<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL_formatting" type="text/xsl" href="/lib/css/styleRSSFeed.xsl"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:ft="http://www.ft.com/FTRSSExtensions">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Junk journalism and that Citi wotsit</title>
	<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/</link>
	<description>FT Alphaville from FT.com</description>
	<copyright>Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2006. "Alphaville", "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.</copyright>
	<webMaster>help@ft.com</webMaster>
	<pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:09:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<ttl>5</ttl>
	<language>en</language>

	<item>
		<title>by: Blogcosm</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8840</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8840</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[<strong>Citibank's junk bonds?  Old media vs. new...</strong>

Earlier this week, Citibank raised $7.5 Billion from the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA). To get some perspective on the deal, it seems logical to turn to the financial press.

Here's Bradley Ke...]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Carlomagno</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8778</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8778</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[Re: Felix Salmon's comment about the divi cut boosting C's stocks, you have to conclude that we live in a topsy-turvy world. Case in point: yesterday Fed governor Kohn mentioned serious downside risks to the US economy and the Dow rallies 300  points! Howzat?

You could just about understand that if the Fed had a good record of avoiding recessions, but the fact is they suck at that particular job. Just look at the following link to appreciate the Fed's woeful record. The presentation by David Altig linked in the article is a must read for an illustration of Greenspan's utter failure to see the 1990 and 2001 recessions coming, much less preventing them.

http://tinyurl.com/36fwyc]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Alea &#124; Citi Deal</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8751</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8751</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[[...] Paul Murphy at FT Alphaville Junk journalism and that Citi wotsit and Junk Citi Felix Salmon at Portfolio.com Why Citi’s 11% Coupon Doesn’t Mean it’s Paying Junk Rates [...]]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: RT</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8750</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8750</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[Generally: I would think the Investment fund just bought a call on C at $37 and wrote a put at $31.  I would think this shows that the investment fund may be bullish on C.  

I would think this also shows that C does not see that much upside in its own stock.  As, C just wrote a call  at $37 and bought a put at $31.  ]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: klandnyc</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8743</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:55:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8743</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[As a major financial newspaper, you should have gotten it right the first time that a comparison to junk bond wasn't the right way to look at a forward equity issuance. I think the most interesting thing about the deal is actually the media coverage of it. Junk journalism (your word, not mine) is being practiced en mass on both sides of the Atlantic. WSJ has an equally "subprime" coverage comparing the deal to junk bond. In that sense, financial journalists aren't very different from their counterparts covering political news. It's all about sensational headlines sans nuance with very little fact checking. The picture is equally dismal in the blogger-sphere, with a few notable exception. For me, this one little deal turns out to a revealing and useful way to judge the quality and integrity of the hundred of so-called experts who blog everyday about developing financial news and deals. It differentiates those who know what they are talking about from those who don't but talk about them anyway. It's really not rocket science in this case. Anyone who was comparing the 11% yield to junk bond in this deal should start with learning about the difference between bond and equity - you know - the finance 101 stuff.  Better still, they should consider writing about something else other than finance. Perhaps there is an opening in the political news department?]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John Barry</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8740</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8740</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[Well it worked for Freddy Mac (FRE) , allegedly they're going to cut the dividend, and launch a convertible (8.25%) and they up 14%  so far today.]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: jean claude kommer</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8732</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:08:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8732</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[But this is not a reverse convertible because ADIA has no option to get cash at maturity.
FT is right, "This deal is best thought of as a forward issue of equity ..."]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: jean claude kommer</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8729</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8729</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[I f this is truly a reverse convertible, then the 11% coupon is the maximum return that ADIA  will get over the life of the deal.]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: hedgehog</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8725</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2007/11/28/9230/junk-journalism-and-that-citi-wotsit/#comment-8725</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[thanks for the analysis of Citi's what'sit

agree entirely with your sentiment ......"one aspect of the ongoing credit malarky, is that amongst both market participants and market observers, many are increasingly ready to read “down” as “up,” “red” as “black”, and “bad” as “good.”

the fact that your comments on Alpha are hitting a few raw nerves is a positive sign as corporal Jones would say .. "they don't like it up em" - keep up the good work]]></description>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
