Tag Archives: UBS

Court Ruling Could Delay Fiat's Buyout of Chrysler

By Reuters

fiat chrysler buyout assembly line court ruling autoworkers health care trust

Filed under: , , , ,

AP

MILAN — A ruling by a U.S. judge risks delaying Fiat’s plan to buy up all of Chrysler unless it can reach an out-of-court settlement with a healthcare trust that is a minority shareholder in the U.S. group.

The Italian carmaker said Wednesday it “looked forward” to solving a dispute with an autoworkers’ health-care trust in court after winning a partial victory Tuesday in its path to buy the 41.5 percent of Chrysler it doesn’t already own.

Delaware Chancery Court Judge Donald Parsons on Tuesday accepted the carmaker’s legal positions in two pivotal disputes in its legal battle with VEBA, the United Autoworkers-affiliated health-care trust that owns 41.5 percent of Chrysler.

However, the judge stopped short of ordering VEBA to sell 54,154 Chrysler shares to Fiat for $139.7 million, as the latter had sought, saying certain questions still needed to be answered through testimony at a trial.

Sponsored Linksadsonar_placementId=1505951;adsonar_pid=1990767;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=242;adsonar_zh=252;adsonar_jv=’ads.tw.adsonar.com’;

“Fiat looks forward to resolving the few remaining issues in the litigation, through the discovery requested by the judge, and remains confident that those residual issues will also be resolved in its favor,” Fiat said in a statement Wednesday.

A trial is likely to take between a year and 18 months, said a person familiar with the matter. However, another person said the lengthy process makes it more likely that Fiat and VEBA will reach an out of court settlement on the dispute.

“We view the ruling as positive for Fiat and likely to help an out-of-court agreement,” said UBS analyst Philippo Houchois in a research note. “We still view end 2013 as a likely deadline for an agreement as VEBA.”

Fiat’s lawyers will now be forced to argue in court with representatives of the health-care trust about why Fiat should pay less than the trust is asking in a deal the latter needs to pay future benefits for retired Chrysler workers.

The UAW became Chrysler’s second-largest shareholder when Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy in 2009 and the union swapped future health-care payments owed to it for a stake in the company. VEBA is a trust that manages those health-care benefits on behalf of the union.

Fiat already runs the two automakers as a single company, but wants to buy the rest of Chrysler to squeeze out more synergies, cut borrowing costs and access some of Chrysler’s cash flow.

Fiat shares were volatile in early trade, falling 0.8 percent to €5.98 at 0850 GMT (4:50 a.m. Eastern time).

“The ruling is a step forward and is good news,” said a Milan trader. “But it’s not decisive and the market is not discounting it as a done deal yet.”


Permalink | <a target=_blank href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/forward/20682070/" title="Send this entry to a friend via …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

72% of Millionaires Don't Think They're Rich

By Arden Dier

Having millions of dollars to invest doesn’t make you rich, at least according to those who have those millions. A study by investment firm UBS has found just 28% of people with between $1 million and $5 million in investable assets consider themselves wealthy, ABC News reports. While your first… …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Newser – Home

Britain charges two brokers over Libor rate scandal

Britain’s Serious Fraud Office said Monday that two former brokers have been charged with conspiring to manipulate the Libor interbank lending rate.

“Terry Farr and James Gilmour, former brokers at RP Martin Holdings Limited, have today been charged with offences of conspiracy to defraud in connection with the investigation by the Serious Fraud Office into the manipulation of Libor,” the SFO said in a statement.

The men will appear in court at a later date, it said, adding that its probe into Libor manipulation would continue.

Gilmour, 48, was charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud. Farr, 41, was charged with two counts of the same offence.

The development comes after the SFO filed similar charges against former UBS and Citigroup trader Tom Hayes last month.

All three men were arrested in Britain last December as part of the investigation.

Libor is calculated daily, using estimates from banks of their own interbank rates. However, the system has been found to be open to abuse, with some traders lying about borrowing costs to boost trading positions or make their bank seem more secure.

The Libor scandal erupted last year when British bank Barclays was fined ??290 million ($470 million, 363 million euros) by British and US regulators for attempted manipulation of Libor and Euribor interbank rates between 2005 and 2009.

Royal Bank of Scotland and Swiss lender UBS have also received heavy fines over alleged rigging of Libor. Euribor is the eurozone equivalent.

Libor or the London Interbank Offered Rate is the umbrella term for benchmark rates that underpin the terms of 500 trillion US dollars (??320 trillion) of contracts from mortgages to the cost of corporate lending.

Last week meanwhile, Britain announced that NYSE Euronext, the owner of the New York Stock Exchange, would take over management of Libor early next year.

That followed a review which recommended that industry body the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) should be stripped of its responsibility for setting Libor after widespread rate-rigging was found to have taken place.

