Subscribe: RSS Feed | Twitter | Facebook | Email
Home | Contact Us

Archive for the ‘Wall Street’ Category

Why Is the Market Selling Off Today?

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 20th, 2009 2:30 PM |

The broad equity market indices are down 3+% on the day. Why would that happen when the bulk of company news today was generally positive?  At least on the surface the news was positive:

1. Bank of America posted .44 earnings per share vs. expectations of .04
2. Eli Lilly earnings were up 23% outpacing expectations.
3. Halliburton disappointed with earnings down 35% but that is due to the massive correction in the price of oil from a year ago.
Merger Activity:
4. Oracle is purchasing Sun Microsystems in a $7.4 billion deal.
5. Pepsi is buying two bottling companies for $6 billion.
6. Glaxo is purchasing Stiefel for $2.9 billion.

Leading economic indicators declined by .3 but that decline is offset by an improved reading from the prior month.

Then, why is the market down so much? Two reasons are promoted, but only one of them is getting proper coverage.

Market analysts supposedly are focused today on the ongoing increases in chargeoffs and writedowns on the loan portfolios in the banking industry. These loans consist of credit card loans, residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, and corporate loans.

I don’t buy this line of reasoning for today’s selloff. Increased chargeoffs and writedowns have been widely expected for a while. The level of reserves taken by the banks has been widely panned as being insufficient. Then why is the market down so much? (more…)

Repaying TARP Funds: Playing Ball With Uncle Sam

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 20th, 2009 10:27 AM |

Last evening on NQR’s Sense on Cents with LD (note: you can listen to audio recording of the show from the BlogTalkRadio player in the right sidebar), I proposed that the Obama administration would not release individual results of the Bank Stress Tests. I further added that I thought the administration may encourage stronger banking institutions to channel funds to weaker institutions. In so doing, these stronger banks – such as JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs – may actually take equity stakes in the weaker banks. Will JP Morgan and Goldman bear the entire risk of those equity stakes? Doubtful. Uncle Sam will likely negotiate terms along the lines of other bank bailouts in which a strong bank provides capital but the government bears the brunt of the losses.

As I write this, Bloomberg reports Bank of America is speculated to need another $10-20 billion in equity capital. BofA’s earnings were reported this morning at .44 earnings per share versus an expectation of approximately .03 earnings per share. Analysts are panning the earnings due to the propsects for ongoing increases in credit losses within BofA’s loan portfolio. BofA’s stock is down approximately 8% in early trading.

If BofA does need another $10-$20 billion in equity capital, where might it come from? In my opinion, in a non-public transferral of capital, those funds may come from JP Morgan and/or Goldman Sachs, and would actually be recycled TARP funds.  Effectively, JPM and GS will merely be a conduit for increased government funds injected into BofA and Citigroup, as well. Remember JPM has $25 billion in TARP funds, Goldman has $10 billion.  If BofA took $15 billion of these funds then Citi could receive $20 billion. What would JPM and GS receive in return? I would think these negotiations would be private and not released, although given that the capital provided is public money all information should be released.  (more…)

Tune in Sunday Evening to NoQuarter Radio’s “Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle”

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 11th, 2009 6:45 PM |

Please join me Sunday evening from 8-9 p.m. ET for NoQuarter Radio’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle. What is truly going on in the economy? Where are markets headed? The developments in the markets, economy, global finance, Wall Street, and Washington are occurring at breakneck speed. I will try to slow things down a bit and provide a sense of perspective. What did we learn in the markets over the last week and month and what do they mean for the weeks and months ahead? What is happening overseas and how does that impact us here at home? What is happening in the municipal sector and how will that impact the markets and our personal finances? So much to cover.

My guest will be Louis George Rieger, Chief Investment Strategist at Greenwich Investment Management. Following graduation from Yale Law School, George accepted a position at T. Rowe Price Associates LLC, where he became an officer and stockholder. In 1984, George founded RRH Capital Management, Inc. At RRH, George established the firm’s record in the management of not-rated, tax exempt bonds and high yield equities. George founded Greenwich Investment Management in 2006. George’s legal education has proven valuable in structuring municipal bond issues. He brings over 35 years of experience in the securities industry. (more…)

Mum’s the Word

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 10th, 2009 12:40 PM |

shhhhThe movie Goodfellas provides a wealth of material for comparative analysis of the markets. The “insider activity,” the “fooling around,” “the payoffs,” and “the gambling” all make for great drama on the screen. Truth be told, one does not have to look all that hard to find striking similarities to certain activities in the world of Wall Street, and for that matter, Washington.

One of my favorite scenes in the movie occurs after the boys make the big heist. Immediately, the word is put out to keep your mouths shut and no indications of newfound wealth.

Back to reality. In terms of “putting the fix” into the world of our major money center banks, isn’t the relaxation of the mark-to- market the “newfound wealth”? Isn’t the “keep your mouths shut” the equivalent of the Treasury telling the banks not to comment on results of the Bank Stress Test? Speaking of the Bank Stress Tests, Bloomberg reports:

The U.S. Federal Reserve has told Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Citigroup Inc. and other banks to keep mum on the results of “stress tests” that will gauge their ability to weather the recession, people familiar with the matter said.

The Fed wants to ensure that the report cards don’t leak during earnings conference calls scheduled for this month. Such a scenario might push stock prices lower for banks perceived as weak and interfere with the government’s plan to release the results in an orderly fashion later this month.

Clearly the Fed and Treasury are trying to keep their “boys” quiet and lay low while the real regulators of the market, that being honest investors, are walking the beat.

If any of the boys talk, then the leaders of the family won’t be able to coordinate the stories and hoodwink the public.

Whatever happened to, “as long as you tell the truth, you don’t have to worry about having a bad memory”?

It seems we are operating much more in the realm of, “well, I can tell you but . . . ”

The Goodfellas: Henry Hill, Jimmy Conway, Paul Cicero, and Tommy DeVito

The Goodfellas: Henry Hill, Jimmy Conway, Paul Cicero, and Tommy DeVito

Henry . . . Jimmy . . . Paulie . . . Tommy . . .

Please let me know who in our government and world of finance are most appropriate to play each of these individuals? Let’s have some fun.

From The Archives: “Where’s The Money??”

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 10th, 2009 8:16 AM |

On a quiet Good Friday morning, brief reflection never hurts. In that spirit, I thought it may be worthwhile to go into the archives for our year-end piece 2008. This piece was originally published on December 29, 2008:

I thought about providing an outlook for 2009. I considered offering further opinions on Obama’s economic plans. Perhaps a review of the Bush economic program would be well received. Then yesterday, the lead editorial in my local newspaper asked “Where did the bailout money go?” I had my answer. In previous pieces I have touched upon why I thought there was a very good chance this money would not flow through the system. I hesitate to continue to refer back to my piece published on November 12th (The Wall St. Model is Broken…and Won’t Soon be Fixed), but for new readers I do firmly believe it is as good as anything I have read or seen in any publication in explaining how we find ourselves in our current position.

Please allow me to digress for a second. I will admit that I am not a movie buff, but I do enjoy films that focus on the success of underdogs, have a measure of financial intrigue, or perhaps a combination of the two. Not surprisingly, a few of my favorite movies are, Rocky, Jerry Maguire, and The Sting. (more…)

Corporate Bond Model Points to 13.5% Unemployment . . . MUST READ

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 9th, 2009 8:51 PM |

To all our readers celebrating a religious tradition, I wish you a beautiful and blessed holiday.

Not to spoil the feast, but I feel compelled to share this WSJ piece reviewing an econometric model’s results of analysis of the corporate bond market. It’s not very pretty. In fact, it is downright scary. 

Over the course of my career, I have found that plenty of short term research misses meaningful variables. Research that incorporates longer term fundamental analysis has intrigued me much more. To that end, this piece plays into my long term concerns.  (more…)

“Beholden to Failed Banksters”

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 9th, 2009 3:56 PM |

Any investor or manager with a degree of experience knows that the “first loss is the best loss.” What do I mean by that? Once the market detects a loss or a weakened position, the price for that asset will remain capped unless and until the asset is sold or liquidated. This price action occurs in every sector of every market.

Welcome to the world of global finance 2009. As banks, insurance companies, hedge funds, and other financial entities deal with losses, we see a lack of aggressive posture being taken on dealing with these losses. Why? Once moral hazard is violated with a single entity, every other entity will look to violate it as well.

Immediate losses are forestalled in hopes that they will be covered or disguised. However, every loss ultimately must be recognized. By whom  and how is the question.

At this juncture, more of the losses in our financial system are being directed toward the taxpayers. How? Via the wide array of government programs. What is the cost? A likely underperforming economy due to a lack of credit, and higher taxes to offset lower revenues.  (more…)

Behind the Scenes . . .

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 9th, 2009 7:14 AM |

A mixed bag of items you may have missed in the midst of some of the daily noise and pandering:

1. Bloomberg reported this morning that the government (Treasury and Federal Reserve) expects ALL 19 banks undergoing the Bank Stress Tests to pass!! Wahoo!! Bloomberg further reported, however, that certain banks may continue to need ongoing capital injections. Would the proctors of the exam please release the questions so the FDIC can provide a more thorough review? What a SHAM.

Please review, Bank Stress Tests: Major Sham?

2. The Federal Reserve yesterday released the minutes of its March 18th meeting. The Fed revised its projection for a bottoming of unemployment to mid-2010 from the end of 2009. Additionally, they lowered their projections for a turn in the economy. Lastly, in regard to the Fed’s purchases of government and mortgage-backed securities, they had differing opinions as to how to approach these purchases. The FT reports:

one Fed policymaker wanted to stick to buying mortgage-related securities. Another wanted to add only more Treasury purchases. Buying both was a way to keep everyone happy and hedge the Fed’s bets in the light of uncertainty as to which type of asset purchase might prove effective.

“Several members noted that working across a range of assets and instruments was appropriate when the effects of any one tactic were uncertain,” the minutes say.

Michael Feroli, an economist at JPMorgan, said the “uncertainty rationale” was novel. It added up to an experimental, portfolio-based approach to policy rather than one driven by strong conviction.

For what it is worth, on the day of the Fed’s announcement to buy both government and mortgage-backed debt, rates rallied close to 40 basis points, a truly historic move. Since then, those rates have totally reversed. While the Fed is buying, obviously somebody else is selling. Who may that be? The U.S. Treasury for one. I mean, the Treasury could literally walk the government notes and bonds down the street in Washington to the Fed and put these securities in their vault while the Fed simultaneously puts cash deposits into the Treasury vault.

Do you get the sense, though, that Fed officials are winging it to a large extent? I do. (more…)

Bank Stress Tests: Major Sham??

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 8th, 2009 11:35 AM |

failing-grade1Why is it urban school dropout rates are 50%? Well, I am sure there would be as many reasons for that horrendous statistic as there are dropouts. The fact of the matter is, though, the state of urban education has promoted a phenomena known as “social promotion.” If students aren’t qualified to do the work, testing has been gamed, standards have been lowered, and corners have been cut. As a result, urban education at this stage is an unmitigated disaster. What does this have to do with the current state of our economy and the world of finance? I am glad you asked.

If banks, much like students, are not required to pass rigorous testing, then “social promotion” in finance will produce results not unlike those in education–underperformance and ultimately an inability to compete on the global stage.

Against that backdrop, I personally looked forward to the results of the Bank Stress Tests. Let’s finally get an honest assessment of the “students.” Let’s see how they have performed and let’s project to see how they will perform!!

As with any test, the results are only meaningful if the process and proctor have unquestioned integrity. The proctors for the Bank Stress Test are none other than Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Fed chair Ben Bernanke. Why is a testing authority of the magnitude of FDIC, led by Sheila Bair, not more involved in the process? Ms. Bair is the one individual in our country with the greatest level of interaction with and understanding of the student body, that being the banking industry as a whole and individual banks specifically. (more…)

Games of Chance: TALF, PPIP, TARP, FDIC, FASB

Posted by Larry Doyle on April 7th, 2009 2:40 PM |

In thinking about the economy, markets, and our banking system, my memory brings me back to my early days in New York. While working my way along 8th Avenue back to my apartment in Hell’s Kitchen, I would happen upon numerous versions of the classic NYC “hustle.” The shell game (also 3 card monte) was rampant in NYC in the ’80s. Mayor Giuliani cleared out this game, along with a host of other street scenes. For those not familiar with this game, there was a constant need for new players with new money to keep the game alive.

Why do these games remind me of our current banking system? The similarities are scary. Let’s access the most recent piece from John Mauldin’s site to “view the games.”

Mauldin’s guest, John Hussman, comments on these various “games” (TALF, PPIP, TARP, FDIC, FASB), in which taxpayers bear the brunt of the risk in the government’s engagement with financial institutions. Hussman writes of the PPIP:

this is a recipe for the insolvency of the FDIC and an attempt to bail out bank bondholders using funds that have not even been allocated by Congress. The whole plan is a bureaucratic abuse of the FDIC’s balance sheet, which exists to protect ordinary depositors, not bank bondholders.

(more…)






Recent Posts


ECONOMIC ALL-STARS


Archives