AIG Says Will Not Join Lawsuit Against U.S. Government.

[elleng]

Source: nyt/reuters

American International Group Inc will not join a lawsuit against the U.S. government over the terms of the insurer's 2008 bailout, the company said on Wednesday.

In a statement, AIG said it expected to file a formal statement explaining its decision in coming weeks with the courts hearing the various cases.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/01/09/business/09reuters-aig-board.html?hp

[hlthe2b]

1. Too late... damage done and many of us will NOT forget.

Assholes...

[Flashmann]

5. Too late... damage done and many of us will NOT forget.

Yep.....Should've been a no brainer......Just the fact that they considered it for more than a millisecond,hi-lites an unacceptable level of wanton asshattiness.....

[soleft]

8. Thanks

[still_one]

2. I am sure hank Greenberg isn't too happy. The right move. Greenberg can get bent

[HERVEPA]

9. Show some love for 58 home runs

[still_one]

12. Wrong greenberg, but good one

[grantcart]

3. NPR business show ran a funny parody of AIG's "thanking America" ad.

They had an expert on who said that because there was a lawsuit that could effect shareholder equity that the board had to listen to the proposal or face the possibility of defending a lawsuit from this quack.

He also said that as it was universally accepted that AIG would have gone bankrupt without the bailout and the shareholders would have zero equity that the whole lawsuit is an absurd joke.

He predicted that the board would listen to both sides (government also gave a presentation) and show this idiot the door in a New York minute.

[1StrongBlackMan]

10. I heard the segment this morning ...

It was a parody?

From the segment, the lawsuit filing quack was none other than AIG former-CEO Hank Greenberg, a major stock holder in AIG. Talk about self-dealing! I guess his millions in walk-away money was not enough.

http://www.businessinsider.com/aig-launched-risky-bets-under-greenberg-2013-1

[TwilightGardener]

4. Did Elizabeth Warren scare them off?

[elleng]

7. She and probably a lot more 'noise.'

[SunSeeker]

13. Yes, when she publicized the "stealth bailout" via those tax breaks AIG shouldn't still be getting.

Apparently, they value their tax breaks more than anything they could recover from their lawsuit. Too late. They'll lose those now that EW is on the case. Just the fact that they would even mull over suing the government over bailing out their sorry asses is reason enough to immediately end those unjustified tax breaks.

[Hosnon]

17. God I love her. I FINALLY feel like we have someone not in their pocket.

I don't need "on my side". Not "on their side" works for now.

[Beacool]

15. I doubt it.

Greenberg was to the insurance industry someone similar to the old commercials for E. F. Hutton, when he spoke people in the industry listened. The Board paid him the courtesy of listening to his proposal. They probably did not imagine that their board meeting would have attracted so much attention.

[Enrique]

6. are they not merciful n/t

[closeupready]

11. But wait! Isn't that a breach of fiduciary duty??!

To the shareholders?

[Beacool]

14. It went the way that I thought it would go.

The board listened to Greenberg and then declined to join the lawsuit. Meantime, politicians and the punditry at large whipped people into a froth over something that never came to fruition.

As in old Rome, bread and circuses (panem et circenses).

[Bossy Monkey]

16. Damn! Now what am I going to do with all these torches and pitchforks? n/t

[cheapdate]

18. Big friggin' deal -- the corporation will not join the lawsuit.

The corporation made a business decision -- weighing potential gain vs. downside loss of reputation. The shareholders are still suing the government -- our government -- because they believe they were short-changed on some dividend payments while WE were saving them from bankruptcy.

I think this might be -- for me -- the most arrogant, maddening piece of the whole economic fiasco.

When is it enough?