RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeSummers and Jarrett Provide Hints of What Is To Come
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 27th, 2009 8:57 AM |
Larry Summers threw some cold water on the economy yesterday morning in stating his belief the economy will continue to decline for some time to come. Specifically,
“I expect the economy will continue to decline,” with “sharp declines in employment for quite some time this year,” Summers said today on “Fox News Sunday.”
Is Summers positioning the administration for a forecast more in line with IMF projections than the Congressional Budget Office? Recall that the IMF believes the U.S. economy will have flat to only slightly positive growth in 2010 with a double digit unemployment rate. Those projections are decidedly weaker than projections previously employed by the administration.
Is Summers starting to manage expectations downward given what he sees on the horizon? I believe so.
Furthermore, Valerie Jarrett, senior economic advisor, offered hints of administration plans for our banking system this weekend, in stating:
“Whether management changes occur, whether banks are asked to raise more capital, all of that’s going to come forth in the coming week,” Jarrett said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program today.
My instincts tell me that an advisor in Jarrett’s position releases that statement in preparation for exactly those moves. Will this be Vikram Pandit’s last week at Citigroup? Will Ken Lewis be forced out at Bank of America? I think the odds for either of those moves – if not both – just increased.
Management of any organization, including the White House, needs to maintain credibility by providing a reasonably accurate flow of information. The Sunday morning talk shows provide a forum and I think Summers and Jarrett provided solid hints at what is to come from the White House in the days and months ahead. Bloomberg provides a full summary of these points and others, Summers Says U.S. Economy to Decline ‘For Some Time.’
LD
Bank Stress Tests? Take Home Exams and Partially Self-Graded
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 24th, 2009 3:10 PM |
The Treasury just released the methodology used in assessing the vitality of the 19 largest banks via the Bank Stress Tests. The market took the release of this methodology as a big yawn. Treasury offered that the capital at some banks has been “substantially reduced.” Please tell us something we don’t know.
The worst case scenario used by Treasury still falls into the camp of what most analysts view as the expected scenario.
In reading deeper into some of the reviews of the methodology, I am struck by the leeway provided to the banks in measuring the credit quality of loans on the banks’ books and the likelihood of deterioration on those loans. I view that as the wiggle room described by Meredith Whitney earlier this week.
As Bloomberg reports, Fed Says Capital at Some Major Banks Is Substantially Reduced:
“Firms were allowed to diverge from the indicative loss rates where they could provide evidence that their estimated loss rates were appropriate,” the study said.
Regulators used the market shocks of the second half of 2008, when Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. declared bankruptcy, as the model for testing banks with trading portfolios of $100 billion or more.
As they pored over banks’ loan and securities portfolios and off-balance-sheet liabilities, examiners increasingly focused on the quality of credits. They were concerned about wide variations in underwriting standards, a regulatory official said this week.
Supervisors concluded that banks’ lending practices need to be given as much weight as macroeconomic scenarios in determining the health of each bank, the official said.
The goal of the reviews is to keep the major financial institutions lending over the next two years, and to determine how much capital they may need if the economic slump worsens.
Supervisors will weigh how much capital each company holds, its ability to retain earnings over the next few years, future access to private capital and the extent any asset writedowns.
The Bank Stress Tests are not only largely a take home exam, but now we discover they are partially self-graded.
Call me suspicious.
In speaking with friends on Wall Street, I have heard from a number of individuals that there is still a large short base in a number of the financials. The short base is providing a strong cushion to that sector specifically and the market in general.
LD
The Red Sea
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 24th, 2009 11:26 AM |
While there is tremendous focus on the Bank Stress Tests, there remains limited focus overall on the centerpieces of our domestic housing finance industry. I am talking about Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. Some have categorized these institutions as “black holes.” I believe a more appropriate designation would be The Red Sea as these institutions are awash in losses and continue to bleed money.
We may never know the circumstances surrounding the death of acting Freddie Mac CFO, David Kellerman, but there is a lot of focus by government officials on these institutions. There has been much less focus by private analysts. To that end, I am most grateful to Bloomberg’s David Reilly for reporting on Fannie Mae Creates Housing Mirage With Bum Loans.
