Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

The Art of Bank Failures

Posted on by Adrienne Gonzalez

alan_greenspan_pancake.jpgDeutsche Bank wins the prize for the most well-capitalized art collection, racking up 53,000 works in one of the largest corporate art collections in the world – as of 2004, worth an estimated $124 million (USD). Does that fall under PP&E? How does one depreciate a Cezanne hanging in a corporate office anyway? Oh wait, you don’t.
In honor of the year anniversary of Lehman’s fall, we find it worth noting here that Lehman’s Dick Fuld and his wife found that when you’re in desperate need of a capital infusion and facing epic failure, pawning off your precious fine art pieces works in a pinch.
More, after the jump


Guardian UK:

The bankrupt investment bank Lehman Brothers wants to sell at least $8m (£5.2m) worth of the art collection that once decorated its offices. The news comes as $20m of postwar art, put up for sale by the former Lehman boss Richard Fuld and his wife Kathy, goes on the block tonight at Christie’s in New York.

That’s got to hurt.
But Dick isn’t alone. If only banks would have considered these precious assets while spiraling down the toilet.
Portfolio has a do-not-miss on the art collections left behind by bank failures:

From coast to coast, millions of dollars of corporate art that once hung in the offices of well-known banks has itself become entangled in the fallout from the financial crisis. The fate of that artwork is still being sorted out, along with the assets involved in many of the unprecedented bank failures and resulting mergers that took place last year. Some of the surviving financial institutions appear to be holding onto the valuable artwork for their own collections, despite the chance to cushion their coffers with its sale. Others are selling the art or donating it to local museums and nonprofits.

Well, wait a minute, will this art have the same fate as the $4 billion in WaMu deposits the failed thrift is fighting to get back from JP Morgan? Just sayin.
This is nothing new. In 1991, the FDIC netted a cool $250,000 for the art collection of failed Boston Trade Bank. Though that was a pathetic catch in comparison to the $800,000 the collection of 219 pieces was estimated to be worth but hey, every little bit helps.
Wonder why no one’s thought to tap AIG for some precious paintings? Surely General Motors has a few pricey pieces lying around corporate offices, let’s use that to recoup that $23 billion American taxpayers may never see again!

Related Posts

Should You Request a Rescore if a Simulation Snafu Cost You a Passing Grade on the CPA Exam?

For this, my first CPA exam advice column since 2010 testing finally closed, we have a pretty interesting question from a candidate in Georgia who wants to know if it her 74 is worth a rescore. Normally my advice is to forget about disputing your score as the AICPA has not actually changed a single failing score to passing in the last three years (remember, their formula is bulletproof and they are not about to admit their precious psychometric testing sucks) but this is a special case.

Hello, I have a question related to my score on Auditing and would appreciate any advice you could provide. I took the exam on 10/28/2010 and received my score of 74. I am wondering what my options are for appeal or review. The reason for this is because on the last simulation one of the tabs was not the same when I tried to review as when I first saw it. I am 100% sure that I had the choice of 6 options when taken the exam. But once I went back to review the test, there were only 4 choices available. I did report this to the coordinator that was present and she told me that she would write a report. I also reported in the section where they ask if there were any problems during testing.

Firstly, remember that Prometric test center staff are not hired by the AICPA to administer your test. They administer hundreds of different professional examinations, not just the CPA, so they don’t really get how important a single screwed up simulation can be to your overall score. Don’t be surprised if they merely wrote down your complaint and tossed it into the examination abyss.

That being said, the AICPA’s appeal process isn’t really going to help you. As I said above, the chances of a rescore turning out favorably for you are slim to none.

But you may have another option, available through your state board, that would allow you to meet with one of their representatives and see the questions you did not answer correctly. Whether or not this actually ends up in your 74 turning into a 75 is up for debate and in my three years of working in CPA review, I never met anyone who did this, let alone did it successfully.

Contact your state board and ask about the score appeal option. If available, you will likely have to pay a fee and there are no guarantees that anything positive will come of it but if you sincerely believe that the simulation changed, that’s a glitch and throwing out that simulation could just bring you beyond a 75.

Good luck!

The Return of Capital?

Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for magic money.jpgAfter last week’s talk with Sam Antar, he got me thinking about our major capital problems, reminding me of something I’d seen earlier in the year on the world running out of capital.
How is that even possible? Isn’t capital just an accounting entry?
In the April piece, it was argued that the global capital trench is not possibly large enough to cater to the budgetary debauchery of the Obama administration. The stimulus. Health care. Afghanistan. Pick one and you can easily identify where the problem lies; put them together and you realize that we are fighting an uphill battle against investor demand for risky assets – including sovereign debt. In other words, T-bills aren’t what they used to be.


So how can regulators impose stricter capital requirements when trillions in fake capital built upon fantasy accounting in the years leading up to the financial crisis was vaporized?
Credit Suisse believes new capital requirements in Europe will cost affected banks £33 billion, some of which will inevitably come from those banks’ clients.
FT Alphaville:

Indeed, one of the theories about why lending by UK banks has yet to pick up — despite the Bank of England’s QEasing efforts — is that banks have been preparing for higher capital rules just like the ones above. That rather implies there are, perhaps less expected, costs for consumers as well.
As the FSA notes in the consultation:As noted in Table 1, costs for firms will rise substantially as a result of these measures and these costs will be passed on, at least in part, to consumers. This increase may manifest itself as lower deposit returns and higher borrowing interest rates. The extent to which this occurs depends on a number of factors, including the extent to which firms may already be able to charge above competitive prices for some products.

Know what’s happening? You’ve got to pay back your share of that fake capital vaporized in the decoupling process. You borrowed against it and bought crap with it and got a raise because of it and now you’ve got to give it back.
That’s all.

Tales From the CPA Exam: Is Gum Really Banned at Prometric?

Directly from CPAnet comes word that gum could possibly be banned by Prometric, although it may only apply if the testing staff are having a bad day. I didn’t see gum on the list of prohibited items either and would assume the rules are not there for interpretation by staff based on the mood they are in.

The test facilitator at Prometric today made me take my gum out before the exam. I rebutted with the fact that the AICPA does not prohibit gum in the list of prohbited items in the AICPA Candidate Bulletin: She then explained that people have left their gum in the testing center and it has been a “mess” to clean up. She seemed irritated and ornery, and I didn’t want to raise my blood pressure any higher before going into the test room… so I conceded and spit out my gum.

Now, I tend to consider myself to be a courteous and responsible gumchewer. I dispose of my gum in its original wrapper that always ends up in a trash can. One reason I like chewing gum while taking a test is b/c it allows me to harness any natural stress and focus on the task at hand. I really could’ve used some gum today, but I didn’t let that ruin my test. However, I will never be able to quantify the effect of my lack of gum on my final score tbd. Does anybody know the official gum rule? I think this lady was just having a bad day…

I didn’t attempt to reach Prometric to confirm this candidate’s story, I believe that our little candidate here IS a responsible gumchewer. Since this was posted on August 3 (assuming the night after the exam), the candidate still has until September 3 to request a rescore though it’s been several years since the AICPA has actually granted one (don’t waste the money).

I believe you can also contest the conditions of your testing center within the same 30 day window so if you absolutely must, go that route. Complain that you were subjected to conditions outside of your control that had a detrimental effect on your performance and see how that works out.

Or hope you passed and don’t bring gum next time. Regardless of why you wanted it, you should have been allowed it since it wasn’t on the list. Hopefully this person checks in and lets us know how it turns out.