Gee, I thought the stinking banker bailout was supposed to help!

[Raineyrocks]

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/16/news/companies/bank_of_america_results/index.htm?postversion=2009101607

Bank of America: $2.2 billion loss
Nation's biggest bank is hit by bad loans. Outgoing CEO Ken Lewis calls credit costs 'our major     
By David Ellis, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: October 16, 2009: 8:45 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Bank of America suffered a $2.2 billion loss in the latest quarter, the company said Friday.

Contributing to the grim third-quarter performance was a $1.2 billion dividend payment to its preferred shareholders, including the U.S. government, as well as credit losses within some of its consumer-related businesses.

"Obviously, credit costs remain high, and that is our major financial challenge going forward," Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis said in a statement.

The Charlotte, N.C.-based lender also paid out $402 million in the quarter after it agreed to eliminate a loss-sharing agreement it had struck with the government earlier this year.

Taken together, the company said it lost 26 cents a share.

Just a year ago, the company was comfortably in the black, reporting profit of $704 million, or 15 cents a share.

Friday's results, however, were slightly worse than Wall Street was expecting. Analysts had anticipated that the company would suffer a loss of 21 cents a share, according to Thomson Reuters.

Suffering the brunt of this quarter's losses was Bank of America's mortgage and credit card businesses. Both divisions lost more than $1 billion during the July-September period as more and more Americans found themselves out of work and unable to keep up with their loan obligations.

Loan troubles also intensified within Bank of America's commercial real estate portfolio, amid slower by both businesses and consumers.
0:00 /4:31AmEx CEO: We need reform

One bright spot was its wealth management business, one of the key businesses that led Bank of America to complete its controversial deal with Merrill Lynch last year.

Bank of America's latest results come at arguably one of the most strained periods for the nation's largest bank.

The company is currently facing a number of high-profile state and federal investigations related to its purchase of Merrill Lynch, not to mention a looming legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The company's pay plans for its top 100 employees are also under review by the Obama administration's so-called "pay czar." On Thursday, Lewis agreed to a deal not to accept a salary or bonus in his final year as CEO in an effort to deflect some of scrutiny the firm faces.

Last month, Lewis announced his decision to retire from the firm at year end, which some have speculated was prompted by the heightened scrutiny from both Capitol Hill and Wall Street. The company is currently engaged in a search for his replacement.

Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) shares fell more than 4% in pre-market trading. To top of page
First Published: October 16, 2009: 7:29 AM ET

[Tom Sawyer]

My banker neighbor is driving a brand new Porsche...
The bailout seems to work fine for the bankers. 

[Raineyrocks]

My banker neighbor is driving a brand new Porsche...
The bailout seems to work fine for the bankers. 

Eeeer, doesn't it make you angry?

[Ogre]

Indeed, the government hasn't stopped spending. The bailout helped those it was designed to help -- the bank management and politicians.

[Little Owl]

What sort of imbecile ever thought this bailout would do the country any good?  A bank is not like a steel maker or a software company.  Those companies have skills, talent, and intellectual capital.  One could at least argue that they have value beyond their financials and that saving them can be worthwhile even when they're broke.

A bank, in contrast, has no value whatsoever when it has no money.  Giving money to an insolvent bank is no better than giving it out at random.  (Arguably worse since the failed bank has a proven track record of failure.)

This scam wasn't even clever, because it was a scam on the surface.

[Raineyrocks]

What sort of imbecile ever thought this bailout would do the country any good?  A bank is not like a steel maker or a software company.  Those companies have skills, talent, and intellectual capital.  One could at least argue that they have value beyond their financials and that saving them can be worthwhile even when they're broke.

A bank, in contrast, has no value whatsoever when it has no money.  Giving money to an insolvent bank is no better than giving it out at random.  (Arguably worse since the failed bank has a proven track record of failure.)

This scam wasn't even clever, because it was a scam on the surface.

Right, it was a scam so no imbecile ever thought this bailout would do the country any good.    I wonder how far things are going to go until the majority of people in this country have had enough. 

What's your guess?  I honestly don't have one.  I thought the passing of the ' Patriot Acts' alone would have been it.