Effectively, Fannie Mae is giving funds away to very high credit risk individuals who would have otherwise most likely already defaulted on their mortgages. As Reilly reports:
Give money away. That was a solution to the housing crisis mortgage giant Fannie Mae hit on last year.
Faced with growing numbers of homeowners unable to make mortgage payments, Fannie decided to fund loans to borrowers that were instant losers.
The point was to buy time. Even though those loans resulted in a $453 million loss, they helped keep troubled homeowners from defaulting. That meant Fannie for now didn’t have to make good on loan guarantees that may have cost it as much as $2.4 billion.
Make no mistake, this Fannie Mae program was also being utilized by Freddie Mac. Reports have come out that Freddie Mac’s Kellerman was pressured by Freddie’s accountants to improperly report their financials. In a similar vein, Fannie is playing another version of the “shell game” in order to buy time and forestall losses. (more…)
1st Quarter Earnings: What Have We Learned?
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 22nd, 2009 5:45 PM |
As we work our way through the 1st quarter earnings reports, what have we learned?
1. Earnings for certain tech companies (Google, E-Bay, Apple, Qualcomm) have beat expectations. The fact that these companies have large cash positions and are not overly burdened with debt has benefitted them.
2. Major money center bank (Citi, BofA, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo) earnings looked good on the surface but there remain real questions about the quality and transparency of the numbers. The Bank Stress Tests hang over this sector. Independent analysis indicates that banks in general are lending less as credit writedowns continue to increase. The earnings in these banks are focused more on trading activities and mortgage refinancing while core consumer banking is quite weak. The strength in trading and refinancing is directly linked to government supported actions (related to AIG, Fed purchases of mortgage and government securities). Many analysts question whether the earnings from trading are repeatable while core banking activity is a drag.
3. Earnings for regional banks (KeyCorp, First Horizon, Bank of New York, Suntrust, Regions) and banks without sizable trading businesses are weak across the board. Credit chargeoffs on existing loans (credit cards, residential, commercial mortgages, corporate loans) continue to move higher and limited demand for new credit are hurting these institutions. (more…)
Will Bank Stress Tests Be “Put on a Curve?”
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 22nd, 2009 9:10 AM |
Will the soon to be released Bank Stress Tests provide real clarity on the health of our banking industry or will the tests be “curved?” Meredith Whitney, highly regarded bank analyst, has indicated that the tests will provide plenty of wiggle room for the banks. Just yesterday Secretary Geithner “goosed” the market by indicating the majority of banks have sufficient capital. To what degree can we trust what Turbo-Tim is telling us?
Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of PIMCO (Pacific Investment Management Company) provides a blueprint for an honest review of the Stress Tests. Mr. El-Erian highlights the following in a Financial Times article:
First, transparency is key. Whether the government likes it or not, hundreds of analysts around the world will reverse engineer the stress tests. The government would be well advised to assist the process through clarity. Obfuscation would result in damaging market noise and further derail the real economy. At the minimum, policymakers need to provide credible details on the methodology, the underlying assumptions and scenario analyses.
To this point, neither the banks nor the government have provided real transparency. What are we to expect when Congress pressures the FASB to relax mark-to-market accounting thus forever clouding real transparency?
Second, the results of the stress tests must be part of a comprehensive, forward-looking package to resolve problems at banks. Out-performing banks should be provided with exit mechanisms from the exceptional government support that they have been receiving and, presumably, no longer need. At the other end, there must be clarity as to how capital-deficient banks that no longer have access to private capital will be handled. (more…)
Bank Stress Tests: Threading the Needle
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 19th, 2009 12:44 PM |
For those involved in assessing the solvency of our domestic banking system, the prospects of releasing the results of the Bank Stress Tests are frightening. How do Secretary Geithner, Fed chair Bernanke, regulators, and President Obama himself maintain credibility with the markets while simultaneously growing confidence in the public?
As Bloomberg reports, Bank Regulators Clash Over U.S. Stress-Tests Endgame. Secretary Geithner clearly was trying to buy time when he proposed the Bank Stress Test model. The day of reckoning will soon be upon us. The administration will release the model used on April 24 and the results on May 4th. However, there are enormous conflicts within the administration and the regulatory community as to how to release the information and how much information to release.
