Fri
Jan 11 2008
11:46 am
By: R. Neal

BofA to pay $4.1B to buy Countrywide

Bank of America said Friday it will buy Countrywide Financial for $4.1 billion in stock, a deal that rescues the country's biggest mortgage lender and expands the financial services empire of the nation's largest consumer bank.

At least the government didn't bail them out. Yet. BofA just bought a huge boatload of debt, plus more than half a million delinquent loans, of which more than 100,000 are facing foreclosure.

P.S. Is the "too large to fail" doctrine still in effect? Bank of America has over $1.5 trillion (yes, that's "trillion" with a "t") in assets. And that was before the Countrywide acquisition (approx. $210 billion in assets). Could the FDIC or even the U.S. Government as a whole afford to bail them out?

(In banking lingo, "assets" are mostly loans, and "liabilities" are mostly your deposits. Although it seems like loans are increasingly becoming liabilities.)

Just wondering. Our bank (which is also quite large but nowhere near BofA) is a little wobbly right now. It's troubling.

Average Guy's picture

As one of the major

As one of the major principals of VISA (link...) , BOA knows the debt business.

If you are a Visa card holder and have a Countrywide mortgage, hold on to your wallet. Or at least fix your rates.

Could the FDIC or even the U.S. Government as a whole afford to bail them out?

Don't you mean China?

Anonymous's picture

Countrywide is losing money

Countrywide is losing money now, but it originated $408 billion in new mortgages last year. And despite all the bellyaching about the subprime mortgage crisis, try to think about it from a fatcat banker's perspective. Bank of America just can't wait to get its hands on the 93% of Countrywide's mortgage portfolio that is still being paid on time.

R. Neal's picture

That's true. If the credit

That's true. If the credit crunch turns around they are instantly a huge player in the mortgage business and got in at fire sale prices. An interesting gamble, and maybe a good one for the long term. I guess it also helps to have the resources to weather whatever storms still lie ahead. There probably aren't many others able or willing to take the risk.

Average Guy's picture

Monetary Standards?

If the economic world is now flat (or if that's the goal), should we not have a monetary standard? What would the re-introduction of the gold standard do to the U.S. and/or global economy?

Average Guy's picture

Printing more can't always be the answer

The example you gave is what I see the oil industry is bilking now. It used to be the case oil needed OPEC and speculators because of all the different factions. Now, Exxon/BP/Shell/others own the equipment and process at the site, pump and transport in between.

So now when speculators say China, India or Mid-East issues spike the cost, big oil ups the price, shrugs their shoulders and say there is nothing they can do - even though their process doesn't change.

Do you think central banks are the answer or do you see another? It seems to me, a central bank with a closed board room would at least be a bit easier to manipulate than a tangible commodity on the open market.

Average Guy's picture

Gold is a fictitious

Gold is a fictitious commodity in the first place especially when it is called "money."

I feel the same about most commodities. Their only as valuable as they are needed. Obviously, beyond floating flakes of it in vodka, it's not all that useful.

But, that brings me back to asking; is there anything else/better than a central bank?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives