<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Negotiating your rating: Part 2, the rough and tumble</title>
	<atom:link href="http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/2008/04/negotiating-your-rating-part-2-the-rough-and-tumble.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/2008/04/negotiating-your-rating-part-2-the-rough-and-tumble.html</link>
	<description>Affordable Housing Institue</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 01:10:03 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JI</title>
		<link>http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/2008/04/negotiating-your-rating-part-2-the-rough-and-tumble.html/comment-page-1#comment-7882</link>
		<dc:creator>JI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 04:08:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/2008/04/negotiating-your-rating-part-2-the-rough-and-tumble.html#comment-7882</guid>
		<description>I think this author has taken things a little too far. Readers would be better served if this article focused on the key issue. Which, in my opinion, is the revenue model of the rating agencies. The analysts, credit policy members and even the credit committee process has integrity but does not  work in favor of the investor due to wrong incentives.  If the rating agency stopped charging the issuers for rating their bonds and instead charged investors for research, publications and products business they would truely be doing what they are set up for - Investors Service. 
Any comments on this would be appreciated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this author has taken things a little too far. Readers would be better served if this article focused on the key issue. Which, in my opinion, is the revenue model of the rating agencies. The analysts, credit policy members and even the credit committee process has integrity but does not  work in favor of the investor due to wrong incentives.  If the rating agency stopped charging the issuers for rating their bonds and instead charged investors for research, publications and products business they would truely be doing what they are set up for &#8211; Investors Service.<br />
Any comments on this would be appreciated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
