"Does anyone really want to see Citi's first-quarter numbers?"

From KAL at The Economist: http://www.economist.com/daily/kallery/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13245050&source=features_box_main

http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/06/news/economy/jobs_february/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/06/news/companies/bank_failure/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/06/news/dodd.fdic.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009030700
In the US the unemployment rate hit 8.1%, another bank bit the dust and in the CDS markets one seizure after the other rocks the system. The markets are, under the cover of darkness at times, preparing for some more big-name defaults.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/06/news/economy/consumer_credit/index.htm
In a bit of a happy blip, US consumer credit had a bit of a spike, which is nice. But it's unlikely to have anything to do with the bigger picture.

http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13244969&source=features_box_main
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Big-risks-for-the-insurer-of-last-resort-$pd20090306-PUS82?OpenDocument
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13240654
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13145857
http://www.informationarbitrage.com/2009/03/wheres-the-trade.html
I've also found a couple of articles about the situation in Europe and the UK. The government there just increased its stake in Lloyd's Bank (not related to the insurance company, by the way), but there is little for them to do but sit back and pick up the pieces as they come. Britain is in really, really deep trouble and Roger Ehrenberg from informationarbitrage sets out a few reasons for why long-US/short-UK might be an idea for the next year. I'm still astounded myself that US treasuries has held up, but I suppose there's basically nothing else out there to put one's money into.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/KGB-INTERROGATION-Greg-Tanzer-$pd20090306-PURW6?OpenDocument&src=sph
http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13251429&source=features_box_main
And of course the regulators are out there as well, as usual trying to hide their inability to see any of this coming with "we didn't have enough power". Stupid, if you ask me because even without the legislations to do anything they had all the access to information they could possibly have needed. But they had no better an idea on the true state of the system than the banks themselves. There's some sort of debate popping up at the moment in Australia as well. Domestic banks here are doing relatively well, and politicans are quick to attribute this to APRA and all the great regulations they devised, while CEOs of course attribute most of it to their great leadership and risk management systems. But Ian MacFarlane (former RBA boss) reckons it might have had different reasons: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Foundational-fluke-$pd20090302-PR559?OpenDocument

And in funny/general news, it turns out that
- About $50b of US taxpayer funds used to save AIG went straight into the pockets of Deutsche and Goldman's, among others: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123638394500958141.html
- People are remembering some wisdom from ages past by buying a good book: http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13185404
- New York is basically stuffed: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/new-york-$pd20090306-PUQMU?OpenDocument ... reading that, I can't help myself: http://www.leveragedsellout.com/2008/05/layoff-season
- And finally, here's a bit of an overview of the one question that really needs answering yesterday: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/To-nationalise-or-not--that-is-the-question-$pd20090304-PSUBW?OpenDocument