How does Citibank have a 'profit' in a quarter it gets a welfare check?

is the bailout on the ballance sheet, with a corresponding liability to the taxpayer?

i dont think it's anywhere but in their pockets

 

To answer your question...Yes, it is on their balance sheet with a corresponding liability to the taxpayer.

I understand you are mad and angry at the situation the United States is in. I suspect for most of America, a lot of their anger has to do with ignorance. Keep in mind I said ignorant, as in not knowing (banking, finance, politics and accounting) and not stupid, as in unable to comprehend.

Just be happy they are not going bankrupt and the US will make a good deal of money on this "deal". The state of New York needs them to turn profits as well so that they may collect taxes. This is a good thing.

 

Citigroup reports earnings April 17. Estimate: -$0.32


He's about to join the list : Famous Last Words

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/greg_gordon/story/63606.html

 

Yes. This is a complete fraud but the SEC is in on the game.

So why did Citigroup do it?

That’s easy….next week starts the Stock Black-out Period for most of the financial institutions before their 1st quarter earnings release. During the black-out period company employees are not allowed to trade (or dump) their own stock until after their earnings release. With the banking sector about to implode any day this will be the insiders last gasp at cashing out.

This Citgroup “release” is the biggest farce since Bear and Lehman said they didn’t need any new capital. It is also illegal to “pre announce” earnings in this manner and has set up Citigroup to be pummeled with lawsuits if the tide turns for them in March. Did you notice that the news said the earnings excluded one-time charges?

“Pandit declined to say how large credit losses and other one-time items have been that would at least partially offset profit.”

The latest housing decline has pummeled the value of Mortgage Backed Securities…are they not counting these? How many Credit Default Swaps did they have riding on GM? GM has already stated that they will run out of cash in March and it has already been agreed that a bankruptcy would be the likely outcome. For years GM has been the poster child for CDS bets with estimates running in the multi $TRILLIONS of bets placed on GM. Counterparty failures are already stressing the derivatives market but a GM failure will surely set off the Weapon Of Mass Financial Destruction blowing the big banks out of the water.

http://goldtent.net/wp_gold/2009/03...legal-to-pre-announce-earnings-in-this-manner

 

The statement of Citi is to be seen from a different pint of view :

it is a reassurance for customers and investors that Citi´s "core business" is profitable.

Simples.

Take into consideration uncle BEN´s statement and you have an "explosive" mix of good news !

 

You sound more like someone who is bitter because your C short isn't working out rather than a concerned citizen, but even if your civic concern is legit, you still sound like a misguided concerned citizen nonetheless. How you were able to conclude that a LOAN -- that is not only being paid back, but is also yielding approximately $3 billion a year in interest for the government and the taxpayer -- is welfare, is beyond me. But I'm sure Mr. Pandit would have preferred for it to truly have been welfare, so that they could have made even a bigger profit this year

I know one thing for certain, if I ever need to borrow money from someone, I'm want to borrow it from you. Hopefully you'll view it as welfare and I'll never have to pay it back.

 

They simply said they had strong revenues ex-writedowns

 

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/03/another-bear-market-rally-or-something.html

"So Citigroup has a profit, excluding what?

Who knows? Pandit did not say.

In other news, I am announcing I have $10 billion in my bank account except for the portion of the $10 billion I do not have."

 

Did any of you Citigroup bashers even bother reading the article before you started typing?

They operated at a profit for the first 2 months of the year -- thats it? Whats the big deal about that? Is it really that hard to believe that when a major money center bank was able to subtract all of their monthly operating costs (expenses) from all the money they brought in for the month (revenues) and also subtracted the amount of the monthly loan payment to the government (also an expense), that the number was actually positive?

I would certainly hope that somebody made sure that the possibility was there for them to operate at a profit before lending them a ton of money.... otherwise, how would they ever pay it back?