RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeZombie & Co.
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 7th, 2009 5:45 AM |
I am no fan of George Soros. I often believe he does not draw a hard line between his political interests and his business interests. His active support with MoveOn.org has made a mockery of any attempt to achieve campaign finance reform.
That said, for those involved in global finance, whether you like George Soros or not, you need to know what he is thinking. Why? George Soros can move markets via his own investment strategies. Additionally, there is little doubt that George is the epicenter in a massive flow of market sensitive information.
To that end, Soros gave a stinging indictment of the change in the FASB’s mark-to-market by stating in a Bloomberg interview,
the change to fair-value accounting rules will keep troubled banks in business, stalling a recovery of the U.S. economy.
“This is part of the muddling through scenario where we are going to keep zombie banks alive,” Soros, 78, said today in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “It’s going to sap the energies of the economy.”
Is this statement a self-serving offering by Soros? Who knows? Is it an attempt to further promote the U.S. as a lessened power? Perhaps. That said, there are others, myself included, who believe the relaxation of the mark-to-market, especially for outfits like Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the 12 regional Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBs) is nothing short of a charade.
Did Soros’ statement have an impact on the market? Not today. The dollar has been improving of late. However, over the longer haul, the cost of having a number of zombie-like banking institutions will be pressure on the dollar along with increased borrowing costs for the zombie institutions or Uncle Sam who will be backing them.
From a personal perspective, would you lend money to a zombie?
And now, here’s a must-watch little treat. Crank up your speakers . . .
LD
A Fraud By Any Other Name
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 6th, 2009 4:30 PM |
A few loyal readers have graciously shared video clips of interviews with former banking regulator, William K. Black. These interviews address the fact that a tremendous amount of mortgage originations at the core of our current economic turmoil were fraudulently underwritten. The borrowers were never qualified only then to fall upon hard times. The loans were often NINJA (No income check, No job check or asset check) and the fraud was more often committed by the lender than the borrower.
Why and how did this happen? Let’s briefly revisit my writing from November 12th:
At the turn of the century, the Wall Street model was a pure “originate to distribute” model with little to no residual risk on behalf of the originators or underwriters. When there is no residual risk, those who “WIN” are the players that can purely process the most volume. Well, how does one get volume? Lower the credit standards, put fewer restrictions on borrowers, little to no covenants (NINA Loans … no income, no asset check). WOW!!! What were we thinking?? Well Wall St. felt, “let’s worry about it tomorrow or maybe not at all because we are making too much money today.”
That money SUPPOSEDLY being made left tremendous risks on the books of the banks. The pursuit of ever greater SUPPOSED profits incorporated the use of CDS (credit default swaps) as synthetic collateral for structured deals. These CDS allowed for an enormous increase in volume and SUPPOSED profits. Don’t forget, though, at the core of the process a large percentage of the underlying loans were fraudulently underwritten. (more…)
Refinancing Risk Runs Rampant…Get To Higher Ground!
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 6th, 2009 10:27 AM |
The key for the global markets and economy is the ability to refinance outstanding debt. In the absence of a viable asset securitization market, will banks provide financing for current loans to be refinanced as they come due? Please remember the asset securitization market represented approximately 40% of total lending, so we are talking about a MAJOR segment of the market.
As banks assess applications for loan refinancings, they will impose ever more stringent underwriting standards as they will most likely put these loans on their books. Consumers, small businesses, and major corporations that do not have solid balance sheets and income statements will NOT get new financing. What happens to the existing loans that can’t get refinanced? The process is as such:
1. loan becomes delinquent
2. loan defaults
3. lender forecloses and takes possession of asset
4. lender attempts to liquidate asset via sale, pressuring valuation of assets in that sector.
5. original lender books loss on non-performing asset
What does it all mean? Losses on asset classes across the board. Can government programs plug the holes in the refinancing markets? Well, the Federal Reserve is known as the lender of last resort but their loans extend primarily to the banks themselves to plug holes in their balance sheets. The other governmental programs (TALF, PPIP) will hopefully restart the asset securitization markets and bring liquidity back in for refinancing. Will these programs hold the waves behind the dike? To a certain extent, but my recommendation is . . . get to higher ground. (more…)
Mr. Geithner, “I Want Some More”
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 30th, 2009 5:15 AM |
Poor Oliver Twist faced the wrath of the workhouse master when he asked for more soup. Why is it that certain banks do not face similar wrath when they go back to Uncle Sam for more “bread” with the soup?
They want more??!!
I have commented extensively on the banks’ need for more capital. Bernanke and Geithner now share that the banking industry has significant embedded losses which need more capital: Geithner Says Some Banks to Need ‘Large Amounts’ of Assistance.
Over and above this fact, it is now widely speculated that significant revenues at certain banks (Citi and BofA) were generated in the last few months via unwinding exposure to AIG. In short, AIG entered into massive transactions with these banks to eliminate further exposure on pre-existing trades. In the process, AIG (taxpayers) incurred larger losses while these banks generated large profits. Why would AIG do this? It’s part of a “going out of business sale” and executed with a “volume discount.”
As an investor, though, am I supposed to think that bank revenues are improving because of positive trends in the economy? No way.
Risks remain extraordinarily high. To that end, I STRONGLY encourage people to listen to the audio recording or the podcast of my interview with Michael Panzner from last evening. Michael has had the economy and the market called for the last few years. His books are comprehensive in laying out a sobering reality and potentially a daunting future.
LD
Tune in Sunday Evening to NoQuarter Radio’s “Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle”
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 29th, 2009 9:14 AM |
Please join us Sunday evening from 8-9 p.m. ET for NoQuarter Radio’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle. With the stock market near 12 year lows, what is driving 
the flows? What is truly going on in the economy? Where are markets headed? Given the Washington political circus, how will new legislation impact the future of Wall Street? So much to cover.
I will be speaking with Michael J. Panzner, a 25-year veteran of the global stock, bond, and currency markets who has worked in New York and London for such leading companies as HSBC, Soros Funds, ABN Amro, Dresdner Bank, and J.P. Morgan Chase.
He is the author of When Giants Fall: An Economic Roadmap for the End of the American Era, Financial Armageddon: Protecting Your Future from Four Impending Catastrophes, and The New Laws of the Stock Market Jungle: An Insider’s Guide to Successful Investing in a Changing World.
He has also been a columnist at TheStreet.com’s RealMoney paid-subscription service and a contributor to AOL’s BloggingStocks.com. In addition, Panzner has appeared on or been quoted byCNBC, Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Barron’s Reuters, CNN, MarketWatch, BusinessWeek Online, TheStreet.com, Slate, CFO.com, and other print, radio and television outlets. (more…)
How Long Can You Tread Water?
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 26th, 2009 11:10 AM |
The other day, I provided a cursory overview of the details embedded in the recently proposed Public-Private Investment Partnership, Will Banks Truly Sell these Toxic Assets?
The main point I tried to highlight in that piece was the need for true price discovery for these toxic assets. A loyal reader provided tremendous insight in highlighting that the PPIP needs to assure that sellers are truly at arm’s length from buyers to insure that the price discovery process is real and fair.
There are potential concerns with this price discovery process highlighted in my piece Send in the Clown. Are the bank portfolios, located within the largest banks needing to sell toxic assets, attempting to prop the market higher? (more…)
FDIC . . . For Doing It Correctly
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 19th, 2009 2:41 PM |
Sense on Cents is very judicious in selecting our Economic All-Stars (highlighted in the left sidebar). These individuals continually display a level of professionalism, maturity, consistency, and integrity which are not commonly found in our financial or political spectrum. I deeply appreciate their insights and perspectives and enjoy sharing them with our audience at Sense on Cents and No Quarter USA.
I thank Susan and Andy for tipping me off to remarks made earlier today in which Sheila Bair Says “Too Big to Fail” Strategy for Financial Institutions Must End. The administration and other political pundits are trying to make the case that the Federal Reserve should serve as the systemic risk regulator. In my opinion, Sheila Bair should occupy that role. There is a major political battle developing over this turf. Make no mistake that how this battle plays out will have deep and longstanding implications for our financial system as a whole and for individual consumers. (more…)
Libor Creeping Higher
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 11th, 2009 5:45 AM |
For those involved in the markets, very often the first rate one checks in the morning is Libor (London Interbank Offered Rate). For those not directly involved in the markets, perhaps tomorrow morning or Thursday you may start your day by asking your partner, “where’s Libor?” In all seriousness, the 1 month and 3 month Libor rates may very well be the most closely watched indicators of market health in the world.
As Libor is the rate at which banks can borrow from each other in the London market, the rate is an indication as to the availability of dollars and the confidence banks have in each other’s credit. Traditionally, Libor tracked the Federal Funds rate (the rate at which banks borrow from the Federal Reserve) very closely. However, on the heels of the failure of Lehman Bros. last September, the confidence banks and investors had in each other plummeted. The relationship between the Fed Funds rate and 3 month Libor blew out. The 3 month Libor rate went as high as 4.7% from just outside 1%. Recall that at that period there was concern about money market funds “breaking the buck” amongst a whole set of other issues. (more…)
