I'll preface this with my lack of any love for ITT, but there's a piece of the story that bothers me: "Last month, the feds demanded the company produce an additional $153 million in collateral—nearly double its $78 million in cash on hand—to cover possible losses that the government might incur if the company were to suddenly fail." Here's how that sounds to me: "Well, ITT technically hasn't done anything illegal. B…
> "Well, ITT technically hasn't done anything illegal. [...]" The DOE action is based on a risk of business failure produced by fraud lawsuits by the SEC (for securities fraud) and CFPB (for consumer fraud) against ITT, both directly and because the costs and potential fundamental issues with ITTs then-existing business model revealed by those lawsuits also led to the risk of losing the accreditation from its accredi…
Ah, thanks, that clears it up for me.