In March a small "Pros vs Cons" of the US Public Private Investment Plan (PPIP), more accurately known by its vernacular "toxic asset plan" title, appeared here. A quote from PIMCO's Bill Gross was cited:
“This is perhaps the first win/win/win policy to be put on the table and it should be welcomed enthusiastically. We intend to participate.”
Which is interesting because they chose yesterday not to participate in the "win/win/win".
Now, observes can choose to believe PIMCOs reasoning that "as a result of uncertainties regarding the design and implementation of the program, PIMCO withdrew its application to serve as a manager for the PPIP in early June" although no one else in the race did.
Or they can consider the merits of a LA Times piece yesterday:
"Pimco may have stumbled badly with its initial foray into buying troubled mortgage-backed bonds in 2007. That could have fueled concerns internally that the firm wouldn’t be able to raise from investors the minimum $500 million seed capital required for a manager in the PPIP under the Treasury’s rules." (link)Hazards of bottom fishing...