<?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: [CPDO rating error] CPDOs&#8217; triple A failure</title>
	<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/</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>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:19:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:19:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<ttl>5</ttl>
	<language>en</language>

	<item>
		<title>by: Integrity Research&#187; Blog Archive &#187; A bug in the Moody&#8217;s black box?</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21805</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 17:34:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21805</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[[...] New York - Earlier this week, the FT reported the disturbing news that “Moody’s awarded incorrect triple A ratings to billions of dollars worth of a type of complex debt product due to a bug in its computer models”. Even worse, investors and clients were not informed when the error was discovered, and the code was corrected simultaneously with a methodological change. To say that this is an embarrassment is an understatement. Moody’s shares have fallen by nearly a quarter since the news broke, and certain legislators, smelling blood in the water, have begun to circle around this case. Ironically enough, S&P has placed Moody’s on ratings watch negative, and it’s possible that we will see lawsuits and regulatory action. [...]]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: THE NEW REPUBLIC &#124; Blogs</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21383</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 20:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21383</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[[...] Moody's (about which I've posted a few times) has announced that "The integrity of our ratings and rating methodologies is extremely important to us, and we take seriously the questions"...blah, blah, blah. Actually, there are three full Financial Times articles (one in the lead position on the front page), two of which authored were authored by a trio (Sam Jones, Gillian Tett and Paul J. Davies) and the other written by the last of the three alone explaining how a computer error at Moody's sparked the international calamity attached to Constant Proportion Debt Obligations (CPDOs).Yeah, yeah, and the same error was made at Fitch's and S&P. And, beyond these, MBIA (about which I've also posted and in which I have confessed that I hold a sizable short stake, despite an accusation in Barron's that I haven't) and its compatriot fakers and exploiters like Ambac somehow trusted the ratings and for a while made zillions off them until...well, you until things began to collapse.This scandal has been known to some investors on Wall Street (among them Pershing Square management, on whose board I sit) which have been sounding the alarum for as long as five years and even more broadly two. Under duress and panicked by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, Moody's has begun a review of its evaluating methodologies. But Moody's and the other companies in cahoots with it have on several occasions announced studies of their procedures. This is "promises, promises" and about utter contempt for the ordinary investor public and mortgagee who got snared in the euphoria. [...]]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Research Recap &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Moody&#8217;s Has Some Explaining To Do</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21251</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 17:18:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21251</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[[...] More details are available via Alphaville. Felix Salmon at Portfolio.com distills the essence of the affair and makes the interesting point that the relationship between the FT and its Alphaville blog allows for more indepth coverage of such an arcane topic. “You couldn’t print all this kind of stuff in a newspaper, it would be far too technical and boring. But online you can put everything up.” [...]]]></description>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Monkey</title>
		<link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21224</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 11:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/05/21/13224/cpdos-triple-a-failure/#comment-21224</guid>
					<description><![CDATA[This is your moment Sam - the day you graduated from PM Apprentice to Siralun himself.  To quote Star Wars: The circle is now complete!  Bask in it and be sure to milk some US college speaking engagements out of it if you can.  They pay well - just ask Cherie, Tony or Clinton

Hell, do a Peston and get the BBC to commission a 45 minute 'special' called 'The Ratings Game: Glitch In The System'.

Seriously Sam if I dont hear that you are living on a luxury yacht moored off the Monaco coast by the end of the year I will be terribly disappointed.]]></description>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
