Sense on Cents

“Crony Capitalism”

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 29th, 2009 7:55 AM |

Has the economic integrity of the United States of America been reduced to the level of a banana republic? This theme is recurring through many channels. In the midst of a daily perspective, one may quickly and strongly dismiss such claims as overhyped libertarian fearmongering. I do not put myslef in that camp, but I do take pause to reflect on the long term implications of actions and programs enacted throughout our economic crisis.

Sin-Ming Shaw, a Thought Leader (left sidebar) here at Sense on Cents, provides sobering and thoughtful commentary on this topic in his article, “America’s Crony Capitalism.” While we all would like a swift, strong, and fast economic recovery, Shaw addresses the lack of integrity and transparency in the process. Many would maintain that “we did what we had to do” or similarly “these ends justifies these means.” I strongly believe the costs have not yet been paid, continue to accrue everyday, and will be astronomical over the long haul.

Shaw provides insights on the Bank Stress Tests:

The government had allowed bankers to “negotiate” the results, like a student taking a final examination and then negotiating her grade.

The truth is that the tests were not designed to find answers. Both Wall Street’s chieftains and the Obama administration already knew the truth. They knew that if the true conditions at many big banks were publicly revealed, many would have been immediately declared bankrupt, necessitating government receivership to stop a tsunami of bank runs.

Wall Street’s titans, however, had convinced Obama and his team that their continued stewardship was essential to getting the world out of its crisis. They successfully portrayed themselves as victims of a firestorm, rather than as accessories to arson.

Strong and indicting charges put forth by Shaw. The fact is, though, he is accurate in his analysis. Washington and Wall Street have sufficiently agreed in their assessment and analysis of this crisis. They have conspired on their entrance to solution. They will debate their exit knowing full well they are joined at the hip in the process.

The necessary rigor to expose and unearth the crime and criminals is severely lacking. Despite talk of a Financial Inquiry Commission, word from Washington is that stall tactics, turf wars, and partisan politics will once again rule the day in forestalling the needed indictments and prosecutions, both literally and figuratively, of those involved in this mess.

Our “Washington wizards” may declare short term victory (Austan Goolsbee interview yesterday), and point to recovering markets as evidence. Those who may care to look at the world from a larger and longer perspective, fully appreciate that history will judge this time using a different measure. Shaw asserts:

The world also wanted to see the US retaking the high road in reinforcing business ethics and integrity – so lacking under the last administration. As taxpayers had already put huge sums into rescuing failing banks, with the prospect of more to come, a transparent process to reveal how the money was being used was imperative.

All this said, our future for now is both clear and murky. The Obama administration, as well as the Bush administration, sacrificed integrity in the name of short term bank solvency. The efficacy of this move will be debated for years. The fact is, though, the cost of such a move is not fully appreciated. Shaw summarizes as much:

Like swine flu, crony capitalism has migrated from corrupt Third World countries to America, once the citadel of sound public and private governance. Is it any wonder that China is perceived as an increasingly credible model for much of the developing world, while the US is now viewed as a symbol of hypocrisy and double standards?

Comments (1)

Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae Deja Vu?

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 28th, 2009 4:21 PM |

Can our economy absorb another financial hit of the magnitude of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae?

In the process of digging for some data on Uncle Sam’s TARP commitments, I came across a compelling story at Subsidyscope, a Financial Primer (right sidebar) link here at Sense on Cents. The lead story at Subsidyscope, dated May 26, 2009: Concerns Grow Over Federal Home Loan Bank Investments. They write:

The Federal Home Loan Banks, or FHLBs, may be the biggest financial players you’ve never heard of. Collectively, they hold $1.3 trillion in assets and are the largest U.S. borrower after the federal government.

For readers here at Sense on Cents, I have raised warnings about the FHLB system both on April 3rd (Putting Perfume on a Pig!!) and just this past Monday, May 25th (FHLBs: Red Sea, Dead Sea, or Both?). In my opinion, there is little doubt that the FHLB system was the greatest beneficiary of the FASB’s relaxation of the mark-to-market. Subsidyscope says as much:

A Subsidyscope review of the FHLBs’ financial statements has found that several of the banks are carrying substantial “unrealized losses” on their investments in mortgage-backed securities. Because the banks believe these losses are temporary, they don’t have to be recognized on the banks’ accounting statements.

What’s potentially worrisome is the sheer size of the losses. For the Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle, they are substantially larger than the capital the bank holds to protect itself against such declines. If its mortgage-backed securities don’t regain their value, the bank will have to write them down, which could wipe out its capital buffer and raise risks for taxpayers.

Remind you of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? I thought so. Let’s continue to dig even deeper. Subsidyscope asserts: Read the rest »

Comments (0)

Let’s Look Under the Washington Mutual Rock

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 28th, 2009 1:02 PM |

Many people may think Washington Mutual is just another large financial conglomerate that has since gone into thrift heaven via its takeover by JP Morgan. While WaMu is now part of the JPM franchise, it continues to send very real signs which provide great insight as we navigate the economic landscape.

Thank you to our friends at 12th Street Capital for highlighting a release put forth yesterday by Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JP Morgan. As the Financial Times reports, JP Morgan Warns on Credit Card Woes:

Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase chief executive, warned on Wednesday that loss rates on the credit card loans of Washington Mutual, the troubled bank acquired last year by JPMorgan, could climb to 24 per cent by the year end.

In the past, credit card loss rates have tracked the unemployment rate but that relationship has been breaking down for more troubled credit card portfolios, such as the $25.9bn in WaMu credit card loans.

At the end of the first quarter, 12.63 per cent of the WaMu credit card loans were deemed uncollectable by JPMorgan. The bank estimates that figure could reach 18 to 24 per cent by the end of 2009, depending on economic conditions.

The initial question begs as to how and why the credit performance of WaMu’s cardholders could be that much worse than the industry as a whole. For those unfamiliar with Washington Mutual, the institution made a failed attempt to penetrate the Wall Street fortress via leveraging its credit origination platform. WaMu was one of the most aggressive lenders across the spectrum of products. As I wrote back on November 12th in The Wall Street Model Is Broken….and Won’t Soon Be Fixed:

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).

Washington Mutual was the poster child for aggressive, if not irresponsible, lending. When their distribution capabilities ceased, the institution was left “holding the bag.” That bag was filled with credit cards now projected by the TOP banker on the street to default at twice the norm. What more can we learn in this process? Let’s dig deeper. Read the rest »

Comments (4)

Sense on Cents Economic Review: Red Light, Green Light

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 28th, 2009 11:09 AM |

We had some very interesting economic reports released this morning. The data and its interpretation provide serious “grist for the mill.” On that note, let’s sharpen the stone and get to work.

1. Durable Goods: rose 1.9% versus a consensus expectation of a rise of .5%. Much of the increase was due to strong orders in the automotive and defense industries. Green light, green shoot, call it what you want. This report is much stronger than expected, so get back in there and BUY, BUY, BUY. Actually, hold on . . .

Do we expect to see growth in the automotive industry going forward? This industry is and will continue to be downsized. Do we think Barack is looking to grow our defense budget? Most assuredly not.

As much as market analysts, media mavens, and government officials are spinning this report in a very positive fashion, let’s dig deeper.

Last month’s Durable Goods Orders were revised lower from an initial reading of -.8% to -2.1%. Red light!! Additionally, given the volatile nature of orders in the transportation sector, economists look at Durable Goods excluding transportation. How did that do?

Wow!! Another green light. Durable Goods excluding transportation orders rose .8% versus an expectation of -.3%. Much stronger than expected. How about revisions to last month’s numbers? Uh-oh!! Last month this report reflected a decline of -.6% and this was revised to a -2.7%!!! Red light!!

So for those who think we’re making progress on this front, put it in the context of “take three steps back and two steps forward!!” Read the rest »

Comments (0)

The Stakes Are Raised

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 28th, 2009 7:46 AM |

The move higher in rates and lower in the U.S. dollar is nothing more than the market response to Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner, and ultimately Barack Obama for the cards that they have already shown.

Managing one’s personal business and finances is anything but a game, but the manner in which Wall Street and Washington address economic and financial issues incorporates many aspects of “game theory.” As such, we need to adapt our own thought process and financial management accordingly.

Our leaders in Washington have shown many cards, including:

1. $780 billion Stimulus

2. proposed $3.5 trillion budget

3. multiple trillions in backstops to the financial industry (Sense on Cents’ link to Subsidyscope provides a wealth of info)

4. a trillion dollar plus commitment to quantitative easing targeted over a 6 month time horizon.

Be mindful that the “Washington wizards” are at the “table” and “playing the game” with borrowed funds. Each of us is also in the “game” whether we know it or not. We, along with foreign participants, are funding the window from which the wizards have to get the cash to stay in the game. The move higher in interest rates on the long end of our yield curve is nothing more than market participants (investors) “raising” the stakes on the “wizards.” Read the rest »

Comments (4)

The Wheels Have Come Off Barack’s Bond Bus

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 27th, 2009 5:56 PM |

Despite what market analysts, media mavens, and government officials may assert, from an investment standpoint, the price action in the bond market can only be defined as “THEY’VE LOST CONTROL!!”

Who’s they? Bernanke, Geithner, Summers, Obama, and team. How so? The weight of the massive deficit spending along with the embedded costs of the Fed’s quantitative easing program are pressuring the bond market and driving interest rates dramatically higher. (10yr U.S. Treasury moved higher by almost 20 basis points today to 3.75%, a full 55 basis points higher over the last week. This is an ENORMOUS move.)

The knock on effect is increased anxiety in the equity markets (down 2% today) and a highly likely further slowing in the economy. I am not surprised. Given the programs and approach put forth by Obama, along with the economic turmoil, there was little doubt we would experience very high levels of deficit spending. Prior to the inauguration (January 4th to be precise), I surmised:

I also believe that despite the Fed and Treasury purchasing government and mortgage debt, these rates will end up much higher at the end of this year than they are now simply due to the growing deficit. A move higher in these rates will potentially cause further anguish within the equity markets.

I have tried to proactively highlight why I thought the government bond bubble was bursting (Is The Government Bond Bubble Getting Ready To Burst?) and just yesterday broached the negative impact on interest rates of all the mortgage refinancing activity (Mortgage Refi Activity Is Driving Rates Higher).

For those involved in trading or investing, successful calls are measured by direction, magnitude, and time. This call on rates has been a fairly patient development, but given the dramatic shift higher in rates over the last week, the implications of this move can now be embraced. Those implications include a revaluation of the equity markets (lower) and the economy (forestalled recovery). Beware of people who discount this move in interest rates. The fact is it has more to run. In my opinion, the move higher in rates is not only a reflection of the supply of bonds (both government and mortgage) but also an indication of further deterioration in our currency precipitating inflation.

Can the Federal Reserve do anything to defend the currency? Increase short term interest rates. Does anybody think our economy can afford an increase in short term rates at this juncture? NO WAY! There truly is very little the Fed or Treasury can do at this juncture. Thus, in my opinion, they’ve truly lost control as “the wheels have come off the bus.” Welcome to the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam economy 2009.

Comments (8)

Are We There Yet? “Aftermath of Economic Crises” Revisited

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 27th, 2009 3:25 PM |

Are we there yet? What parent does not hear those words ringing in their ears? Well, in regard to our economic trail, let’s revisit an insightful piece of economic analysis put forth by Professor Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard and Professor Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland.

I initially reviewed Rogoff’s and Reinhart’s treatise in my January piece, “Time, Why You Punish Me?” Let’s revisit and review if we’re there yet, and if not just how much further we may have to drive. I wrote at the time:

In the midst of ongoing reading and research, I was fortunate to come across a presentation prepared by Professor Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University and Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland, entitled “Aftermath of Economic Crises”

This work reviews a total of 18 banking crises which led to economic recessions since WW II. They put particular emphasis on 5 of these crises: Spain in 1977, Norway 1987, Finland 1991, Sweden 1991, Japan 1992. Each of the crises they studied share three characteristics:

1. Asset Market Collapse
Housing price declines averaged 35% over a 6 year timeframe. Equity price collapses averaged 55% over three and a half years.

Our housing markets are widely divergent with the major metropolitan cities within CA, AZ, NV, FL, and MI down anywhere from 25-35% over the last 12 months and down approximately 10-15% the year before that. Other markets have held up much better and are down approximately 10-15% in the last year. The national average declined 19% in the last year.

Our equity markets are currently 40% off the highs having declined slightly north of 50% at the March lows. Read the rest »

Comments (2)

Full Throttle

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 27th, 2009 11:28 AM |

To say that we are in the economic fight of our lives would be a gross understatement. While we are feeding ammo into all our weaponry on the main deck, are we remiss in keeping a close eye on what is happening “in the engine room”?

Let’s go into the control room on the main deck and scope things out. On one wing, we see the plans to combat the problems in the commercial real estate market have suffered a setback. Bloomberg reconnaissance provides details: Top Rated Commercial Mortgage Debt May Face Cuts:

The highest-graded bonds backed by commercial mortgages may be cut by Standard & Poor’s, potentially rendering the securities ineligible for a $1 trillion U.S. program to jumpstart lending.

As much as 90 percent of so-called super senior commercial- mortgage backed bonds sold in 2007 may be affected as the ratings firm changes how it assesses the debt, New York-based S&P said today in a report. About 25 percent of the bonds sold in 2005, and 60 percent of those sold in 2006 may be cut.

“We believe these transactions are characterized by increasingly more aggressive underwriting than prior vintages,” S&P said. “Furthermore, recent-vintage CMBS, particularly those issued since 2006, were originated during a time of peak rents and values,” and may be more affected by falling rents.

Cutting the ratings would exclude the securities from the Federal Reserve’s program to bolster credit markets by financing the purchase of older commercial real-estate debt. To be eligible for the program, collateral can’t carry a rating below AAA from any rating firm.

This development is a MAJOR setback in our economic battle. An overhang of office space and underperforming real estate properties will be a significant drag not only on earnings for holders of the loans but also on the economies where these properties are located. Read the rest »

Comments (1)

Putting “The Fix” in the PPIP

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 27th, 2009 7:03 AM |

Is the Obama administration once again going to be party to “underworld” business principles in an attempt to promote the success of a program to clean up the banks? Let’s go down into ‘the street.’

The TALF (Term Asset Based Lending Facility) so far has had middling success. The PPIP (Public-Private Investment Partnership) is yet to be rolled out. Investors have been reluctant to participate in these programs, despite attractive financing terms, because of concerns in partnering with a capricious and at times vindictive Uncle Sam. These programs, as with any transactional program, have one major potential flaw: self-dealing. I highlighted this point on April 7th in my post Games of Chance: TALF, PPIP, TARP, FDIC, FASB. I wrote:

In a slightly different version of the game – and in attempt to attract more players, if not necessarily truly new money – the government is considering allowing the sellers of toxic assets to also be buyers. How does that version of the game work? The sellers (Citi, BofA, JP Morgan, et al):

. . . can put up a few percent of their own money, and swap each other’s toxic assets financed by a bewildered public suddenly bearing more than 90% of the downside risk. The “investors” in this happy “public-private partnership” keep half the upside while ordinary Americans take the downside off of their hands. Some partnership. [From John Hussman at John Mauldin’s Outside the Box]

Fast forward to May 27th and this version of the “game” is being proposed by the dealers. The Wall Street Journal highlights, Banks Aiming to Play Both Sides of Coin:

Some banks are prodding the government to let them use public money to help buy troubled assets from the banks themselves.

Banking trade groups are lobbying the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. for permission to bid on the same assets that the banks would put up for sale as part of the government’s Public Private Investment Program.

PPIP was hatched by the Obama administration as a way for banks to sell hard-to-value loans and securities to private investors, who would get financial aid as an enticement to help them unclog bank balance sheets. The program, expected to start this summer, will get as much as $100 billion in taxpayer-funded capital. That could increase to more than $500 billion in purchasing power with participation from private investors and FDIC financing.

The lobbying push is aimed at the Legacy Loans Program, which will use about half of the government’s overall PPIP infusion to facilitate the sale of whole loans such as residential and commercial mortgages.

I can already hear the pontificating on how rigorous the oversight of this program will be. Geithner and team will produce a set of selling points to “make the case.” All that said, games of chance are actually exceedingly simple. The dealer and another player or two fabricate a reasonable chance for success for new participants (taxpayers) while knowing full well the table is tilted, the “fix” is baked in, and the “dough” is going home with them. The WSJ highlights these concerns:

“To allow the government to finance an off-balance-sheet maneuver that claims to shift risk off the parent firm’s books but really doesn’t offload it is highly problematic,” said Arthur Levitt, a former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman who is an adviser to private-equity firm Carlyle Group LLC.

“The notion of banks doing this is incongruent with the original purpose of the PPIP and wrought with major conflicts,” said Thomas Priore, president of ICP Capital, a New York fixed-income investment firm overseeing about $16 billion in assets.

One risk is that certain hard-to-value assets mightn’t be fairly priced if banks are essentially negotiating with themselves. Inflated prices could result in the government overpaying. Recipients of taxpayer-funded capital infusions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program also could use those funds to buy their own loans.

The fact that banks want to “play the game” again truly indicates the character and integrity of this crowd. Self-dealing is common practice in the underworld. We have witnessed the violation of private contracts in the housing and automotive sectors.

Will Geithner and team allow taxpayers to be run over once again via self-dealing within the PPIP?

Comments (0)

Mortgage Refi Activity Is Driving Rates Higher

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 26th, 2009 7:17 PM |

In Wall Street terms, the wheels are coming off the Treasury bus. What does that mean in layman’s terms? Interest rates on U.S. Treasury securities are ratcheting higher. Why? I have addressed the massive supply of global government bonds that will be issued in order to finance the exploding deficits. For newer readers, you can find my thoughts on this topic in Is The Government Bond Bubble Getting Ready To Burst? UPDATE #2.

The dynamics of the massive supply of bond issuance to fund global deficits will not change. To wit, our market needs to absorb $60 billion in 5yr and 7yr notes tomorrow and Thursday. Long term interest rates in our U.S. Treasury market moved higher by another 10 basis points again today to a level of 3.55%.

Over and above that, though, there is another significant reason that is driving our bond market lower and interest rates higher. This reason is receiving little to no attention by the media or market analysts. In fact, the color allocated to this factor is strictly viewed as a positive. I am talking about the waves of mortgage refinancing precipitated by the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing program.

How could refinancing activity further pressure the government bond market driving interest rates higher? Well, let’s accept the premise that any government program is never risk free or cost free. The quantitative easing employed by the Federal Reserve to purchase government and mortgage-backed securities has very real costs. The extraordinary volume of purchases of newly issued mortgage-backed securities by the Federal Reserve has allowed millions of homeowners to lower their mortgage payments. This is great for those benefitting. What are the costs? Read the rest »

Comments (2)

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »