Case 3: Prots Can Truly Corrupt Sub-prime Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMO's) are a very specialized investment vehicle which became very popular during the period 2003-08. Very simply the assets in one of these CMO's consisted of huge pools of sub-prime mortgages and the liabilities consisted of various layers of long term debt and then a thin sliver of common equity. Crucial to the successful economics of these CMO's was that a large chunk of this long term debt had to carry a AAA bond rating from both Moody's and Standard {'9' Poors, the two major bond rating agencies. Without this AAA rating investors would demand a higher interest rate and the returns to the common equity holder in the CMO would be compromised, negating the purpose of creating the CMO in the rst place. The rating agencies received a fee for rating each one of these CMO's before they went to the bond market for sale and these fees became an extremely important part of the agencies' profitability during the 2003-08 period. Investment banking rms originating these CMO's were routinely submitting them to the rating agencies and regularly expecting AAA ratings on a large portion of this debt. Companies like AIG are routinely buying this CMO debt based upon these AAA ratings and holding the debt for long term investment purposes. Ultimately, in 2008, a very large numb er of these sub-prime mortgages began to go into default {foreclosure which, in turn, resulted in massive losses to the investors in these CMO's including the investors in the AAA rated debt. Question A: What ethical dilemmas would the rating agencies have to deal with during this period? Question B: What obligations do the rating agencies have to these CMO investors? Question C: How do you think you would have been received if you worked for one of these agencies and objected to the AAA bond ratings being \"sold\" by your employer? Question D: As an employee what are your other options here