…read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox World News

The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman &amp; Toskes Continues To Investigate Claims of UBS Custo

By Business Wirevia The Motley Fool

Filed under:

The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes Continues To Investigate Claims of UBS Customers Who Sustained Losses in the UBS Willow Fund, L.L.C.

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)– The Securities Arbitration Law Firm of Klayman & Toskes (“K&T”), www.nasd-law.com,announced today that it is continuing to investigate claims of UBS Financial Services (NYS: UBS) customers who purchased the UBS Willow Fund (“Willow Fund”). The Willow Fund is a private hedge fund which was formed in 2000. In October of 2012, investors were notified that the Fund would be liquidated. While many investors were advised that the Fund was a safe, low risk product, the Fund has declined about 80%.

K&T is investigating whether UBS adequately disclosed the risks associated with the UBS Willow Fund, as well as whether investors’ portfolios were over-concentrated in the Fund. The individual brokers and advisors who sold the UBS Willow Fund are not the target of this investigation. Instead, K&T is looking into UBS‘s conduct in connection with its marketing of the Fund to its customers. Further, the law firm is investigating whether the UBS Willow Fund deviated from its disclosed strategy of investing in distressed debt, and instead started speculating in foreign sovereign debt credit default swaps. It is believed that these credit default swaps eventually led to the collapse of the fund, and caused investors to lose a substantial portion of their investment.

In December 2012, a class action lawsuit, case no. 12-civ-9288, was filed on behalf of all investors in the UBS Willow Fund. However, the case was subsequently dismissed without prejudice this past January. Accordingly, investors who sustained losses in the UBS Willow Fund are encouraged to contact K&T to explore their legal rights and options, and should consider filing an individual securities arbitration claim against UBS.

The attorneys at K&T are dedicated to pursuing claims on behalf of investors who have suffered significant investment losses. K&T, an experienced, qualified and nationally recognized securities litigation law firm, practices exclusively in the field of securities arbitration and litigation. It continues its representation of investors throughout the world in securities arbitration and litigation matters against major Wall Street brokerage firms.

If you wish to discuss this announcement or have investment losses of $100,000 or more in the UBS Willow Fund, please contact Steven D. Toskes, Esquire or Jahan K. Manasseh, Esquire of Klayman & Toskes, P.A., at 888-997-9956 or visit us on the web at www.nasd-law.com.

New Study on Advisor Satisfaction Invokes Chickens, Eggs

By Molly McCluskey, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

In the case of broker and customer satisfaction, which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

Do satisfied customers lead to satisfied brokers? Or are customers satisfied when their brokers are?

It’s a question I asked Craig Martin, director of investment services at J.D. Power and Associates and the lead on the new 2013 U.S. Financial Advisor Satisfaction study. The study measures satisfaction among advisors who are employed directly with an investment services firm, as well as those who are affiliated with, but independently operated from, a broker-dealer. Among the findings: Overall satisfaction among advisors is up since 2010; advisors want their firms to focus more on customers than on profits, and nearly a third of all advisors are ambivalent about their firm, which could ultimately cause them to change firms.

The top firms in the employee segment were Edward Jones, Raymond James and Associates, UBS Financial Services, Merrill Lynch Financial Management , Wells Fargo , and Chase. In the independent-advisor segment, the highest-ranked firms were Commonwealth Financial Network, Cambridge Investment Research, Raymond James Financial Services, Northwestern Mutual, and LPL Financial. J.D. Power looked at factors including compensation, contact, people, job duties, work environment, products and offerings to clients, technology, and services and support offered to financial advisors.

The results of the 2013 Customer Satisfaction Survey will be released in May, but if last year’s dual studies are any indication, the results of the two will dovetail very closely. That’s what I found in covering last year’s studies, and Martin says it’s likely to be similar this year. And, he says, that’s to be expected year after year. “People are generally happier when they’re successful,” he told me, “and for an advisor to be successful, he or she has to be able to serve their clients. The question is, how do you create a level of engagement you want with a customer, one that not just satisfies them, but truly makes them an advocate of your firm, one who tells their friends and is loyal?”

That, Martin says, only comes when advisors are supported by their firm. With 40% of advisors saying they experienced a technological or paperwork issue in the past year, how those issues are handled makes a difference in advisor satisfaction, and ultimately, customer satisfaction. “The higher-services firms prevent the challenges that prevent advisors from being in front of the client,” Martin says. “Those at the top eliminate issues and limit the impact to the advisor on a daily basis.”

But what does all this happiness mean for investors? Ultimately, very little. Martin says that although J.D. Power hasn’t done any studies on the impacts of their reports on share prices, he suspects there aren’t any dramatic changes. “This [report] isn’t a surprise. It’s a validation,” he says. “If you’re losing customers and losing advisors, that’s going to have a bottom-line impact, and will show up long before our review.”

So, which comes first? A happy customer or a happy advisor? Martin has

From: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/04/11/new-study-on-advisor-satisfaction-invokes-chickens/

Why Citibank Is Up Big Today

By John Grgurich, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Last week at this time, I was writing about how Citigroup and the rest of the big-four banks were tanking for no apparent reason. This week, I’m happy to report that Citi and its peers are decidedly not tanking. In fact, banks appear to be leading an overall market rally.  Here’s what we know.

The exact opposite of last week
First, let’s have a quick look at exactly where Citi, its peers, and the markets are about midway through the trading day:

  • Citi is up a big 2.43%.
  • Bank of America is up 0.65%.
  • JPMorgan Chase is up 1.36%.
  • And Wells Fargo is up 0.92%.

The markets are all in the green, too, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average up 0.86%, the S&P 500 up 1.08%, and the Nasdaq Composite up 1.68%.

The Facebook effect
Two days ago, The Wall Street Journal broke the news that Citi plans to file suit against Nasdaq OMX Group for its botched handling of last May’s Facebook initial public offering, and Citi’s share price has been on the rise ever since.

There’s no word yet on how much money the bank will ask for, but the Journal is reporting that securities firms as a group lost around $550 million total on the deal. Swiss banking giant UBS lost $356 million alone, which leaves less than $200 million for Citi and its cohorts to split.  

Based on this, we know that whatever the superbank eventually claims in the filing won’t be a game-changing amount of money. But investors — like myself — are probably just happy to see that the sometimes languid and unfocused bank is stepping up to try to right a wrong and recover monies it feels are justly due.

Speaking of game changers, thank you to CEO Michael Corbat for going to bat for Citi’s bottom line and for investors.

Of course, in addition to the Facebook news, Citi is also up likely just because the markets are up. The stock market, as we know, moves because of human psychology as much as for any other reason. There’s a reason we have terms like “vicious cycle,” as well as its flip side, “virtuous circle.”

But Foolish investors like yourself know you’re in the stock market for long term, and you know you don’t need to check on your share prices everyday. In the short term, the markets may move up and down, but over weeks, months, and years, so long as the companies you’re invested in have strong fundamentals, you know your money is in the right place.

Looking for in-depth analysis on Citi?
If so, look no further than our new premium report on the superbank. In it Matt Koppenheffer — The Motley Fool’s senior banking analyst — will fill you in on both reasons to buy and reasons to sell Citigroup.

He’ll also clue you in on what areas investors need to watch going forward. For instant access to Matt’s personal take on Citi, simply click here

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Why This Important Dow Stock Jumped 1.5% Today

By Anders Bylund, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

IBM is a giant among Dow stocks. The IT hardware and services veteran accounts for 11% of the Dow Jones Industrial Average index by weight, and its price swings always make a big difference to the Dow’s daily value changes.

This morning, Big Blue‘s shares jumped as much as 1.5% on an analyst upgrade. That’s enough to add 25 points to the Dow’s overall value, thanks to IBM‘s $211 share price, and a major driver of today’s bullish Dow action.

The fuel for this morning’s rocket ride came from star analyst Steve Milunovich, formerly of Merrill Lynch but now a managing director at Swiss powerhouse UBS. Milunovich is the kind of rainmaker who can move even blue-chip mega caps like IBM with a stroke of his pen.

In this case, Milunovich boosted IBM from “hold” to “buy” with a $235 price target. That would be a 12% upside to Tuesday’s closing prices.

He paints Big Blue as a company in transition, “well positioned” to become a leader in so-called “IT-as-a-service” cloud computing. That’s a model where businesses kick their IT operations out as a stand-alone business or divisions, moving a traditional cost center into the realm of flexible and potentially profitable operations.

These IT-focused entities are often powered by advanced cloud-computing solutions and big outsourcing contracts — two areas where IBM is both huge and growing.

Milunovich calls this a “sound strategy,” and it’s hard to disagree.

IBM has been heading in this direction for many years now, but the IT-as-a-service trend is primed for massive growth in the near future as the idea enters the mainstream. IBM stock has already crushed its Dow Jones peers over the last five and 10 years, and it’s likely to keep on keeping on.

IBM data by YCharts.

So this man among Dow stock boys looks primed for further gains. Milunovich sees a 12% return for the next year, and I believe that’s an appropriate long-term growth rate for the next five years as well. In fact, I just started a long-term outperform CAPScall on IBM to underscore the comprehensive power of IBM‘s cloud-focused industry muscle.

The amount of data we store every year is growing by a mind-boggling 60% annually! To make sense of this trend and pick out a winner, The Motley Fool has compiled a new report called “The Only Stock You Need to Profit From the NEW Technology Revolution.” The report highlights a company that has gained 300% since first recommended by Fool analysts but still has plenty of room left to run. To get instant access to the name of this company transforming the IT industry, click here — it’s free.

The article Why This Important Dow Stock Jumped 1.5% Today originally appeared on Fool.com.

Fool contributor Anders Bylund holds no position in any company mentioned. Check out

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

UBS Loses Lawsuit After Former Employee Calls Firm Immoral and Unethical

By Bill Singer, Contributor

In Statements of Claim filed in July 2011, Claimant UBS asserted breach of contract; common count for money lent; common count for account stated; and unjust enrichment concerning separate November 2008 promissory notes. Claimant UBS sought against Respondent Kirwan and Respondent Meninger, $300,407.85 and $185,287.19, respectively, in compensatory damages plus interest, costs, attorneys’ fees, and other fees. In the Matter of the FINRA Arbitration Between UBS Financial Services Inc., Claimant/Counter-Respondent vs. James P. Kirwan, Respondent/Counter-Claimant – AND – Joanne M. Meninger, Claimant/Counter-Respondent (FINRA Consolidated Case Number; 11-02752 (consolidated with –02753), April 4, 2013). SIDE BAR: On May 2, 2012, Respondent Kirwan and Respondent Meninger filed a Motion to Consolidate FINRA Arbitrations 11-02752 and 11-02753; following opposition from UBS, the FINRA Arbitration Panel granted the motion on June 20, 2012. Respondent Kirwan and Respondent Meninger generally denied the allegations, asserted various affirmative defenses, and filed Counterclaims asserting breach of contract. Separately, Counterclaimant Meninger alleged that she did not receive any paychecks for commissions during her former UBS employment. …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Latest

KNOT Offshore Partners LP Prices Initial Public Offering of Common Units

By Business Wirevia The Motley Fool

Filed under:

KNOT Offshore Partners LP Prices Initial Public Offering of Common Units

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)– KNOT Offshore Partners LP (NYS: KNOP) (“KNOT Offshore Partners” or “KNOP“) today announced that it priced its initial public offering of 7,450,000 common units at a price of $21.00 per unit. KNOT Offshore Partners has granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to 1,117,500 additional common units, at the same price per unit. The common units being offered to the public are expected to begin trading on April 10, 2013, on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “KNOP.” The offering is expected to close on or about April 15, 2013, subject to customary closing conditions.

Following completion of the offering, Knutsen NYK Offshore Tankers AS, a Norwegian private limited liability company (“KNOT“), will own KNOP‘s general partner and a 55.4% limited partner interest in KNOT Offshore Partners. If the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units is exercised in full, KNOT will own a 49.0% limited partner interest in KNOT Offshore Partners.

KNOT Offshore Partners intends to use the net proceeds from the offering, which are estimated to be approximately $138.4 million, after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions, structuring fees and estimated offering expenses, to repay borrowings outstanding under its vessel financing agreements and for general partnership purposes.

BofA Merrill Lynch and Citigroup are acting as co-structuring agents and joint book-running managers in the transaction. Barclays is acting as a joint book-running manager. DNB and UBS are acting as co-lead managers for the offering. Raymond James and RBC are acting as co-managers for the offering. The offering of the common units will be made only by means of a prospectus. A written prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933 may be obtained from the offices of:

BofA Merrill Lynch, 222 Broadway, New York, NY 10038, Attention: Prospectus Department, dg.prospectus_requests@baml.com.

Citigroup, c/o Broadridge Financial Solutions, 1155 Long Island Avenue, Edgewood, NY 11717 (tel: 800-831-9146).

A registration statement relating to KNOT Offshore Partners’ common units has been filed with and declared effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC“). The registration statement is available on the SEC‘s website at www.sec.gov.

This news release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of the common units described above, nor will there be any sales of these common …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Is the Fox in the Hen House?

By Andrew Marder, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

If we’ve learned nothing over the past decade, we’ve learned that on Capitol Hill, Democrats and Republicans hate each other. So I suppose we should all be applauding the unanimous approval of Mary Jo White as the new head of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Apparently not one single U.S. Senator was concerned that, for the last decade, she worked to defend banks like JPMorgan Chase , Morgan Stanley , and UBS .

Maybe that doesn’t matter, and White will be completely unbiased. Even so, the number of cases she’ll have to recuse herself from seems likely to exceed the number she’ll be allowed to hear in her first year, because of the number of personal connections she still holds in the banking world.

The warm embrace of familiarity
Wall Street‘s love of American politics has never been in question, and in the 2012 election, the financial sector gave over $88 million to presidential campaigns, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The close connection the industry feels with politicians has led to what many have deemed a revolving door between Wall Street and Capitol Hill.

During the financial crisis, then Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was reported to have held closed-door meetings with his former employer, JPMorgan. Those close ties may lead to weakness in policy and in litigation. Unfortunately, White’s nomination isn’t a breath of fresh air, but just more of the same.

Commenting on the appointment, the Investment Company Institute — a trade group for money markets, which recently tried to sue the Commodity Futures Trading Commission — applauded the appointment. Without making it a black and white issue, shouldn’t we want the people who are working on behalf of the companies that are suing the government to be more upset with these appointments? While they might have to work together, I’d be happier if the Institute had been furious.

What comes next
To paraphrase Senator Sherrod Brown, who initially voted against White’s appointment, I’m not worried that White is a bad person, and I’m not worried she’s going to be manipulated — I’m worried that we’ve made the system of oversight too chummy with those that it’s supposed to oversee.

White will have to recuse herself for a year in cases that involve former clients, but after that, things don’t get much clearer. With a net worth well over $15 million and a decade spent in the financial industry, White is probably going to have to sit out of at least a few cases in which she has a financial interest in the outcome.

While it’s probably not fair to say that there’s a fox in the hen house, it’s not all that far off. I’m reminded of a Far Side cartoon that depicts a dingo farm built right next door to a nursery, with a caption that just reads “Trouble brewing.” That’s what we’ve got now — trouble brewing. 

With big finance firms still trading at deep discounts to their historic norms, …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Dow Gains, but Alcoa Falls Short

By Jeremy Bowman, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

After spending most of the day in negative territory, the Dow Jones Industrial Average made a late run to finish up 48 points or 0.3% as optimism about the beginning of earnings season seemed to take over late in the day. Following multiple reports last week about a slowing job market, Wall Street seemed happy to shift its focus elsewhere as earnings reports begin to roll in.

Alcoa kicked off the quarterly reports in style, gaining 1.8% during the trading session, and reporting overall profit growth of 59% to $149 million or $0.13 a share, even as revenue continued to slide, falling 3%, on weak aluminum demand. Still, the manufacturer managed to lift earnings per share with growth in its downstream segment, which sells products such as aluminum wheels and aircraft parts. EPS topped expectations of $0.13 a share, but sales came in a bit short. Shares were down 1.3% in after-hours trading.

Elsewhere on the Dow, Coca-Cola jumped 2% as separate reports reaffirmed the growth potential in the energy-drink industry. Wells Fargo said that energy drinks should push overall growth in the beverage industry while UBS put in its own vote of confidence in the industry, saying that Monster Beverage had strong upside potential in international sales. After hours, Monster, once thought of as a buyout target for Coca-Cola, also announced a $200 million share-buyback program. Shares of the energy-drink maker were up 4.7% today.

Johnson & Johnson led the Dow laggards today, finishing down 1.1% after getting downgraded by JPMorgan Chase. Michael Weinstein dropped his rating from “overweight” to “hold,” saying that the health-care giant’s stock trades at an 8% premium to its intrinsic value and that he expects the company lower its guidance soon.  

Shares of General Electric finished up 0.8%, but it sent Lufkin Industries, a maker of oil pumps and similar transmission products, up 37.6%, after agreeing to acquire it. GE will pay about $3 billion for Lufkin, a move that gives the conglomerate increased exposure to the fast-growing shale oil-and-gas industry, and will make GE Oil & Gas the company’s third largest unit. The deal is expected to close in June.

Finally, outside the Dow, CEO Ron Johnson was finally ousted from J.C. Penney following one of the more tumultuous years in retail history. Johnson’s brand revamp never took and cost more the company more than a quarter of its sales, and the retailer has already taken several steps to undo his decisions, such as bringing back markdowns. Former CEO Mike Ullman, who led the company for nearly seven years before being replaced by Johnson, will be back at the helm. Investors seemed uninspired by the decision, as shares were off 9.9% after hours.

Materials industries are traditionally known for their high barriers to entry, and the aluminum industry is no exception. Controlling about 15% of global production in this highly consolidated industry, Alcoa is in …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Even Jamie Dimon Pouts (Though He's Still Richer Than Mike Mayo)

By John Maxfield, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Just because Jamie Dimon, the chairman and chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase , is the most visible and highest regarded leader of a major Wall Street bank doesn’t mean that he’s immune from saying and doing stupid and immature things.

At an investors’ conference at the end of February, he boasted about why he’s so much richer than Mike Mayo, a bank analyst at Credit Suisse. And, no, as Reuters’ James Saft noted, it’s not because Dimon is better than Mayo at picking lottery tickets. The reason, according to Dimon, concerned Mayo’s intimation that Swiss lender UBS is perceived by some affluent customers to be safer than JPMorgan because the former has a higher capital ratio. While I don’t mean to dismiss Dimon’s completely illogical explanation, the reality has more to do with the fact that Dimon’s father landed him a job with Sandy Weill in 1982. But that’s water under the bridge.

What isn’t water under the bridge is the suggestion that Dimon might leave JPMorgan if he’s forced to give up his role as chairman of the board. It was revealed in the middle of last year that the nation’s largest bank by assets would have to take a roughly $6 billion loss tied to the trading of certain credit derivatives by the bank’s chief investment office. Multiple heads rolled, including the chief investment officer’s, Dimon’s annual pay was cut, and now shareholders are threatening to vote in favor of a proposal that separates the positions of chairman and chief executive officer — both Bank of America and Citigroup have done the same thing over the past few years.

But here’s the icing on the cake, according to an analyst quoted today by Bloomberg News: “If the board is forced by a shareholder vote to strip Jamie Dimon of his chairman’s role, then shareholders may find that Jamie Dimon decides to move on, maybe not immediately but within the year.”

Is that a bluff, blackmail, extortion, or an ultimatum? At this point, it seems more like an unsubstantiated rumor. But that being said, it’s a worthwhile reminder of how even Wall Street‘s best and brightest believe they are beyond reproach.

With big finance firms still trading at deep discounts to their historic norms, investors everywhere are wondering if this is the new normal, or whether finance stocks are a screaming buy today. The answer depends on the company, so to help figure out whether JPMorgan is a buy today, I invite you to read our premium research report on the company. Click here now for instant access!

var FoolAnalyticsData = FoolAnalyticsData || []; …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

No Error Of Margin In $25 Million UBS Lawsuit

By Bill Singer, Contributor

Ah yes, the perennial margin dispute finds its way onto yet another court docket. Once again we are confronted with the clash between what a customer thinks and expects, on the one side of the legal caption, and what a brokerage firm discloses and disclaims, on the other side of the “versus.” Cast Of Characters WC Capital Management, LLC (“Willow Creek”) is the general partner and manager of Willow Creek Capital Partners, L.P. (“WCCP”) and Willow Creek Short Biased 30/130 Fund, LP. (“WCSB”). WCCP and WCSB are two “long/short” investment partnerships that generally invested in securities of companies with a sub-$1 billion market capitalization. In early 2007, UBS agreed to act as Willow Creek’s prime broker, and as a result of that capacity, UBS provided to WCCP and WCS: margin loans and prime brokerage services; maintained custody of the two partnerships’ securities and cash collateral; and provided them with loans on margin. Account agreements between UBS and Willow Creek provided that UBS could demand additional collateral from Willow Creek: [i]f at any time any of the UBS Entities has reasonable grounds for insecurity with respect to [Willow Creek’s] performance of any of the Contracts or its Obligations, any of the UBS Entities may demand . . . adequate assurance of due performance by [Willow Creek] within 24 hours . . . . The adequate assurance of performance may include . . . the delivery by [Willow Creek] to [UBS] of additional property as Collateral. The Client Account Agreements also required that Willow Creek “maintain in and furnish to the  Accounts such margin . . . as is required by Applicable Law and such greater amounts as the UBS Entities may in their sole discretion require.”  Upon opening its accounts, Willow Creek received a UBS Disclosure Statement, which, in part, asserted that: It is [UBS]’s policy to review periodically any account as to which it has credit concerns in light of the value of the assets in the account . . . . Each account with a debit balance is reviewed on an individual basis with consideration given to factors such as market conditions generally at the time, marketability of the securities in the account, frequency of the activity in the account, duration of the account and concentration of particular securities in the account. Different weight may be given these factors by [UBS], and on the basis of its review, [UBS], in its sole discretion, may require additional collateral, above the amount required by the rules of the self regulatory agencies, as security for your obligations to [UBS]. . . …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Latest

Should I Buy Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation?

By Harvey Jones, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

LONDON — I’m shopping for shares again, and I’m looking for something cheap to pop into my basket. Should I dig into Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation?

Heavy metals
I’ve been so used to FTSE 100 companies posting solid five-year growth figures that it’s a shock to check the numbers on Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation . Frankly, they’re woeful. All the miners have struggled lately, but few have been as hopeless as this Kazakhstan-based miner and metals company. That said, this could make it an interesting contrarian play. So should I buy ENRC?

If you had invested in ENRC five years ago, you would have lost 78% of your money. You would also have lost heavily over four years, three years, two years, one year and the last month. Financial performance in 2012 was poor, with ENRC posting a net loss of $804 million, against a $1.97 billion profit in 2011. Revenue fell 18% to $6.32 billion. It also suffered a slew of costly writedowns totaling $1.5 billion, including a $608 million impairment charge on its Kazakhstan aluminum business. Investors didn’t even get a final dividend. All the major miners have been hit by falling commodity prices, but this is of a different order.

Soviet rocks
ENRC is a troubled company. Since listing on the FTSE 100 in 2007, it has faced a Serious Fraud Office investigation into corruption allegations and a Financial Services Authority probe into its corporate governance. The so-called “Trio” of founding Kazakh shareholders were memorably accused by ousted board member Ken Olisa as being “more Soviet than City”. You need to carry out a careful investigations of your own before trusting your money to this stock.

