>>But it certainly is not 100%. I am not clear on what what a reverse auction is exactly. Can someone explain?
>
>http://www.supplyexcellence.com/blog/2008/09/29/bailout-reverse-auctions/
>
>You can download the paper on it here:
>
>http://www.nera.com/publication.asp?p_ID=3589&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nera.com%2Fpublication.asp%3Fp_ID%3D3589&esheet=5789933&lan=en_US&anchor=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nera.com%2Fpublication.asp%3Fp_ID%3D3589&index=1
>
>A nice quick explanation here:
>
>http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/reverse_auctions.php
>and
>http://blogs.ft.com/wolfforum/2008/09/can-washington-%E2%80%93-and-a-reverse-auction-%E2%80%93-save-the-markets-and-protect-the-taxpayer/
>
>Traditional auctions have one seller and many buyers competing on price. But in this situation, there is likely, at least at first, to be only one buyer (the U.S. Treasury) and many potential sellers (all the banks holding these toxic securities). Through such a reverse auction, these sellers would propose to the Treasury – and ultimately any other buyers willing to come into the market as co-investors – the lowest price they would accept for their eligible securities. This will help protect taxpayers from overpaying for these securities.

Good info, thanks. Are you going to SW Fox?