As Bloomberg highlights,
The U.S. Treasury and financial regulators are clashing with each other over how to disclose results from the stress tests of 19 U.S. banks, with some officials concerned at potential damage to weaker institutions.
With a May 4 deadline approaching, there is no set plan for how much information to release, how to categorize the results or who should make the announcements, people familiar with the matter said. While the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and other regulators want few details about the assessments to be publicized, the Treasury is pushing for broader disclosure.
The disarray highlights what threatens to be a lose-lose situation for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner: If all the banks pass, the tests’ credibility will be questioned, and if some banks get failing grades and are forced to accept more government capital and oversight, they may be punished by investors and customers.
“There are plenty of ways to go wrong here,” said Wayne Abernathy, executive vice president of the American Bankers Association in Washington. “It might have sounded good at the time, but now looking back, it has far more risk than benefit.”
What will come of this? The pressure from all corners is increasing on Geithner. Can he snatch victory from what may appear to be a lose-lose situation? Can he somehow or other get the results forestalled and maintain credibility? Can he keep the various constituencies placated? Truly, he needs to “thread the needle.”
Listen to NQR’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle this evening from 8-9 p.m. as I discuss how I think Secretary Geithner will try to thread the needle.
LD
Increased Foreclosures: An Equal and Opposite Reaction
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 15th, 2009 11:53 AM |
There are tremendous cross currents in residential housing. Over the course of the last few months we have seen the following:
-an uptick in housing starts
-an uptick in new home sales
-a decline in home prices as indicated by the S&P/Case-Shiller Index
Do not forget, though, that Uncle Sam had Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae postpone the foreclosure process over the course of the last few months. Additionally, Congress compelled certain of the larger mortgage originators, such as JP Morgan Chase, Citi, and Wells Fargo, to also postpone foreclosures.
While the postponing of foreclosures allows for a delay in that process, regrettably it does not negate it. As the WSJ reports today, Banks Ramp Up Foreclosures.
The Federal Reserve knows that increased supply in housing in the face of rising unemployment will further depress home prices. In fact, just yesterday the Fed made a statement indicating it believes housing prices may overshoot to the downside much as they overshot to the upside earlier this decade. That scenario seems to be the equivalent of a physics principle – for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
The subsequent impact of this increased foreclosure activity is an increase in chargeoffs by banks holding the mortgages. While certain banks, such as Wells Fargo, reported surprisingly strong 1st quarter earnings, be mindful that many analysts criticized Wells for not reserving more against future chargeoffs.
Over and above this impact on bank earnings, do not forget that the model used for the Bank Stress Tests incorporated an unemployment rate of 10.3% as the absolute worst case scenario.
That rate is now commonly accepted as a very strong likelihood.
LD
“I Want the Truth!”
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 15th, 2009 6:44 AM |
Recall how Hank Paulson compelled every major money center bank to accept government funds via the TARP last Fall. Paulson was concerned that if every institution did not participate in the TARP that the market would punish those institutions receiving funds.
The lack of delineation then and still now is creating stress for individual institutions and the market as a whole. Why? Markets thrive on two factors: capital and information. We have witnessed over the last year what a lack of capital in the form of credit has meant for the economy. We are also experiencing what a lack of information means.
Whether it is industrial and tech companies not providing guidance about their future earnings (GE, Intel just yesterday), banks utilizing relaxed mark-to-market accounting, or now banks being lumped together on Bank Stress Test results, the markets are sufferring as a result.
Are we seeing a version of the classic scene in a A Few Good Men? Who can ever forget this exchange?
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee (Tom Cruise): I think I’m entitled to them.
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee: I want the truth!
Jessep: You can’t handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives…You don’t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty…we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use ’em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I’d rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you’re entitled to!
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: You’re goddamn right I did!!
“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…)
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…)
Tags: Bank of America's earnings, Bank Stress Tests, FDIC-backed debt, Goldman Sachs repaying TARP, JP Morgan repaying TARP, Larry Summers comments on repaying TARP, TARP fund repayment
Posted in Bank Stress Test, Banking Institutions, TALF, TARP, Wall Street | 2 Comments »