Clubfoothead Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Do any of you really have any idea what sort of bank Northern Trust actually is? They are one of the largest investment management firms / custodial banks / transaction processing banks in the country ... their lending is (generally) only ancillary to their investment advisory business. Quoting from their website: ........................... Northern Trust is a global leader in delivering innovative investment management, asset and fund administration, fiduciary and banking solutions to corporations, institutions and affluent individuals. For nearly 120 years, we have evolved with the changing needs of our clients and our world. As of December 31, 2008, Northern Trust Corporation had: $82 billion in banking assets $3.0 trillion in assets under custody $575.5 billion in assets under management ........................... Why do you think those bullet points are the ones they focus on? Because those are the most important points of their business. Northern Trust is nothing like Citibank (et.al.). Without knowing exactly who was in LA, the vast majority of them were probably investment management clients. Related to this is this, which is on Yahoo finance ... shows their three main competitors as FMR Corp (the parent company for Fidelity, the big money management firm), Bank New York Mellon and State Street. What do those firms have in common? Custody of assets and asset management. Not making loans. Feel free to figure out what you're pontificating on and/or getting all bent out of shape about before actually pontificating or getting bent out of shape. Explain why they took the money then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Explain why they took the money then. Because they weren't given a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 (edited) Because they weren't given a choice. Bull$hit. This company is took $1,600,000,000.00 from the federal government that you claim it does not need. I guess when I categorized them as just another bull$hit bank was right. I got bent out of shape for exactly the right reason - if they are throwing parties they don't need the money. Feel free to continue to pontificate to the rest of us when you have not idea what anybody is talking about. Edited February 25, 2009 by Clubfoothead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Bull$hit. This company is took $1,600,000,000.00 from the federal government that you claim it does not need. I guess when I categorized them as just another bull$hit bank was right. I got bent out of shape for exactly the right reason - if they are throwing parties they don't need the money. Feel free to continue to pontificate to the rest of us when you have not idea what anybody is talking about. He already explained it. Your government forced them to take it. They forced some of the banks that are in good shape to take money so nobody would know which are the good and which are the bad, so that there wouldn't be a run on the bad banks which would make things worse. Basically they were forced to take it to stop a bank run on banks that did not have sufficient assets to cover possible withdraws. Your government doesn't want you to know that your bank is in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 He already explained it. Your government forced them to take it. They forced some of the banks that are in good shape to take money so nobody would know which are the good and which are the bad, so that there wouldn't be a run on the bad banks which would make things worse. Basically they were forced to take it to stop a bank run on banks that did not have sufficient assets to cover possible withdraws. Your government doesn't want you to know that your bank is in trouble. Bull$hit. Entities have to apply to participate in the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 He already explained it. Your government forced them to take it. They forced some of the banks that are in good shape to take money so nobody would know which are the good and which are the bad, so that there wouldn't be a run on the bad banks which would make things worse. Basically they were forced to take it to stop a bank run on banks that did not have sufficient assets to cover possible withdraws. Your government doesn't want you to know that your bank is in trouble. According to morning news, yes, they were forced to take it. However, an amendment was quickly passed way back then, enabling those banks that didn't want/need the money to return it. And guess who did NOT return it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.