So, what's your opinion? How much of this amazing profit report is due to the changes in mark-to-market accounting rules. It's sounds fishy, I haven't noticed a huge increase in desire for loans, atleast among people I know. Just curious, thanks for atleast mentioning the possibility.

So, what's your opinion? How much of this amazing profit report is due to the changes in mark-to-market accounting rules. It's sounds fishy, I haven't noticed a huge increase in desire for loans, atleast among people I know. Just curious, thanks for atleast mentioning the possibility.

I am saying it here first, this is all smoke and mirrors. Because of the relaxation in 'mark to market' rules, toxic debt is now suddenly being passed off as 'healthy mortgage business'. I guarantee that if Wells Fargo had to liquidate some of it's assets to access capitol, they would not be able to access a third of what they are claiming they hold in mortgages, because it's all toxic. Wake up people, if the numbers all of a sudden look too good to be true, it's becuase they are.

B. Green: I don't know enough about WF to hazard a guess. But it's almost certain that WF did not take markdowns that they otherwise would have, absent the rule change on MTM. I don't think they're marking UP assets, however... Even if they're not making tons of new loans, that wide a spread on their existing biz can make some very nice cash flow.