WHEN DISTRESSED CONDTIONS ARE ALLOWED TO OCCUR AMENDED

This follow-up to this previous post WHEN DISTRESSED CONDITIONS ARE ALLOWED TO OCCUR is carried out to point out that the investment by MidAmerican in 2008 in the location via, which this FEER subscription was ordered via check #2688 in 2004 does not change just because of their “grandiose” gesture based on a certain Mogul’s “principle” that , a) brandishing investment in conjunction with b) closing the USSBIA financial accounts through, which the check was written (for non existent reasons) alters historical events, in the pursuit of purchased “legitimacy”. See the below email communications.

 

WHEN DISTRESSED CONDTIONS ARE ALLOWED TO OCCUR

This is follow-up to the posts COINCIDENCES AND OTHER THINGS - UPDATED (10/30/2012) as well as HOW TO ESTABLISH AN INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BLAME NO-ONE to document that while the current financial crisis (of at least a century) was a crisis for many, not all suffered as a result and this post is an effort to help put this series of events in proper perspective for a better understanding. According to that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from August 26, 2011 a certain well-known Mogul went on a spending spree during this fiasco for many and profited greatly. Those deals between 2008 and 2009 totaled more than $21 billion in such corporate Titans as, Wall Street’s Goldman, General Electric, Swiss Reinsurance Co, Dow Chemical Co and Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co in the form of preferred equity, bonds and other preferred instruments with some of the highlights as follows:

In 2008:
GOLDMAN & SACHS GROUP INC. - $5 billion for, which Goldman paid $5.5 billion to redeem in the spring of 2011 after having previously paid $1 billion in dividends to the Mogul (as of the time of this article the stock had dropped 12%).
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO - $3 billion in preferred stock to boost liquidity for, which GE was expected to repay the Mogul in terms similar to what he obtained from Goldman (however, as of the article’s writing the stock had dropped 37%).

BYD (Shenzhen, China based manufacturer of “Green” vehicles), - US$1.8 billion for a 10% stake in that company through its MidAmerican Energy unit), A deal at the time thought to be a wise investment with its rising share price, however by 2011 the price had fallen to around HK$16/share down from a high of approximately $19/share (as reported in the August 24, 2011 edition of that popular daily/weekend Business Publication).


In 2009:
SWISS REINSURANCE CO - $2.6 billion in the form of a loan to rebuild its capital and in return the Mogul received 12% annual return in securities and the loan has been repaid.

In 2011:
Even though the Judge in the case wasn’t impressed by the $33 million “sweetheart” settlement worked out with the SEC and BofA, as previously documented in comment # 1 from 12/23/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page, (the mere fact that it was publicly proposed was sufficient) for some Mogul who apparently offered to “invest” in their institution to the tune of the $5 billion he was reported to have offered to invest in this entity that began with a phone call from this Mogul office at approximately 11:00 am on August 24, 2011 and ended one day later the 25th at 8:30 am with the Board of Directors approving the infusion. What a vote of confidence from One (noted for his highly “thin” standards) in this Institution for having the courage to publicly propose their $33 million settlement deal with the SEC (to provide a con artist with “legitimacy” based on another’s records). Could it be that this was a quid pro quo deal worked out and would have taken place anyway, irrespective of whatever else occurred, because it provided support for this entity’s identity switching/stealing, perpetual wealth generating methodology?
In conclusion, since this crisis, which just happened to bring about “coincidental” distressed conditions for many, not all suffered therefore, no-one can be at fault when a few profited so handsomely at the expense of so many, because if one individual knew to bet against the subprime market as documented in the post “WHAT’S NEXT FOR AN INSTANT SOCIETY? ”, at least another [who is known as a type of “Sultan of Panama” and prides himself as being omnipotent (because for some unknown reason he appears to be knowledgeable of all the events in my life) and who profited handsomely (in his all-knowing wisdom) most likely, also knew]. I WONDER WHAT TYPE OF DISTRESSED CONDITIONS WILL “COINCDENTALLY” OCCUR AT SOME POINT IN TIME NEXT TO ENABLE THIS MOGUL TO PROFIT GREATLY OUT OF THE SUFFERING OF SO MANY? This is in a nutshell why a “WHO” answer was not possible in that financial crisis inquiry, in my opinion.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RULE THE DAY AMENDED

This is an update to the previous post UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES RULE THE DAY in the interest of accuracy after conducting additional research to ensure that a more completed picture was being viewed of the circumstances surrounding the example 2 used regarding the delivery giants with names that sounds like Phextes and Youpzs, and what was realized was that this entity’s (Phextes) Founder and CEO guards the position of the Company he founded in 1971 with much passion. Furthermore, there is an ongoing and long-standing rivalry between these two nemeses. Therefore, this Entity’s position has to be viewed in this light because of the intense competitive nature of their business. For example, when the Phextex CEO announced in July 2010 that his organization had purchased new transportation equipment, which in his opinion would be a “game changer” in the competition with his archrival Youpzs in the Asian delivery and pickup route. Youpzs immediately responded that they did not believe the new equipment would a game changer of any type and even if such was the case, they had the means necessary to adjust their own network to neutralize any competitive advantage even if any such were to occur. The Founder finished his announcement as reported in that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from July 14, 2010 by pointing out that “the secret of this business is you’ve got to have a defensive strategy, as well as an offensive strategy.” Therefore, in conclusion, it is being pointed out that the actions of both Phextes as well as Youpzs have to be viewed in the light of these highly competitive circumstances.  

WHAT'S NEXT FOR AN INSTANT SOCIETY?

There is a real dilemma, which describes polar opposite scenarios with no easy answers in sight facing our society. At one end of the scale there exists the hedge fund industry with assets reportedly managed by such funds totaling $1.92 trillion by the end of 2010, which was up by 20% from the previous year. To better place this in proper perspective, these assets increased a staggering one hundred and fifty ($150) billion in the fourth (4^th) quarter of 2010 alone. The dilemma that exists is the average of 8% to 9% unemployment figure that existed even during the referenced year and still exists while some boldly claim in front of millions that things are on the “right’ track and that “no-one else could have done better” given the existing conditions. In the face of the desperation conditions many have experienced as a result of the worst financial crisis in almost a century many believed this to be true.
The point being made here is this, why is it not possible for some individual to devise a method to make these two scenarios benefit each other? A method is possible to solve most dilemmas, however, the biggest drawback is the type of mindset that has overtaken society (like a controlling vine), which has deluded us to become seduced with INSTANT “everything”. As a result, its difficult to expect anyone to wait for years for returns on their investments instead of the average of 10.5% annual return on investment of these types of investment vehicles, not even taking into account the average gain of 15% annual return for the Standard & Poor’s (S & P) 500 index and the 19% return on the average stock mutual fund. In some individual cases an increase of 590% in a single year is possible, (as occurred by the individual who correctly bet that the subprime mortgage market was about to implode and personally made four (4) billion in the process in 2007 (as reported in that popular daily/weekend Business Publication from January 28, 2010 (A1/2).
It is because of the “meism” of our society exemplified best by the dearth of “reality” television programs with the promise of INSTANT stardom for “one” successful contestant, etc. explains best why these two (2) can’t be successfully devised to be beneficial for each other because Fund Manager wouldn’t be able to realize their billion-dollar/year average returns and would lose their reputations as being elite Managers. After all, why should anyone have to wait to achieve “success” in the age of: instant food, instant beverages, instant accomplishments, instant identities, instant qualifications, instant access, instant mail, instant communications, instant credit, instant elections, instant crops, instant stardom, instant military records, instant cures and even instant families may now also be available.
Clearly, the investment resources are available to address one part of the dilemma, however, the real question that exists is, is the will available to make these two (2) scenarios work for each other? Our society may be too far down the INSTANT road to be able to successfully tackle this scenario without some unplanned event of such a magnitude bringing about conditions to “force” society to rethink its values in the conundrum we are facing. However, there is always a chance for real CHANGE to turn the tide!

HOW TO ESTABLISH AN INVESTIGATION THAT WILL BLAME NO-ONE!

According to HWJ Jr., a writer from that Daily/Weekend Business Street Publication, if you are investigating the underlying issues involved in causing the greatest financial breakdown in nearly a century (as occurred in 2008), start by asking an irrelevant question. In his opinion, the WHO was not addressed only the WHAT. My late Mother in her wisdom would point out “if you start wrong, you are not going to end up right”. HWJ Jr. in the January 29/30, 2011 edition (A17) concluded that the investigation was an exercise in political correctness because the relevant WHO question (or the elephant in the room for lack of a better symbol) was not addressed. What was missing in my opinion was clarity of focus, such as was exercised by those who established the “ground rules” for determining at whose doorstep ALL the (complex security issues involved in the changing role of an Embassy in a “war” zone) responsibility for the blame in the recent Syrian Embassy issue, lay. For example, if an embassy is called upon to provide assistance to another Department or Agency (especially one more proficient in security measures), who bears overall responsible for adequate security, especially if such practices are carried out in a “war” zone? That Report from all media reports left no doubt about the central responsible party and it can only be concluded that all these secondary factors were examined in arriving at the conclusion drawn. It only goes to show in all fairness, that the “will” to find out the WHO is possible, on occasion does take place. All that’s needed is to find out is, what are the type of contributing “factors” required in order to establish clearly focused ground rules that “target” the relevant criteria, such that the focus will be consistently clear instead of being diffused on occasion, (in the opinion of some).
Perhaps by this action, it was demonstrated that the Writer in the December 31, 2009 edition of the same Popular Publication (A13) was not correct in concluding that under the current Administration, “we have pulled back from the foreign world. We’re smaller for accepting that false choice between burdens at home and burdens abroad, and the world beyond our shores is more hazardous and cynical for our retrenchment and our self-flagellation.” However, it may take more than a single decisive action such as this to prove this writer wrong, (when the state of the world is taken into consideration). Maybe, it was the loss of “life” that marshaled all the competing interests, but what about all the secondary indirect lives impacted by the financial disaster either directly or indirectly. Who can say with any certainty that loss of “life” did not occur as a result of the financial disaster and that those as well as the surviving do not deserve a WHO answer as well! This demonstrates fair(ness) to those impacted in the financial crisis scenario and does not represent a delve into political policy on my part!
NOTE: This Writer is taking steps to ensure that the repeated use of “we” is not inclusive just because of my use of this quotation in this subject. This position is necessary especially since “Society’s” types standards for demonstrating “legitimacy” are very “thin”.

USING THE ALTERNATE VIEW TO “SEE” THE REAL OBJECTIVE OF MERGER COUNTER OFFERS

When a company makes an offer forcing another in the midst of merging with a third entity to reassess their proposed deal, what typically are the real underlying reasons for such offers? Sometimes what is not stated openly may be more than meets the eye. Consider the following two (2) examples:

• When the Reinsurer’s division of a certain Mogul made a $52/share offer for Transatlantic Holdings inc. to the tune of $3.25 billion, this led Transatlantic to state that this offer was likely to lead to a “superior proposal” to its merger agreement with the third Company as reported in a popular Daily/Weekend Business publication from August 5, 2011 (C3). Since Transatlantic had already agreed to a merger with Allied World Assurance co. this offer led to a sell off of that Company’s stock thereby decreasing the value of its offer by 1.4% to $2.72 billion, and the value of a rival’s (Validus Holdings Ltd) third hostile bidder’s offer to $2.79 billion as that Company’s stock dropped by 4.7%. This course of action appears to be aimed at forcing Allied World to commit to a more expensive merger offer, weakening this Company in order to force them into a position needed to obtain the “superior (quid pro quo) proposal”. Could it be that some form of identity switching/ mangling activity was the real aim of weakening Allied World into accepting some “behind-the-scenes” type “credibility” activity for some Transatlantic “Society’s” type fraud with the $52/share offer?
• Similarly when MidAmerican Energy holdings caused WPL to increase it merger offer for the then IES Industries with its (“prearranged” - see the below photo of a composite) hostile bid, was this action by this entity (now part of this Mogul’s Conglomerate) aimed at placing WPL into a weakened position to force them into acceptance of an impostor/con artist needing an identity from an individual hired for the purpose of identity transfer via quid pro quo deal-making (see the post ADDENDUM TO AN EXAMPLE OF HIRING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ID TRANSFER - UPDATED)? As it turned out, this Window-Dresser CEO showed that he also was “Society’s” type material and could be brought in exchange for a “price.” He was later rewarded handsomely for his (quid pro quo) part in this “multi-layered” merger (see the posts EXPLANATION OF A DISASTER-PRONE WINDOW-DRESSING PERSON) and HOW TO IMPLEMENT IDENTITY THEFT AND LEGITIMIZE FRAUD - UPDATED.  

 



 

WHY WOULD THERE BE A LOOPHOLE ALLOWING HEDGE FUNDS IDENTITY MASKING AFTER THE MADOFF FIASCO (EDITED)?

This post is a follow-up to comment # 2 from 12/27/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page to attempt to answer the question raised to find a logical answer to why would such be permissible in this environment after the disastrous fiasco identified that went “unnoticed” for so long by so many. Well it would appear that those in the IDENTITY MASKING AND/OR SWITCHING business are “held” to different “standards” than most in effect they must be “Society’s” types. These types can: a) commit mail fraud, b) enter locked vehicles and “plant” evidence, c) close financial accounts of a targeted individual without reasons, d) obtained Social Security Administration “legitimacy” based on a “flawed” business card, e) completely take over the history of a targeted individual (including accomplishments and qualifications), f) steal a State Income Tax Refund check “to prove legitimacy”, g) illegally switch property records from one side of the road to the other to prove “authenticity” and h) after all these highly “ethical” practices claim to be the “originals” without consequences [see the post HOW TO STEAL WITHOUT VIOLATING COPYRIGHT MATERIAL CRITERIA (EDITED) ].
If you are able to carry out such activities as documented above and still present yourself as an ethical business operator of ANY type (even believing yourself to be a type of "Sultan of Panama"); then you can also ensure that financial overhaul guidelines also include a needed loophole for IDENTITY MASKING (AND/OR SWITCHING) in case the cloak of anonymity is needed at anytime to “hide” inexplicable funds of your "Society's" types and “gloat” that you are preferred five (5) to one (1) over another not in your “Society”. What is the moral here? If any individual is willing to operate in a “fictional world” with thin to zero standards and not be held accountable for illegal and/or highly unethical actions perpetrated, in the name of legitimacy and perpetual wealth-generation, then the “Society’s” type existence is the place for you. However, if you are the one (1) interested in CHANGE to be capable of ADAPTING TO SEE THE ALTERNATE VIEW, then THERE IS NOW ALSO A REAL CHOICE AVAILABLE. However, be warned “Society’s” types cannot take competition of any type, it’s their way or “WAR” (see the post NO BASIS FOR INVOLVEMENT IN PRIVATE MATTERS AS GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION).