AIG wants to do what ?
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
And AIG wants to do what?
AIG board to weigh joining $25 billion
shareholder lawsuit against US over
bailout ?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...b3c5da-59f3-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_story.html
AIG board to weigh joining $25 billion
shareholder lawsuit against US over
bailout ?
NEW YORK — AIG is considering Wednesday whether the company should join a lawsuit against the government that spent $182 billion to save it from collapse.
American International Group Inc. said its board of directors will weigh whether to take part in a shareholder lawsuit against the U.S. over the government’s $182 billion bailout of the New York-based insurer.
<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">If AIG decides to join the complaint, which seeks $25 billion in damages, it would pit the company against the government that in 2008 kept it from buckling under the weight huge losses on mortgage-backed securities and other toxic assets.</span>
AIG said that after Wednesday’s meeting, its directors should have a decision by the end of the month.
Starr International Co. Inc., the investment firm of former AIG CEO Maurice Greenberg, filed the lawsuit in November 2011 on behalf of the firm and AIG shareholders.
The [lawsuit], filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, says that the <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">government didn’t provide shareholders fair compensation when it took a nearly 80 percent stake in the insurer as part of the bailout</span>. In doing so, the government violated the Constitution, Starr claims.
AIG said that, by law, its board must consider three options: [1] take over the lawsuit and pursue the claims on its own; [2] attempt to prevent the claims from being pursued by Starr; or, [3] allow Starr to continue to pursue the complaint on AIG’s behalf.
The insurer noted that, if it decides not to let Starr pursue its claims on the company’s behalf, Starr would likely challenge the move. Under that scenario, if Starr won the case, AIG would not receive any damages or portion of a potential settlement.
The Court of Federal Claims denied a request by the U.S. to dismiss the lawsuit, which means the case will go forward regardless of AIG’s participation.
The government came to the rescue of AIG in September 2008, at the depths of the financial meltdown. The New York company did business with hundreds of firms around the world, and officials feared its collapse would wreck the financial system.
All told, AIG’s bailout was the largest of the Wall Street rescue packages.
Since the financial meltdown, AIG has undergone a restructuring that has cut its size nearly in half. Its aim is to focus the company on its core insurance operations.
In 2010, the company spun off Asian life insurer AIA Group in Hong Kong’s biggest ever initial public offering to raise $20 billion, which was used to pay bailout debt.
In November, AIG reported a third-quarter profit of nearly $2 billion thanks to strength in its insurance operations and investment returns. In the same period a year earlier it lost $4 billion.
The Treasury Department announced last month that it sold all of its remaining shares of AIG, ending up with $22.7 billion more than it funneled to the company during the height of the financial crisis.
Shares of AIG ended regular trading down 28 cents at $35.65. Over the last 12 months, however, the stock is up more than 50 percent.
American International Group Inc. said its board of directors will weigh whether to take part in a shareholder lawsuit against the U.S. over the government’s $182 billion bailout of the New York-based insurer.
<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">If AIG decides to join the complaint, which seeks $25 billion in damages, it would pit the company against the government that in 2008 kept it from buckling under the weight huge losses on mortgage-backed securities and other toxic assets.</span>
AIG said that after Wednesday’s meeting, its directors should have a decision by the end of the month.
Starr International Co. Inc., the investment firm of former AIG CEO Maurice Greenberg, filed the lawsuit in November 2011 on behalf of the firm and AIG shareholders.
The [lawsuit], filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, says that the <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">government didn’t provide shareholders fair compensation when it took a nearly 80 percent stake in the insurer as part of the bailout</span>. In doing so, the government violated the Constitution, Starr claims.
AIG said that, by law, its board must consider three options: [1] take over the lawsuit and pursue the claims on its own; [2] attempt to prevent the claims from being pursued by Starr; or, [3] allow Starr to continue to pursue the complaint on AIG’s behalf.
The insurer noted that, if it decides not to let Starr pursue its claims on the company’s behalf, Starr would likely challenge the move. Under that scenario, if Starr won the case, AIG would not receive any damages or portion of a potential settlement.
The Court of Federal Claims denied a request by the U.S. to dismiss the lawsuit, which means the case will go forward regardless of AIG’s participation.
The government came to the rescue of AIG in September 2008, at the depths of the financial meltdown. The New York company did business with hundreds of firms around the world, and officials feared its collapse would wreck the financial system.
All told, AIG’s bailout was the largest of the Wall Street rescue packages.
Since the financial meltdown, AIG has undergone a restructuring that has cut its size nearly in half. Its aim is to focus the company on its core insurance operations.
In 2010, the company spun off Asian life insurer AIA Group in Hong Kong’s biggest ever initial public offering to raise $20 billion, which was used to pay bailout debt.
In November, AIG reported a third-quarter profit of nearly $2 billion thanks to strength in its insurance operations and investment returns. In the same period a year earlier it lost $4 billion.
The Treasury Department announced last month that it sold all of its remaining shares of AIG, ending up with $22.7 billion more than it funneled to the company during the height of the financial crisis.
Shares of AIG ended regular trading down 28 cents at $35.65. Over the last 12 months, however, the stock is up more than 50 percent.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...b3c5da-59f3-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_story.html
Come on counselor, Maurice Greenberg, not AIG.
Yep; and what one should expect as well from an industry not adquately regulated.
Not apologizing for AIG or approving of the bailout, but you obviously don't know the history of Greenburg. Typical right wing media, low information comment. Greenburg was fired from AIG. If Faux Snooze says it, you repeat it. As i repeatedly say, facts mean nothing to the principled.
source: Wall Street Journal
AIG Won't Join Greenberg Lawsuit
So you feel the banking and insurance industries are not the most regulated industries in our economy? I don't think it's a lack if regulation, I think it's the issue of corrupt regulators preparing for their next jobs within the industry they are supposed to be regulating.
Edit: looking at your post, I understand it could mean lack of actual regulation or corrupt regulators. I think the reason is corrupt regulators.
I think you obviously don't know that AIG seriously considered joining a lawsuit started by Greenberg. That's vomit inducing.
Proof.
Are you high? What are you talking about proof? Every article quotes the Board of the company directly.
Adquately was an operative word and it goes both to whether the rules and regulations sufficiently and pointedly address dangerous, abusive and/or corrupt "conduct" -- and -- to whether those tasked with enforcement and oversight are both "honest" and, above all, "capable".
`