iftttwall

The ongoing debacle of Italy’s Banca Monte dei Paschi (BMPS) took a turn for the worst today. The bank’s largest shareholders (MPS Foundation) approved (read – forced through) a delay in a EUR 3 billion capital raise, which the bank needs to avoid nationalization, until May. The delay (which will cost the bank EUR 120 million in interest) allows MPS more time to liquidate their 33.5% holding before their stake is massively diluted. Management is ‘considering’ resignation and is “very annoyed,” but the city Mayor is going Nationalist with his delay-supporting comments that “we cannot let the third biggest bank in this country fall prey to foreign interests.” So Europe is recovering but they can’t even raise a day’s worth of POMO to save the oldest bank in the world?

 

Via Reuters,

Italy’s third-biggest bank Monte dei Paschi di Siena was forced to delay a vital 3 billion euro ($4.1 billion) share sale to raise capital until mid-2014 because of shareholder opposition, plunging its turnaround plan into uncertainty.

 

The bank’s chairman and its chief executive may now resign after their plan to launch the cash call in January was defeated at an extraordinary shareholder meeting on Saturday due to the vote of Monte Paschi’s top shareholder.

 

The world’s oldest bank needs to tap investors for cash to pay back 4.1 billion euros in state aid it received earlier this year and avert nationalization

Simple game theory really – why would the largest shareholder “guarantee” losses now when it can try and liquidate more of its exposure over time?

But the cash-strapped Monte dei Paschi foundation – whose stake in the bank is big enough to veto any unwanted decision – forced a postponement until at least mid-May to win more time to sell down its 33.5 percent holding and repay its own debts.

 

…

 

Antonella Mansi, a feisty 39-year-old businesswoman recently appointed head of the Monte dei Paschi foundation, said her insistence on a cash call delay did not amount to a no-confidence vote in the bank’s management.

 

But she said that carrying out the capital increase in January would massively dilute the foundation’s holding, leaving it with virtually nothing to sell to reimburse debts of 340 million euros.

 

“We have a precise duty to ensure (the foundation’s) survival. You can’t ask us to let it collapse,” she said.

Management is “very annoyed”…

Chairman Alessandro Profumo, a strong-willed and internationally respected banker who was formerly the chief of UniCredit, said he and CEO Fabrizio Viola would decide in January whether to step down.

 

“These are decisions one takes in cold blood and in the right place,” Profumo said at the meeting.

 

“What I have on my mind is a 3 billion euro cash call because we need to pay back 4 billion euros to taxpayers. Today this is uncertain and at risk,” he told a press conference.

 

Viola, sitting at his side, told reporters he would do everything “so that the ship does not sink”, but that he could not take responsibility for mistakes made by others.

Of course, there is risk either way…

“It’s important to carry out the capital increase as early as possible,” said Roberto Lottici, fund manager at Ifigest. “The risk is that the bank finds itself rushing into a cash call later at a lower price than what it could achieve now.”

 

…

 

“It’s hard to think that the third largest Italian bank can’t find a pool of banks able to support the cash call after May 2014,” said Antonella Mansi, the president of the MPS foundation, at the shareholders’ meeting.

and given the number of jobs involved… local officials are now reacting in favor of the delay (hoping for domestic savior)…

But in Siena, where the bank is known as “Daddy Monte” and is the biggest employer, fears that the cash call might sever the umbilical cord between the lender and the city run high.

 

Siena mayor Bruno Valentini, whose city council is the top stakeholder in the Monte dei Paschi foundation, said on Friday a postponement might help keep the bank in Italian hands.

 

“We cannot let the third biggest bank in this country fall prey to foreign interests,” he said. “Monte dei Paschi is not just an issue in Siena, it is a big national issue.”

So, even after all the lqiuidty provision; yields and spreads on European debt back near record lows; calls from US asset managers that Europe is recovering and will be the growth engine; and hopes that Europe’s AQR stress test (and resolution mechanism) will be the gold standard for confidence in their banking system… they still can’t find a group of greater fools to pony up EUR3 billion in real (not rehypothecated) money to save the world’s oldest bank – that’s a day’s worth of Fed POMO!!!!

 

On an odd side note, we did note a major surge in ECB margin calls this week…

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/uoBDWm4s8tU/story01.htm Tyler Durden

The ongoing debacle of Italy’s Banca Monte dei Paschi (BMPS) took a turn for the worst today. The bank’s largest shareholders (MPS Foundation) approved (read – forced through) a delay in a EUR 3 billion capital raise, which the bank needs to avoid nationalization, until May. The delay (which will cost the bank EUR 120 million in interest) allows MPS more time to liquidate their 33.5% holding before their stake is massively diluted. Management is ‘considering’ resignation and is “very annoyed,” but the city Mayor is going Nationalist with his delay-supporting comments that “we cannot let the third biggest bank in this country fall prey to foreign interests.” So Europe is recovering but they can’t even raise a day’s worth of POMO to save the oldest bank in the world?

 

Via Reuters,

Italy’s third-biggest bank Monte dei Paschi di Siena was forced to delay a vital 3 billion euro ($4.1 billion) share sale to raise capital until mid-2014 because of shareholder opposition, plunging its turnaround plan into uncertainty.

 

The bank’s chairman and its chief executive may now resign after their plan to launch the cash call in January was defeated at an extraordinary shareholder meeting on Saturday due to the vote of Monte Paschi’s top shareholder.

 

The world’s oldest bank needs to tap investors for cash to pay back 4.1 billion euros in state aid it received earlier this year and avert nationalization

Simple game theory really – why would the largest shareholder “guarantee” losses now when it can try and liquidate more of its exposure over time?

But the cash-strapped Monte dei Paschi foundation – whose stake in the bank is big enough to veto any unwanted decision – forced a postponement until at least mid-May to win more time to sell down its 33.5 percent holding and repay its own debts.

 

…

 

Antonella Mansi, a feisty 39-year-old businesswoman recently appointed head of the Monte dei Paschi foundation, said her insistence on a cash call delay did not amount to a no-confidence vote in the bank’s management.

 

But she said that carrying out the capital increase in January would massively dilute the foundation’s holding, leaving it with virtually nothing to sell to reimburse debts of 340 million euros.

 

“We have a precise duty to ensure (the foundation’s) survival. You can’t ask us to let it collapse,” she said.

Management is “very annoyed”…

Chairman Alessandro Profumo, a strong-willed and internationally respected banker who was formerly the chief of UniCredit, said he and CEO Fabrizio Viola would decide in January whether to step down.

 

“These are decisions one takes in cold blood and in the right place,” Profumo said at the meeting.

 

“What I have on my mind is a 3 billion euro cash call because we need to pay back 4 billion euros to taxpayers. Today this is uncertain and at risk,” he told a press conference.

 

Viola, sitting at his side, told reporters he would do everything “so that the ship does not sink”, but that he could not take responsibility for mistakes made by others.

Of course, there is risk either way…

“It’s important to carry out the capital increase as early as possible,” said Roberto Lottici, fund manager at Ifigest. “The risk is that the bank finds itself rushing into a cash call later at a lower price than what it could achieve now.”

 

…

 

“It’s hard to think that the third largest Italian bank can’t find a pool of banks able to support the cash call after May 2014,” said Antonella Mansi, the president of the MPS foundation, at the shareholders’ meeting.

and given the number of jobs involved… local officials are now reacting in favor of the delay (hoping for domestic savior)…

But in Siena, where the bank is known as “Daddy Monte” and is the biggest employer, fears that the cash call might sever the umbilical cord between the lender and the city run high.

 

Siena mayor Bruno Valentini, whose city council is the top stakeholder in the Monte dei Paschi foundation, said on Friday a postponement might help keep the bank in Italian hands.

 

“We cannot let the third biggest bank in this country fall prey to foreign interests,” he said. “Monte dei Paschi is not just an issue in Siena, it is a big national issue.”

So, even after all the lqiuidty provision; yields and spreads on European debt back near record lows; calls from US asset managers that Europe is recovering and will be the growth engine; and hopes that Europe’s AQR stress test (and resolution mechanism) will be the gold standard for confidence in their banking system… they still can’t find a group of greater fools to pony up EUR3 billion in real (not rehypothecated) money to save the world’s oldest bank – that’s a day’s worth of Fed POMO!!!!

 

On an odd side note, we did note a major surge in ECB margin calls this week…

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/uoBDWm4s8tU/story01.htm Tyler Durden

With equity markets reacting enthusiastically to the Fed’s historic policy change announced last week, PIMCO’s Mohamed El-Erian notes many have rushed to declare victory. Whether in asserting investor comfort with the policy regime shift or in declaring the definitive end of dependence on quantitative easing (“QE”), they believe that the markets’ short-term reaction can indeed be extrapolated into the longer-term. While most Fed officials will welcome the markets’ favourable reaction – and especially so after the May-June shock – El-Erian suspects that they are much more cautious. Indeed, in this FT Op-Ed, he lays out four reasons why such caution is understandable.

Via The FT,

…

First, the impact of Fed policy remains overly dependent on using artificially-high asset prices to alter household and company economic behaviour. Other transmission mechanisms, including the credit channel and the deployment of cash in real economic investments, remain muted. Accordingly, concerns about financial soundness will persist until the Fed witnesses improving economic fundamentals that validate artificially-elevated asset prices.

Second, the Fed is entering a more uncertain policy phase due to its ongoing instrument pivot – namely, less reliance on a direct measure (monthly purchases) and greater reliance on an indirect one (impacting behaviour through forward policy signals). Issues regarding the degree of effectiveness and control could well come to the fore. Just witness the recent sharp upward moves in the 5-year US Treasury yields, along with other intermediate maturities.

Third, those at the Fed who follow closely market positioning will probably recognise that equity markets are currently in the grips of very favourable technicals; and, judging from history, such technicals can lead to price overshoots whose reversal can be quite disruptive.

Finally, the Fed is not the only central bank that has been active in maintaining economic and financial tranquility and, to this end, continuously bolstering asset prices; and it is not the only institution that has been forced to rely on imperfect instruments to fulfil this task.

The European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan are in the same boat. And they, too, face tricky policy issues ahead, with success also ultimately dependent on the overall ability of their economies to overcome the trio of inadequate aggregate demand, insufficient supply responsiveness and residual debt overhangs.

After a couple of false starts, Fed officials have impressively won the first big battle in implementing a gradual orderly exit from QE3, a highly-experimental measure whose longer-term consequences are not fully known as yet. They are yet to win the war.

Of course, a glance around the world – from Turkey to Thailand and even in credit and volatility markets in the last few days, and perhaps El-Erian’s caution is warranted.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/w10V7sbYqy8/story01.htm Tyler Durden

With equity markets reacting enthusiastically to the Fed’s historic policy change announced last week, PIMCO’s Mohamed El-Erian notes many have rushed to declare victory. Whether in asserting investor comfort with the policy regime shift or in declaring the definitive end of dependence on quantitative easing (“QE”), they believe that the markets’ short-term reaction can indeed be extrapolated into the longer-term. While most Fed officials will welcome the markets’ favourable reaction – and especially so after the May-June shock – El-Erian suspects that they are much more cautious. Indeed, in this FT Op-Ed, he lays out four reasons why such caution is understandable.

Via The FT,

…

First, the impact of Fed policy remains overly dependent on using artificially-high asset prices to alter household and company economic behaviour. Other transmission mechanisms, including the credit channel and the deployment of cash in real economic investments, remain muted. Accordingly, concerns about financial soundness will persist until the Fed witnesses improving economic fundamentals that validate artificially-elevated asset prices.

Second, the Fed is entering a more uncertain policy phase due to its ongoing instrument pivot – namely, less reliance on a direct measure (monthly purchases) and greater reliance on an indirect one (impacting behaviour through forward policy signals). Issues regarding the degree of effectiveness and control could well come to the fore. Just witness the recent sharp upward moves in the 5-year US Treasury yields, along with other intermediate maturities.

Third, those at the Fed who follow closely market positioning will probably recognise that equity markets are currently in the grips of very favourable technicals; and, judging from history, such technicals can lead to price overshoots whose reversal can be quite disruptive.

Finally, the Fed is not the only central bank that has been active in maintaining economic and financial tranquility and, to this end, continuously bolstering asset prices; and it is not the only institution that has been forced to rely on imperfect instruments to fulfil this task.

The European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan are in the same boat. And they, too, face tricky policy issues ahead, with success also ultimately dependent on the overall ability of their economies to overcome the trio of inadequate aggregate demand, insufficient supply responsiveness and residual debt overhangs.

After a couple of false starts, Fed officials have impressively won the first big battle in implementing a gradual orderly exit from QE3, a highly-experimental measure whose longer-term consequences are not fully known as yet. They are yet to win the war.

Of course, a glance around the world – from Turkey to Thailand and even in credit and volatility markets in the last few days, and perhaps El-Erian’s caution is warranted.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/w10V7sbYqy8/story01.htm Tyler Durden

The holiday-thinned activity may have distorted the price action, but the general theme that has emerged in recent weeks remains very much intact. The US dollar’s weakness, which many observers and the media emphasize, is very narrow and largely confined to the euro and sterling (and a few currencies that move in their orbits).

 

Even in recent days, as the euro and sterling climbed to two-year high, the yen slumped to five-year lows, and Australian and Canadian dollars remain pinned near multi-year lows.  Eastern and central European currencies have been lifted against the dollar by the rising euro, but many of the larger accessible emerging market currencies, like the South African rand, the crisis-stricken Turkish lira, and Mexican peso have not performed well.   And over the past week, the Thai baht has lost almost as much as the Japanese yen.

 

It seems that the combination of the large current account surplus, aided by the re-balancing of the periphery, including Spain, portfolio capital inflows, and the ongoing de-leveraging of the financial sector is giving the euro greater legs than anticipated.  At the same time, despite the divergence in the trajectory of monetary policy, Dec Eurodollar-Euribor spread stands at an unimpressive 8 bp. Three-month Euribor was fixed higher than three-month Eurodollar (0.2735% vs 0.2466%).

 

The thin market conditions appear to have exacerbated the move that was already underway.  The move to almost $1.39 at the end of last week was exaggerated and some near-term backing and filling is likely.  Initial support is seen in the $1.3680-$1.3700 area and then $1.3600.   On the upside, there is increased focus on the trend line drawn off the record high in 2008 (~ $1.6040) and the May 2011 high (~$1.4940).   It comes in in January near $1.4050.

 

Sterling has convincingly violated a similar trend line.  It is drawn off the August 2009 high (~$1.7045) and the April 2011 high (~$1.6750).  It was approached several times since, including in January and July 2013.  Before the weekend, it recorded its highest close in 2 1/2 years.  Any backing and filling should be limited to the $1.6300-area.  Assuming that sterling pushed through the $1.66, the next important technical target is near $1.6750.

 

The losses in the Dollar Index have been mitigated by the dollar’s strength against the yen and Canadian dollar.  It rebounded quickly from the drop below the month’s previous lows, leaving it stuck between the uptrend drawn off the October 25 low (~79.00) and the December 18 low (~79.80) and the downtrend line drawn off the November 12 and 21 highs (~81.45 and 81.30) and the December 20 high (a little above 0.8080).  These converging trend lines are found near 80.00 and 80.65 at on January 3.

 

If the euro and sterling’s strength are a theme so is the yen’s weakness, making it difficult, as we have noted in talking about the dollar in general.    The dollar pushed through the JPY105 level after breaking JPY104 in the immediate response to the Fed’s tapering decision on December 18. The next important technical target comes near JPY110.

 

The euro has not looked back since breaking above JPY140 on December 6.  The next target is JPY150. Sterling surpassed JPY170 on the Fed’s tapering and this area was tested as support before bouncing higher in recent days.  There is potential, from a technical point of view toward JPY180 and possibly JPY184.

 

The broadly sideways price action in the Australian dollar failed to improve the technical picture.  Its bounce in the early part of the last week stalled just ahead of the lower end technical resistance we noted in the $0.8970 area.  It can be expected to test the $0.8800 in the days ahead. The next major objective is near $0.8550.

 

After the yen and Australian dollar, the Canadian dollar has been the third worst performer against the dollar over here in Q4.  Over the past week, the Canadian dollar was weaker than the Aussie. We look for the greenback to convincingly rise through the CAD1.07 level.  The next immediate technical target is around CAD1.08 and we look for a move toward CAD1.12-CAD1.14 in the coming months.

 

For seven consecutive sessions through the end of last week, the dollar recorded a higher low against the Mexican peso.  Nevertheless, the broad trading range of MXN12.80-MXN13.10, identified last week, has remained largely intact.  Technical indicators are not generating strong signals presently, but if this analysis is accurate and there is some backing and filling technical action in the near-term, we suspect the dollar is more likely to ease toward the lower end of this narrow range.

 

The CFTC’s Commitment of Traders Report for the most recent reporting period is not available.  

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/knhZzgcxknI/story01.htm Marc To Market

The holidays are a time for giving… to yourself if the “independent” US media has anything to do with it… (come on, who deserves it more anyway?)

 

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/OM6BrCKpahE/story01.htm Tyler Durden

The holidays are a time for giving… to yourself if the “independent” US media has anything to do with it… (come on, who deserves it more anyway?)

 

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/OM6BrCKpahE/story01.htm Tyler Durden

When Bitcoin fans were hoping for fast track adoption by the mainstream, catching the attention of the all-seeing eye of Sauron Goldman Sachs was probably low on their list of action items. Yet that is precisely what they got with the arrival of a Goldman Sachs board member M. Michele Burns, who recently joined the board of Boston-based Bitcoin payment processing system startup Circle Internet Financial.

As Fortune reports “Circle launched earlier this year, and was founded by Jeremy Allaire, who has led other Internet start-ups, but recently has become a Bitcoin evangelist. The company got $9 million in funding from a number of venture capitalist firms. Jim Breyer, a partner at Accel and an early backer of Facebook (FB), is also on Circle’s board, as is Raj Date, who recently left a top post at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Circle declined to comment about Burns. Two sources with knowledge of her move confirmed it.”

Perhaps of same or greater importance is that in addition to being the chair of the audit committee at the preeminent FDIC-backed hedge fund, Burns also was a board member of the largest retailer in the world, Walmart (WMT accepting BTC?), and is currently on the board of the one company that is at the nexus of the Internet economy, Cisco (and which was punished furiously following Snowden’s NSA-spying revelations after projected Chinese revenues imploded and that Cisco may or may not have been collaborating with the government in leaking private data).

In fact, when one considers that in the face of Burns, Circle’s proximity to Bitcoin now allows no less than three of the preeminent companies of the old and new economy to keep a close eye on the digital currency and one must be either very excited about the future of BTC…. or very worried. Because if escape from the mainstream is the main target behind the Bitcoin movement, this could be problematic now that Goldman, Cisco and Walmart are all starting to sniff around.

Why a Bitcoin transaction processing company? Simple – these companies are the middlemen that will allow much broader acceptance of BTC by merchants. Consider this in the context of the recent announcement by Overstock that it would begin accepting Bitcoin by mid-2014:

Currently 12.1 million Bitcoin are in circulation, with a total value of about $8.8 billion. At this size, the value of Bitcoin can fluctuate violently based on actions by a few big investors or the Chinese government. This is a problem: If a retailer saves 3 percent on credit card transactions, but the value of Bitcoin loses 5 percent before the retailer can convert it back into dollars, the concept will quickly lose its luster.

 

Bitcoin-processing companies such as Bitpay and Coinbase take on this risk for merchants, offering to convert Bitcoin into U.S. dollars immediately. But they might not be able to handle that risk if any serious slice of Overstock’s transactions comes in Bitcoin, says Barry Silbert, the founder and chief executive of SecondMarket and an investor in both companies. “When you start talking to companies like Overstock or Amazon, they’d only be able to guarantee those rates to a certain transaction amount,” he says. Bitpay processed $100 million in transaction in 2013. “I think the system is going to expand as quickly as it needs to,” says Stephanie Yargo, the company’s vice president of marketing.

Well, maybe not Bitpay, but its competitors such as Circle might, especially if directly or indirectly backed by the balance sheet of, say, Goldman Sachs, especially if in some joint venture with Walmart. Because whereever the money is, either fiat or digital, one can be sure to find Goldman.

Finally, here is the full bio of the Goldman and Cisco, and now Circle, director:

M. Michele Burns

Director Since: October 2011 

Committees: Chair, Audit Committee; member of all other standing committees 

Other Current Public Company Directorships: Cisco Systems, Inc.

Other Public Company Directorships within past 5 years: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 

Career Highlights

• Chief Executive Officer, Retirement Policy Center, sponsored by Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (MMC); Center focuses on retirement public policy issues (October 2011 – Present); Center Fellow and Strategic Advisor, Stanford University Center on Longevity (August 2012 – Present)

• Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mercer LLC, a subsidiary of MMC and a global leader in human resource consulting, outsourcing and investment services (September 2006 – early October 2011)

• Chief Financial Officer, MMC, a global professional services and consulting firm (March 2006 – September 2006)

• Chief Financial Officer, Chief Restructuring Officer and Executive Vice President, Mirant Corporation, a competitive energy company (May 2004 – January 2006)

• Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Delta Air Lines, Inc., an air carrier, which filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in September 2005 (including various other positions, 1999 – April 2004)

• Senior Partner and Leader, Southern Regional Tax Practice, Arthur Andersen LLP, an accounting firm (including various other positions, 1981 –1999)

Other Professional Experience and Community Involvement

• Board member and Treasurer, Elton John AIDS Foundation

Experience and Qualifications

As the former Chief Financial Officer of several global public companies, Ms. Burns brings to our Board substantial expertise in accounting and the review and preparation of financial statements, which she draws upon as our Audit Committee Chair. In addition, as the former CEO of Mercer LLC, Ms. Burns brings to our Board her experience in human capital management and strategic consulting, which assists our Board in its oversight of our firm’s strategy. Through her service on the boards of directors and board committees of other public companies and not-for-profit entities, Ms. Burns has developed additional leadership and corporate governance expertise.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/zzID61gT9rM/story01.htm Tyler Durden

First posted by Christina McDowell in the LA Times

An Open Letter to the Makers of The Wolf of Wall Street, and the Wolf Himself

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, dear Kings of Hollywood, but you have been conned.

Let me introduce myself. My name is Christina McDowell, formerly Christina Prousalis. I am the daughter of Tom Prousalis, a man the Washington Post described as “just some guy on trial for penny-stock fraud.” (I had to change my name after my father stole my identity and then threatened to steal it again, but I’ll get to that part later.) I was eighteen and a freshman in college when my father and his attorneys forced me to attend his trial at New York City’s federal courthouse so that he “looked good” for the jury — the consummate family man.

And you, Jordan Belfort, Wall Street’s self-described Wolf: You remember my father, right? You were chosen to be the government’s star witness in testifying against him. You had pleaded guilty to money laundering and securities fraud (it was the least you could do) and become a government witness in two dozen cases involving your former business associate, but my father’s attorneys blocked your testimony because had you testified it would have revealed more than a half-dozen other corrupt stock offerings too. And, well, that would have been a disaster. It would have just been too many liars, and too many schemes for the jurors, attorneys or the judge to follow.

But the records shows you and my father were in cahoots together with MVSI Inc. of Vienna, e-Net Inc. of Germantown, Md., Octagon Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Czech Industries Inc. of Washington, D.C., and so on — a list of seemingly innocuous, legitimate companies that stretches on. I’ll spare you. Nobody cares. None of these companies actually existed, yet all of them were taken public by the one and only Wolf of Wall Street and his firm Stratton Oakmont Inc in order to defraud unwitting investors and enrich yourselves.

As an eighteen-year-old, I had no idea what was going on. But then again, did anyone? Certainly your investors didn’t — and they were left holding the bag when you cashed out your holdings and got rich off their money.

So Marty and Leo, while you glide through press junkets and look forward to awards season, let me tell you the truth — what happened to my mother, my two sisters, and me.

The day my father had to surrender to prison, I drove him. My mother had locked herself in the bathroom crying and throwing up, becoming nothing short of a more beautiful version of Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine. Ironically enough, Marty, she looks like a cross between Sharon Stone and Michelle Pfeiffer. Totally your leading ingénue type. Anyhow, after my father successfully laundered money in my name, hiding what was left of our assets from the government in a Wells Fargo bank account, I arrived home to discover multiple phone calls from creditors and attorneys threatening to sue me. He’d left me in nearly $100,000 worth of debt. He left and never told me.

After all of that liquidated money was gone from the Wells Fargo bank account, things got pretty bad. My younger sister ran away at seventeen. My older sister struggled to finish school in Texas. I couch surfed for two years, sometimes dressing out of my car and stealing pieces of salami out of my boyfriends’ refrigerators in the middle of the night, because I was so hungry and so ashamed that I couldn’t feed myself. Tips at the restaurant weren’t cutting it. It’s a pretty confusing experience to go from flying private with Dad to an evening where he’s begging you for a piece of your paycheck so he can buy food for dinner.

But, here’s the real kicker —

I believed him.

I believed everything my father told me. I believed it was the government’s fault he was going to prison and leaving his little princess, I believed it was your fault, Jordan Belfort. I believed that by taking out all those credit cards in my name, my father was attempting to save me. I believed him when he got out, and when he told me everything would be OK. I believed him until he tried to do the same thing all over again — until I was at risk of being arrested myself (and I’m saving that story for the memoir).

So here’s the deal. You people are dangerous. Your film is a reckless attempt at continuing to pretend that these sorts of schemes are entertaining, even as the country is reeling from yet another round of Wall Street scandals. We want to get lost in what? These phony financiers’ fun sexcapades and coke binges? Come on, we know the truth. This kind of behavior brought America to its knees.

And yet you’re glorifying it — you who call yourselves liberals. You were honored for career excellence and for your cultural influence by The Kennedy Center, Marty. You drive a Honda hybrid, Leo. Did you think about the cultural message you’d be sending when you decided to make this film? You have successfully aligned yourself with an accomplished criminal, a guy who still hasn’t made full restitution to his victims, exacerbating our national obsession with wealth and status and glorifying greed and psychopathic behavior. And don’t even get me started on the incomprehensible way in which your film degrades women, the misogynistic, ass-backwards message you endorse to younger generations of men.

But hey, listen boys, I get it. I was conned too. By. My. Own. Dad! I drove a white Range Rover in high school, snorted half of Colombia, and got any guy I ever wanted because my father would take them flying in his King Air.

And then I unraveled the truth. The truth about my father and his behavior: that behind all of it was really just insidious soul-sucking shame masked by addiction, which we love to call ambition, which is really just greed. Greed and the desire for fame (exactly what you’ve successfully given self-appointed motivational speaker/financial guru Jordan Belfort, whose business opportunities will surely multiply thanks to this film).

For me, it’s become goddamn unbearable.

But I refuse to give up.

Belfort’s victims, my father’s victims, don’t have a chance at keeping up with the Joneses. They’re left destitute, having lost their life savings at the age of 80. They can’t pay their medical bills or help send their children off to college because of characters like the ones glorified in Terry Winters’ screenplay.

Let me ask you guys something. What makes you think this man deserves to be the protagonist in this story? Do you think his victims are going to want to watch it? Did we forget about the damage that accompanied all those rollicking good times? Or are we sweeping it under the carpet for the sale of a movie ticket? And not just on any day, but on Christmas morning??

So here’s what I’m going to do first. I’m going to hand you my shame. Right now, in this very moment. The shame that I’ve been carrying for far too long as a result of being collateral damage. Because each of you should feel ashamed. And then I’m going to go pre-order my tickets to August: Osage County in support of Julia and Meryl — because at least, as screwed up as that family is, they talk about the truth.

I urge each and every human being in America NOT to support this film, because if you do, you’re simply continuing to feed the Wolves of Wall Street.

Yours truly,

Christina McDowell

PS. Quick update on Dad: He is now doing business with the Albanian government and, rumor has it, married to a 30-year-old Albanian translator — they always, always land on their feet.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ISeXyepR73w/story01.htm Tyler Durden

First posted by Christina McDowell in the LA Times

An Open Letter to the Makers of The Wolf of Wall Street, and the Wolf Himself

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, dear Kings of Hollywood, but you have been conned.

Let me introduce myself. My name is Christina McDowell, formerly Christina Prousalis. I am the daughter of Tom Prousalis, a man the Washington Post described as “just some guy on trial for penny-stock fraud.” (I had to change my name after my father stole my identity and then threatened to steal it again, but I’ll get to that part later.) I was eighteen and a freshman in college when my father and his attorneys forced me to attend his trial at New York City’s federal courthouse so that he “looked good” for the jury — the consummate family man.

And you, Jordan Belfort, Wall Street’s self-described Wolf: You remember my father, right? You were chosen to be the government’s star witness in testifying against him. You had pleaded guilty to money laundering and securities fraud (it was the least you could do) and become a government witness in two dozen cases involving your former business associate, but my father’s attorneys blocked your testimony because had you testified it would have revealed more than a half-dozen other corrupt stock offerings too. And, well, that would have been a disaster. It would have just been too many liars, and too many schemes for the jurors, attorneys or the judge to follow.

But the records shows you and my father were in cahoots together with MVSI Inc. of Vienna, e-Net Inc. of Germantown, Md., Octagon Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Czech Industries Inc. of Washington, D.C., and so on — a list of seemingly innocuous, legitimate companies that stretches on. I’ll spare you. Nobody cares. None of these companies actually existed, yet all of them were taken public by the one and only Wolf of Wall Street and his firm Stratton Oakmont Inc in order to defraud unwitting investors and enrich yourselves.

As an eighteen-year-old, I had no idea what was going on. But then again, did anyone? Certainly your investors didn’t — and they were left holding the bag when you cashed out your holdings and got rich off their money.

So Marty and Leo, while you glide through press junkets and look forward to awards season, let me tell you the truth — what happened to my mother, my two sisters, and me.

The day my father had to surrender to prison, I drove him. My mother had locked herself in the bathroom crying and throwing up, becoming nothing short of a more beautiful version of Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine. Ironically enough, Marty, she looks like a cross between Sharon Stone and Michelle Pfeiffer. Totally your leading ingénue type. Anyhow, after my father successfully laundered money in my name, hiding what was left of our assets from the government in a Wells Fargo bank account, I arrived home to discover multiple phone calls from creditors and attorneys threatening to sue me. He’d left me in nearly $100,000 worth of debt. He left and never told me.

After all of that liquidated money was gone from the Wells Fargo bank account, things got pretty bad. My younger sister ran away at seventeen. My older sister struggled to finish school in Texas. I couch surfed for two years, sometimes dressing out of my car and stealing pieces of salami out of my boyfriends’ refrigerators in the middle of the night, because I was so hungry and so ashamed that I couldn’t feed myself. Tips at the restaurant weren’t cutting it. It’s a pretty confusing experience to go from flying private with Dad to an evening where he’s begging you for a piece of your paycheck so he can buy food for dinner.

But, here’s the real kicker —

I believed him.

I believed everything my father told me. I believed it was the government’s fault he was going to prison and leaving his little princess, I believed it was your fault, Jordan Belfort. I believed that by taking out all those credit cards in my name, my father was attempting to save me. I believed him when he got out, and when he told me everything would be OK. I believed him until he tried to do the same thing all over again — until I was at risk of being arrested myself (and I’m saving that story for the memoir).

So here’s the deal. You people are dangerous. Your film is a reckless attempt at continuing to pretend that these sorts of schemes are entertaining, even as the country is reeling from yet another round of Wall Street scandals. We want to get lost in what? These phony financiers’ fun sexcapades and coke binges? Come on, we know the truth. This kind of behavior brought America to its knees.

And yet you’re glorifying it — you who call yourselves liberals. You were honored for career excellence and for your cultural influence by The Kennedy Center, Marty. You drive a Honda hybrid, Leo. Did you think about the cultural message you’d be sending when you decided to make this film? You have successfully aligned yourself with an accomplished criminal, a guy who still hasn’t made full restitution to his victims, exacerbating our national obsession with wealth and status and glorifying greed and psychopathic behavior. And don’t even get me started on the incomprehensible way in which your film degrades women, the misogynistic, ass-backwards message you endorse to younger generations of men.

But hey, listen boys, I get it. I was conned too. By. My. Own. Dad! I drove a white Range Rover in high school, snorted half of Colombia, and got any guy I ever wanted because my father would take them flying in his King Air.

And then I unraveled the truth. The truth about my father and his behavior: that behind all of it was really just insidious soul-sucking shame masked by addiction, which we love to call ambition, which is really just greed. Greed and the desire for fame (exactly what you’ve successfully given self-appointed motivational speaker/financial guru Jordan Belfort, whose business opportunities will surely multiply thanks to this film).

For me, it’s become goddamn unbearable.

But I refuse to give up.

Belfort’s victims, my father’s victims, don’t have a chance at keeping up with the Joneses. They’re left destitute, having lost their life savings at the age of 80. They can’t pay their medical bills or help send their children off to college because of characters like the ones glorified in Terry Winters’ screenplay.

Let me ask you guys something. What makes you think this man deserves to be the protagonist in this story? Do you think his victims are going to want to watch it? Did we forget about the damage that accompanied all those rollicking good times? Or are we sweeping it under the carpet for the sale of a movie ticket? And not just on any day, but on Christmas morning??

So here’s what I’m going to do first. I’m going to hand you my shame. Right now, in this very moment. The shame that I’ve been carrying for far too long as a result of being collateral damage. Because each of you should feel ashamed. And then I’m going to go pre-order my tickets to August: Osage County in support of Julia and Meryl — because at least, as screwed up as that family is, they talk about the truth.

I urge each and every human being in America NOT to support this film, because if you do, you’re simply continuing to feed the Wolves of Wall Street.

Yours truly,

Christina McDowell

PS. Quick update on Dad: He is now doing business with the Albanian government and, rumor has it, married to a 30-year-old Albanian translator — they always, always land on their feet.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ISeXyepR73w/story01.htm Tyler Durden