Comments on: The Fed vs Bloomberg, ST OMO edition http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/05/31/the-fed-vs-bloomberg-st-omo-edition/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Dollared http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/05/31/the-fed-vs-bloomberg-st-omo-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-27297 Fri, 03 Jun 2011 17:04:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=8459#comment-27297 Thanks, Felix. It takes your level of expertise and connections (and your impressive Excel skills!) to fully flesh this out. Which means the Fed was hiding the ball. Now, Fed issues aside, where is the 8-K from GS that shows that it had to borrow $30B to stay solvent?

Wouldn’t investors want to know? There is where someone had a duty to disclose.

]]>
By: mikehira http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/05/31/the-fed-vs-bloomberg-st-omo-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-27221 Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:23:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=8459#comment-27221 This may be a problem of nomenclature. When the program first came out its was called “Single-Tranche OMO”, http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/03/2 8/guide-to-feds-alphabet-soup/. Later in Fed publications it was called “Single-tranche RP”. On SourceWatch, a Fed watchdog, it was called a “Single-Tranche Repurchase Agreements” , http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit le=Total_Wall_Street_Bailout_Cost .
I could not find it being called “ST OMO” before Bob Ivry’s article. So depending on how the question was asked, Barney Frank may not have recognized it name.
I wrote an email to Bob Ivry for clarification, http://www.insidejob.com/profiles/blogs/ is-st-omo-the-same-as , and I got confirmation that these were all names for the same thing.

]]>
By: hsvkitty http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/05/31/the-fed-vs-bloomberg-st-omo-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-27206 Wed, 01 Jun 2011 06:14:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=8459#comment-27206 Exactly right and well written, Felix.

]]>