Yet ENRC‘s share price is up sharply in recent days, helped by broker UBS upgrading its rating from neutral to buy with a target price of 320 pence. That’s 31% above current share price of £2.44. Continuing in a positive vein, ENRC generates solid cash flow from its Kazakhstan assets, with production volumes records in coal, copper, ferroalloys and electricity. Earnings per share (EPS) are set to grow 26% this year and 44% in 2014. Its geographical position, close to giant Chinese and Russian markets, helps cut its transportation costs, giving it an advantage over its rivals.

Dirty diggers
All miners are a little risky, but ENRC is clearly more risky than most. Even its diversification plans seem to add more danger, as it targets two strife-torn lands, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zimbabwe. Any investment should be seen as speculative, which is fine, provided you understand the risks you are taking, and limit the potential fall-out. ENRC trades at 8.7 times earnings, which is only marginally cheaper than BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, both trading at around nine times earnings, with none of the aggro. Better still, they yield 3.9% and 3.6% respectively. With these FTSE 100 stalwarts going cheap, Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation looks too risky for me. More daring investors might decide it’s …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Big Banks Dodge a Legal Bullet

By Andrew Marder, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

Last week, Judge Naomi Buchwald ruled against a series of class action suits that had been brought against banks, alleging that the banks were guilty of market collusion. The antitrust cases were predicated on the idea that banks got together to artificially lower rates, which in turn hurt investors. Judge Buchwald responded with a lengthy decision that said even if the banks colluded, the plaintiffs didn’t suffer because of that collusion. While it seems the result will be the end of the line for some cases, it’s not over for the banks.

LIBOR rigging
The two biggest players in the LIBOR scandal, so far, are Barclays and UBS . Both companies have admitted that they made false reports to the British Bankers Association, which is responsible for setting the LIBOR. The reasons for the false submissions varied but were largely in one of two camps. Either traders at the bank wanted to make more money with a rate change, or the banks wanted to appear stronger than they were by submitting a lower rate.

Historically, the LIBOR was set by large institutions submitting the rate at which they believed they would be able to borrow money. By submitting a lower rate, banks gave the impression that they were in better financial standing than they really were — like a bankrupt friend telling you that he can get a 15-year mortgage at 2%.

Between Barclays, UBS, and the Royal Bank of Scotland , banks have been fined a total of over $2.5 billion by regulators. So far, those banks have avoided having to pay out to individual investors, and the recent result should keep those losses pushed off for a while — if they ever come.

Other avenues to pursue
While it was the end of the line for some of the plaintiffs, the judge did allow other cases to proceed. Specifically, cases that allege fraud seem to be in better standing, as the banks clearly lied. The difficulty for investors will be in proving that those lies caused them financial damage. That’s going to be very tricky, as the LIBOR was set in a way that took some submissions out every day.

In order to hold a bank culpable, a judge would have to agree that the plaintiff suffered because of a specific bank’s submission. But that submission probably didn’t make it in every day, and even if it did, it may not have had a noticeable impact on the LIBOR for the day.

Fraud is a little easier to prove. The banks lied and misrepresented themselves as submitters of true and honest data. To prove fraud also doesn’t require proving that the banks colluded, and it may have a longer statute of limitations. 

As analysts have pointed out, fraud also requires individuals to prove that they did what they did in part because they thought the banks were not lying about their LIBOR submissions, which is difficult to prove. It …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

It's Time for Royal Dutch Shell to Start Motoring Again

By Harvey Jones, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

LONDON — When I invested in Royal Dutch Shell  three years ago, I was sure I was onto a gusher. With oil trading at comfortably over $100 a barrel, emerging markets getting thirstier by the day and new sources of energy hard to access, this oil and gas big boy seemed a no-brainer. Thanks to its generous 5% yield, Shell was one stock I fully expected to retire on. So what went wrong?

Shell’s share price has barely shifted in the last two years, while the FTSE 100 rose 8% in that time. Yet I reckon the market has been a little harsh on Shell, which reported a fourth-quarter 2012 profit of $5.6 billion, up 15% on the year, thanks to strong performance in its refining and marketing divisions. Management was upbeat about the future, and boosted the quarterly dividend by 4.7%, but it wasn’t enough. The market had expected more. Shell stalled.

Shale and hearty
These are hardly car crash figures. Production rose 3.3% to £3.41 million of oil or natural gas equivalents per day, with new projects in Qatar and australia offsetting falls elsewhere. Shell is investing in 30 new projects that should boost production to four million barrels of oil equivalent a day by 2017 or 2018. With up to £130 billion in the capital spending kitty, it is investing heavily in its future. This is a company that throws off notes, generating $46 billion of cash flow in 2012. It is also getting stuck into the task of exploiting China‘s potentially vast shale oil reserves, after signing a production-sharing contract with China National Petroleum Corporation. New markets, new profits.

Double Dutch
Shell has its problems. The oil price is volatile and new sources such as oil sands are expensive to extract. Gas prices have plummeted thanks to U.S. shale discoveries, hitting its struggling U.S. upstream business. Brokers have lost their enthusiasm. UBS recently downgraded Shell to neutral, blaming a lack of near-term momentum, and held its target price at £23. I will definitely continue to hold Shell. That 5.1% yield, covered 2.5 times, is reason enough to be loyal. The question is, should I top up my tank? The recent bull run has left many of my favorite shares looking fully valued, but I don’t have that problem with Shell, which trades at just 7.7 times earnings. Even BP trades at 11.7 times earnings, while BG Group is even more expensive at around 13 times earnings, despite its lowly 1.5% yield, and recent admission that it won’t grow at all in 2013. On that basis, Shell looks cheap.

Five sure things
Earnings-per-share growth isn’t as juicy, with Shell on course for a 4% drop in 2013 and a meager 2% rise in 2014. The market isn’t fooled, it knows Shell has a long and winding road ahead of it. But for the long-term investor, recent sluggish performance makes now a tempting time to hop on board.

Shell looks a good long-term investment, …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

UBS Declares Coupon Payments on Ten ETRACS Exchange-Traded Notes

By Business Wirevia The Motley Fool

Filed under:

UBS Declares Coupon Payments on Ten ETRACS Exchange-Traded Notes

MLPI: linked to the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index

MLPL: linked to the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index

MLPG: linked to the Alerian Natural Gas MLP Index

MLPW: linked to the Wells Fargo Master Limited Partnership Index

BDCS: linked to the Wells Fargo Business Development Company Index

BDCL: linked to the Wells Fargo Business Development Company Index

RWXL: linked to the Dow Jones Global ex-U.S. Select Real Estate Securities Index

DVYL: linked to the Dow Jones U.S. Select Dividend Index

SDYL: linked to the S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats Index

MORL: linked to the Market Vectors Global Mortgage REITs Index

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Today,UBSannounced coupon payments for ten ETRACS exchange-traded notes (the “ETNs”) all traded on the NYSE Arca. The relevant coupon information is provided in the table below:

Goldman and JPMorgan Are 2 Big Winners in the Banking Shakeout

By Alex Dumortier, CFA, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

After suffering losses yesterday, stocks are bouncing back this morning, with the S&P 500 and the narrower, price-weighted Dow Jones Industrial Average up 0.52% and 0.47%, respectively, as of 10:05 a.m. EDT.

Goldman and JPMorgan: More for you and me!
Last week the Financial Times reported that Dow component JPMorgan Chase was likely to wrest the top ranking in the first-quarter M&A league table from Goldman Sachs for the first time in two years.

While M&A is a capital-light business, both banks are capitalizing on the aftermath of the credit crisis, in which numerous international competitors are shrinking other areas of their activity. So says Gary Cohn, Goldman president and chief operating officer and a likely successor to CEO Lloyd Blankfein. At a press briefing in Sao Paulo, Brazil, Cohn gave a frank assessment of the competitive state of the industry: “We are seeing the big international banks, outside of ourselves and JPMorgan, really taking pretty substantial steps back from the market and we haven’t seen that in the entire history of banking.”

He had no problem naming names, either: “If you look at what a UBS is doing or what a Credit Suisse is doing and the fact they have publicly announced they’re cutting their risk-weighted assets, they’re cutting their balance sheet, they are getting out of certain businesses, they are getting out of certain jurisdictions.”

In October, UBS announced that it would cut 10,000 staff, effectively withdrawing from the fixed-income business, which was not deemed profitable enough under new, stricter capital requirements. As such, the remaining business becomes more attractive for remaining participants. The process Cohn is highlighting is basic economics: As supply (competition) decreases, prices (profits) increase. He did, however, remark that local institutions were providing stiffer competition in markets such as Brazil, Singapore, Tokyo, and Hong Kong.

In summary: As international banks retreat from parts of the securities industry, JPMorgan and Goldman are the biggest beneficiaries. Despite this, as of yesterday’s close, Goldman’s shares were valued at a minimal 7% premium to their tangible book value, which suggests that investors expect little to no economic profit. Before you conclude that this is an obvious underpricing, you may want to consider that Warren Buffett recently gave up the option to purchase $5 billion worth of Goldman shares at $115, or roughly a one-fifth discount to their current price.

With big financial institutions still trading at deep discounts to their historic norms, investors everywhere are wondering if this is the new normal or if finance stocks are a screaming buy today. The answer depends on the company, so to help you figure out whether Goldman Sachs is a buy today, I invite you to read our premium research report on the company today. Click here now for instant access!

…read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance