32 replies to this topic

[Rogerdodger]

Officially the PPT is called: Working Group on Financial Markets.
Put in place after the big 1987 crash.

The Working Group on Financial Markets (a.k.a. Plunge Protection Team) was created by Executive Order 12631, signed on March 18, 1988 by U.S. President Ronald Reagan. It is thus also called the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, or in limited contexts, the Working Group.

It was established explicitly in response to events in the financial markets surrounding October 19, 1987 to give recommendations for legislative and private sector solutions for "enhancing the integrity, efficiency, orderliness, and competitiveness of our Nation's financial markets and maintaining investor confidence".

According to Executive Order 12631, the Working Group shall be composed of:

• the Secretary of the Treasury, or his designee (as Chairman of the Working Group);
• the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or his designee;
• the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or his designee; and
• the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or her designee.

Notice all the "Or his designee".
Think about who that could be... Goldman Sachs? Pimco? Or __________(fill in the blank, Think BIG)

Trade what is, not the "ideal" market.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 07 July 2007 - 10:07 PM.

[U.F.O.]

Rog, maybe GS, MS, JPM. Not Pimco, for sure. It would have to be a FED Primary Dealer, of which Pimco is not. U.F.O.

[Rogerdodger]

I misspelled it: Pimpco: GLOBAL BONDS Maybe I'm too much influenced by Phil Grandee. He's always onto GS and Pimco.

[U.F.O.]

The FED has a cadre of Primary Dealers they use to effect all types of market moves.....repos, etc. They typically only use those that are members of the Primary Group, which are security dealers that are approved to deal directly with the U.S. Treasury. To do otherwise would invite scrutiny, which would be unnecessary, at the least. They could control every worldwide market, if they desired, by using Goldman alone. U.F.O.

[Rogerdodger]

[img]http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:YY9avEz6OT5P5M:http://delivery.viewimages.com/xv/71081128.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19396908EAF14430D35D4D0F36A252BFE86BB513A9D2B544564.png[/img]
Goldman Sacs Chairman Henry Paulson
Oh yeah. Now he's the PPT head.
And looks happy there.
Better than prison.

As Treasury Secretary, Paulson may have to dump some stock (he is the single largest shareholder in Goldman Sachs according to its 2006 proxy statement, with 4.6 million shares) to decrease his overwhelming conflict of interest, but even if he sells his unrestricted stock, he'll still have several hundred million bucks in RSU (restricted stock unit) awards, which are not immediately sellable. This could place him in a position where maintaining his financial well-being could necessitate supporting policies positive to Goldman's short-term stock price.

He follows Rubin:

In more recent history, Goldman Sachs co-CEO Robert Rubin instigated massive banking deregulation in the five years he served as Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration. Rubin quit in 1999 for a multimillion-dollar position at Citigroup.

He gets $183,500 per year as Treasury Secretary.???
At GS, he made $6,000,000 per year!
Why would he take a $5,800,000 a year cut in pay? Hmmm...
No wonder he looks pissed.
He just figured it out! LOL!

But wait! Actually he took an $87,000,000 one year pay cut!

Dec. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein is eligible for an $87 million bonus this year after his firm shattered Wall Street's profit record.
Goldman's net income rose 70 percent to $9.54 billion in the fiscal year that ended Nov. 24, the most in the history of Wall Street. Shares of Goldman have gained 59 percent this year, the biggest advance in the 12-member Amex Securities Broker/Dealer Index.

Yeah,right.

[img]http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=GS&p=D&yr=2&mn=0&dy=0&i=p91641373288&r=1263.png[/img]
[img]http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=C&p=D&yr=2&mn=0&dy=0&i=p91641373288&r=2028.png[/img]

Edited by Rogerdodger, 08 July 2007 - 12:08 AM.

[arbman]

Primary dealers, if there is anyone who are supposed to borrow and put together a rescue deal with the Fed to make the market or prevent melt-downs, they are the primary dealers averaging over $500 billion in 2005 daily in Treasury volumes.

dealers list

Recent melt-down prevention --record all time borrowing last week;



The dealer paid substaintial borrowing fee for the 10 year Treasuries in this deal for whatever the risk was involved as far as I understand and I don't understand much. But the money was available and they were able to borrow it...

Edited by kisacik, 08 July 2007 - 12:02 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

Have you ever considered what you could do if you knew which way the market was going to move in advance and had unlimited money to play it?
You could prop it up when necessary then let it fall (March) after properly positioning yourself and win in both directions!
Soon the deficit will be a surplus!

Goldman's net income rose 70 percent to $9.54 billion in the fiscal year that ended Nov. 24, the most in the history of Wall Street.

[img]http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:S1JC4tD_5hs8VM:http://www.discoversanta.com/images/yakov.jpg[/img]
What a country!

Edited by Rogerdodger, 08 July 2007 - 12:27 AM.

[...]

or his designee

This is pure conspirazoid junk, in which the routine government wording "or his designee" becomes some sort of devious subterfuge. Which is ridiculous.

All "or his designee" does is allow the named official to send someone else from the agency to routine meetings, with the designee instructed to maintain the agency's position as propounded by the named official. A Deputy Secretary of the Treasury or another Governor (Fed) or Commissioner (SEC or CFTC.) It could even be a less-senior underling. In no case does it mean ANYONE from the private sector. Ever. Under any circumstances.

If someone wants to yammer about a PPT which may actually exist somewhere other than in their fevered imagination, they might want to look at China, a closed, non-transparent government in a non-transparent country.

Since China is now redeploying significant reserves into private equity world-wide, they have both the additional incentive and the ready means to intervene anywhere they wish. They are probably ill-advised to ever do so, as it will not meet with the approval of the U.S. and others. But, it makes for a much, much better conspiracy theory.

The idea that the U.S. government intervenes in any way other than those it has always used, that is, jaw-boning, suggestions and the proverbial winks and nods, is pure, unadultered rubbish.

[Rogerdodger]

The idea that the U.S. government intervenes in any way other than those it has always used, is rubbish.

Guess you didn't read the March 18,1988 Presidential Order:
Executive Order 12631

"To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of funds therefore, the Department of the Treasury shall provide the Working Group with such administrative and support services as may be necessary for the performance of its functions."

Jaw boning, winks and nods do not require Treasury Funds.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 08 July 2007 - 12:46 AM.

[...]

Guess you didn't read the March 18,1988 Presidential Order

I read every word of it. Years ago.

More importantly, what has been the result of it?

Trading and program collars and halts. Whooppee! Close enough for government work. What people fail to realize is why the EO was issued in the first place. The feds had to appear to be 'doing' something about volatile markets. So they did. Reagan issued the EO. They had a few meetings. They made new rules for big declines. They've made more since.

The feds are off the hook because they 'did' domething about the 'problem.' The real problem is that they also provided decades worth of fodder to the conspiraziods while trying to act like they were busy fixing something.

What this thread has deteriorated into is a good example of exactly that.

Jaw boning, winks and nods do not require Treasury Funds.

Yeah, but meetings to come up with something to convince the public that the feds are on top of things do. Which is what the funding provision is speaking to. Government can't have inter-agency meetings unless somebody is going to pay for them. Treasury was elected to foot the bill for coffee and donuts.