Posted on 08/29/2008 9:27:31 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Alpharetta, Georgia-based Integrity Bank has been closed by regulators and its assets have been transferred to Regions Financial Corp., Regions said in a prepared statement late Friday.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. assumed some $900 million in total deposits from Integrity and has transferred them to Regions (RF), Regions said, adding that, "the FDIC will retain most of Integrity Bank's loan portfolio for later disposition."
Integrity's closure is the 10th bank failure so far this year. The bank had $1.1 billion in total assets and $974 million in total deposits as of June 30, the FDIC said.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
FTA:
The FDIC boosted its number of “problem” banks to 117 in June, from 90 at the end of March; the total assets affected by that increased to $78 billion from $26 billion.
From 90 to 117 in three months...for a thirty percent increase. Oh, and did we forget that the FDIC only has $53 Billion in funds to insure trillions in deposits at U.S. banks?
Thanks for the heads up, PAR35!
Time for another of the FDIC’s “Friday Night Lights Out” where they release the info of a bank failure timed to minimize the impact on the news cycle.
In the old days in Texas, they used to be able to close one on Thursday night, and have it reopen under new ownership the next morning. I can’t remember the last time they closed one on a holiday weekend.
Leftist Democrats threatening to bring “civil rights violations” charges against financial institutions that do not give loans to their insolvent “constituents” is bringing some monster chickens home to roost.
Socialism 101: “Cause the problem,blame the opposition,then add to the problem.Repeat process until absolute power is achieved.”
Does anyone know if the FDIC is charging banks risk-based premiums for deposit insurance - or are they going down the same foolish path as the FSLIC in the late 80’s?
There is no way in hell the fdic can charge risk based premiums.
As soon as they charge a premium, there would be an instant run on that bank.
That is why they won’t tell you who is on the list of problem banks either.
Look at Chuck Schumer and IndyMac.
Note that banks increased in size as well as numbers.
Being a federal institution funded by Conrgress,I would assume that FDIC investigations into questionable bank loans given to penniless and credit lacking “minorities” came back,of course,with negative results.
Thus the results were spiked,ignored and the problem further compounded by the almighty aegis of political correctness.
The entire problem of the savings and loan crisis was the failure of the deposit insurance system to charge premiums based on the risk of the institution. Charles Keating’s operations paid the same premium per 100K of deposits as the most prudently run S&L of the day. Without some differentiation - there is no incentive to operate more sensibly - in fact there is an adverse selection problem where reckless swing for the fences strategies are encouraged - because there is no addition expense for risky behavior. You are correct that financial analysts could watch for a bank’s cost of insurance as one indicator of danger - but isn’t that something that we could use?
And how those constituents are taken care of! Many have no ambition, no work ethic, and no ethics period but they do have beautiful homes and cars.
Dang, and they just opened a branch near here too.
Socialism 101: “The mark of Cain is on every dollar earned through ability.”
You could tell something was wrong with this one by the name alone.
It's just like when someone talks about how honest they are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.