AIG insuring another division and a lot of book cooking going on. I suspect when all is said and done there have been trillions taken out of AIG and all of this will make Enron look like a liquor store stickup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parker CA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I read that too. I think we're far from out of the woods with AIG and its potential financial traps
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. Off by a factor of ten ...
it's $1.9 trillion.

BTW The POLICY HOLDERS, not AIG, HOLDS them.

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1886275,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. yep, you're right, it's $ 1.9 trillion...took a week to get a correction appended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peacetrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
11. Well now that we the tax payer own 80% of AIG.. glad to hear it's basically healthy
Edited on Fri Mar-20-09 02:30 PM by Peacetrain
Maybe we will get our money back!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. do we actually *own* 80%?
i confess i haven't kept up with the terms of the bailout

i think we don't have the swedish version, where taxpayers actually do *own* shares, in return for their bailout money

in the swedish version, taxpayers got shares, in exchange for their money, and when the banks returned to health and profit, the taxpayers not only got their original money back, but interest to boot

do we have that version?

i don't think so

think Krugman is right: the U.S. version is:

"privatization of profits with socialization of risk"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. Yes, we do actually own 80%.
Krugman is complaining about the banks, not AIG. We actually own 79.9% of AIG and will get our money back and then some if there is an upside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyLoochka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
14. And the real part - insurance
Is in the process of being totally segregated from the toxic AIG-FP.

It will be a separate company - AIU Holdings. It is financially healthy, as of this point in time.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
18. what the London office did:
Edited on Fri Mar-20-09 06:01 PM by amborin
".....In the case of A.I.G., the virus exploded from a freewheeling little 377-person unit in London, and flourished in a climate of opulent pay, lax oversight and blind faith in financial risk models. It nearly decimated one of the world’s most admired companies, a seemingly sturdy insurer with a trillion-dollar balance sheet, 116,000 employees and operations in 130 countries.

“It is beyond shocking that this small operation could blow up the holding company,” said Robert Arvanitis, chief executive of Risk Finance Advisors in Westport, Conn. “They found a quick way to make a fast buck on derivatives based on A.I.G.’s solid credit rating and strong balance sheet. But it all got out of control.”

The London Office

The insurance giant’s London unit was known as A.I.G. Financial Products, or A.I.G.F.P. It was run with almost complete autonomy, and with an iron hand, by Joseph J. Cassano, according to current and former A.I.G. employees.

A onetime executive with Drexel Burnham Lambert — the investment bank made famous in the 1980s by the junk bond king Michael R. Milken, who later pleaded guilty to six felony charges — Mr. Cassano helped start the London unit in 1987.

The unit became profitable enough that analysts considered Mr. Cassano a dark horse candidate to succeed Maurice R. Greenberg, the longtime chief executive who shaped A.I.G. in his own image until he was ousted amid an accounting scandal three years ago.

But last February, Mr. Cassano resigned after the London unit began bleeding money and auditors raised questions about how the unit valued its holdings. By Sept. 15, the unit’s troubles forced a major downgrade in A.I.G.’s debt rating, requiring the company to post roughly $15 billion in additional collateral — which then prompted the federal rescue.

Mr. Cassano, 53, lives in a handsome, three-story town house in the Knightsbridge neighborhood of London, just around the corner from Harrods department store on a quiet square with a private garden.

He did not respond to interview requests left at his home and with his lawyer. An A.I.G. spokesman also declined to comment.....

At A.I.G., Mr. Cassano found himself ensconced in a behemoth that had a long and storied history of deftly juggling risks. It insured people and properties against natural disasters and death, offered sophisticated asset management services and did so reliably and with bravado on many continents. Even now, its insurance subsidiaries are financially strong.....

When Mr. Cassano first waded into the derivatives market, his biggest business was selling so-called plain vanilla products like interest rate swaps. Such swaps allow participants to bet on the direction of interest rates and, in theory, insulate themselves from unforeseen financial events.

Ten years ago, a “watershed” moment changed the profile of the derivatives that Mr. Cassano traded, according to a transcript of comments he made at an industry event last year. Derivatives specialists from J. P. Morgan, a leading bank that had many dealings with Mr. Cassano’s unit, came calling with a novel idea.

Morgan proposed the following: A.I.G. should try writing insurance on packages of debt known as “collateralized debt obligations.” C.D.O.’s. were pools of loans sliced into tranches and sold to investors based on the credit quality of the underlying securities.

The proposal meant that the London unit was essentially agreeing to provide insurance to financial institutions holding C.D.O.’s and other debts in case they defaulted — in much the same way some homeowners are required to buy mortgage insurance to protect lenders in case the borrowers cannot pay back their loans. ....Under the terms of the insurance derivatives that the London unit underwrote, customers paid a premium to insure their debt for a period of time, usually four or five years, according to the company. Many European banks, for instance, paid A.I.G. to insure bonds that they held in their portfolios.

Because the underlying debt securities — mostly corporate issues and a smattering of mortgage securities — carried blue-chip ratings, A.I.G. Financial Products was happy to book income in exchange for providing insurance. After all, Mr. Cassano and his colleagues apparently assumed, they would never have to pay any claims. Since A.I.G. itself was a highly rated company, it did not have to post collateral on the insurance it wrote, analysts said. That made the contracts all the more profitable. These insurance products were known as “credit default swaps,” or C.D.S.’s in Wall Street argot, and the London unit used them to turn itself into a cash register.

The unit’s revenue rose to $3.26 billion in 2005 from $737 million in 1999. Operating income at the unit also grew, rising to 17.5 percent of A.I.G.’s overall operating income in 2005, compared with 4.2 percent in 1999. Profit margins on the business were enormous. In 2002, operating income was 44 percent of revenue; in 2005, it reached 83 percent. Mr. Cassano and his colleagues minted tidy fortunes during these high-cotton years. Since 2001, compensation at the small unit ranged from $423 million to $616 million each year, according to corporate filings. That meant that on average each person in the unit made more than $1 million a year.

In fact, compensation expenses took a large percentage of the unit’s revenue. In lean years it was 33 percent; in fatter ones 46 percent. Over all, A.I.G. Financial Products paid its employees $3.56 billion during the last seven years.

The London unit’s reach was also vast. While clients and counterparties remain closely guarded secrets in the derivatives trade, Mr. Cassano talked publicly about how proud he was of his customer list. At the 2007 conference he noted that his company worked with a “global swath” of top-notch entities that included “banks and investment banks, pension funds, endowments, foundations, insurance companies, hedge funds, money managers, high-net-worth individuals, municipalities and sovereigns and supranationals.”

Of course, as this intricate skein expanded over the years, it meant that the participants were linked to one another by contracts that existed for the most part inside the financial world’s version of a black box. Goldman Sachs was a member of A.I.G.’s derivatives club, according to people familiar with the operation. It was a customer of A.I.G.’s credit insurance and also acted as an intermediary for trades between A.I.G. and its other clients......"

<snip>

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/business/28melt.html?pagewanted=2&sq=A.I.G.%20and%20london%20office%20and%20credit%20default%20swap&st=cse&scp=5>



basically----many trails lead to Goldman Sachs.....which got reimbursed with big $$$$$$ from the AIG bailouts.......


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. London Office employees got $3.56 billion salary in last 7 yrs:
"....In fact, compensation expenses took a large percentage of the unit’s revenue. In lean years it was 33 percent; in fatter ones 46 percent. Over all, A.I.G. Financial Products paid its employees $3.56 billion during the last seven years......"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-20-09 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
19. Yes it can be allowed to fail. It SHOULD be allowed to fail.
It should be broken up into smaller MORE MANAGEABLE companies.

If it is, as you say, mostly healthy, then buyers and/or investors
will be there when the govt. sells it off.

The same should be done with ALL the to big to fail corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC