From cfo.com:

“There is no way to hardwire [FAS 157 guidance],” asserted FASB member Leslie Seidman at the meeting, who said that fair value estimates should be considered from the perspective of the reporting entity, and therefore will likely be different for each company. “I’m afraid that if we write a lot of ‘shoulds’ it will give us a cookbook approach, but if we leave the hierarchy in place, people will consider the rule principles.”

Another article from cfo.com:

But the final, split vote from the FASB board dictates that companies will have to work through the uncertainties in FAS 157 for the greater good of investors. “This is the most important thing we’ve done as far as investors’ input [we've received], and I’d hate to see this delayed,” said board member Leslie Seidman. However, Seidman was one of the three board members who supported the deferral. She said it’s important for the board to balance investors’ input with an assessment of companies’ readiness so that the disclosures would actually provide better information.

When is everyone going to stop drinking the Kool-Aid?

Actually, I’ll take the other side of that bet.

It’s quite likely that a large number of conflicting interpretations and unintended consequences came to light as real world implementation moved forward, and that’s why a delay was considered.

I had no doubt that they WOULD get around it — I was just wondering how.

I suppose if the rule were kept as is, then the next plan of action would be to just ignore it, followed by lying.

As if the truth will ever come out of Merrill, GS and the rest…

4 to 3 votes is a strong indication of how screwed up our regulatory/political system has become.

To paraphrase slightly out of context Sen. McCain, our times have become the “No lobbyist left behind” era.

I will say it again: There will be no real remedy to all those ills until political campaigns are financed by the people.

I know it is a very unpopular idea in certain quarters. To that, I say that popularity bears little correlation to truth.

Ask yourself this simple question: Who will a politician work for?

My take? Like anyone else, politicians will work for those who pay them. I’d rather pay and have them for me than some special interest group that does not give a heck about my well-being.

What say you?

Francois

I love how the banks say that the assets are fully valued in Level 3………(Homer Simpson moment) D’oh……..

Ciao
MS

However, this does NOT solve the problem of valuations themselves! Only what assets are classified as tier 3, or untradable to the point that valuation is not true market value.

We still have a significant adjustment of the value of these assets to market valuations over model methods to come.

“We early adopted SFAS No. 157 in the first quarter of 2007.”

From Citi:

“The Company elected to early-adopt SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (SFAS 157), as of January 1, 2007.”

In fact, I would like to know of a financial firm that has not early adopted. 157 is also where the distinction of level 3 assets and their required disclosure came from.