SIX more banks closed, pushing past "100"

Weiss

Of course that's not individual banks. That's mostly multi-branch banking organizations:

The largest failure came in Georgia, where regulators have closed 10 banks this year. The Georgia Department of Banking and Finance seized CrescentBank & Trust Co., based in Jasper, which had $1.01 billion in assets, $965.7 million in deposits and 11 branches.

The failure of banks located in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kansas, Nevada and Minnesota illustrates the havoc that continues to sweep the banking industry even as many financial institutions this week reported second-quarter earnings that topped year-earlier levels. So far this year, 102 banks have failed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704249004575385751566330266.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

zrlevin

Interesting. What to you see the impact of this being?

1970SilverArt

The number of bank failures will just get worse as the year goes by IMO. It will probably get to a point where you will see 10+ banks closed each Friday. It would not surprise me if this turned out to be the case.

johnny9434

im waiting for the housing market to go bad from the foreclosures. this isint gonna be pretty

OPA

<< <i>The number of bank failures will just get worse as the year goes by IMO. It will probably get to a point where you will see 10+ banks closed each Friday. It would not surprise me if this turned out to be the case. >>



I'll stick with the projected figures mentioned by the FDIC earlier in the year.....150.... they know what banks need to be closed long before that action is taken.

pmcollectour

<< <i>im waiting for the housing market to go bad from the foreclosures. this isint gonna be pretty >>



The toxic assets in the mortgage market are astronomical. I believe most of the asks are in the 80 range,
while most of the bids are in the 50 range. The bids are 30 points below the ask, but the banks can't afford to
bring down the ask because they are already in deep trouble.

OPA

<< <i>but the banks can't afford to bring down the ask because they are already in deep trouble. >>


That's what's called a Catch 21, they can't afford to keep that junk on the books either.

zrlevin

<< <i>

<< <i>but the banks can't afford to bring down the ask because they are already in deep trouble. >>


That's what's called a Catch 21, they can't afford to keep that junk on the books either. >>



I believe it's called a Catch-22.....

roadrunner

The game is to slowly and methodically bring these failed banks to the table. That means no more than 4-8 per week. The last thing they want to do is to scare the depositors. You will notice that 2 yrs into this the % of overvalued bank assets has risen from not much more than 0-20% to numbers averaging 30-80%. In another 2 years those numbers will probably be at 100-150%. They just can't afford to shutter banks in an exponential manner, even if they technically should. Slow and steady wins the race for the FDIC. It's no different than allowing all the banks to follow marked to model accounting on their derivatives and loans. Appearances are more important than substance.

roadrunner

OPA

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>but the banks can't afford to bring down the ask because they are already in deep trouble. >>


That's what's called a Catch 21, they can't afford to keep that junk on the books either. >>



I believe it's called a Catch-22..... >>



Yup..you're correct...that's what happens when you let your fingers do the walkin

CaptHenway

<< <i>

<< <i>but the banks can't afford to bring down the ask because they are already in deep trouble. >>


That's what's called a Catch 21, they can't afford to keep that junk on the books either. >>



I am reminded of the Victor Borge routine where he talked about his uncle who invented a soft drink called "One-Up," but that didn't work, so he invented "Two-Up," but that didn't fly either, so he invented "Three-Up," and so on until he gave up after "Six-Up." If only he had given it one more try!!!