Carl Levin

Preserving market share mattered, isn't that what he is saying, point blank?

I think that the agencies really went overboard here and really went off the deep end.

Unchecked competition on this basis can place the entire financial system at risk.

How about David Bawden?

And you were making pretty good profit at that time, though, weren't you?

Were you aware that there was a large growth in the utilization of interest-only loans during that period?

That constitutes a risk to ratings quality.

This does constitute a 'risk' to ratings quality.

Should collateral that is coming from a company whose collateral in general is not performing so good, should that collateral be treated differently?

You just said finally, after the fourth time I asked, it should be looked at differently.

So that Standard and Poor's assigns lower ratings to lenders that are known for poor quality loans with high delinquency rates?

It is a pretty sad story. A sad chapter in the history of credit rating agencies, folks.

But it may have been related to this issue, is that what you are saying?

February 2007, we need to talk about getting more resources in general.

Did she get the resources that she needed when she needed them?

You needed more resources?

You did not use this revised model to reevaluate existing RMBS securities, is that correct?

There was at Moody's, I believe--a man named Andy Kimball, is that correct?

Or if the bank got mad enough at an analyst and it was contentious enough, then you might tell the analyst, we are removing you for your own sake.

Did you ever remove a person from transactions with particular banks because of complaints from that bank?

It was transmitted to the analysts that market share was important.

Market share mattered to him, wouldn't you agree, Ms. Barnes?

You didn't retest the old deals, did you?

You were aware of that?

There is a strong internal emphasis on market coverage, yes.