RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeKenneth Rogoff: “A Lot of Insolvent European Banks”
Posted by Larry Doyle on July 7th, 2010 5:30 AM |
Kenneth Rogoff
Should the European Union run bank stress tests or not? While that question has been hotly debated over the last few months, we received an answer today from one of the most highly respected economists in the world. Who might that be? Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff, a Thought Leader and Sense on Cents Economic All-Star.
I have often referenced Rogoff’s work over the last eighteen months (go here) and hold him in the highest possible regard. So, about those European banks and the hotly debated stress tests? What does Rogoff think? Are you sitting down?
In a Bloomberg commentary, European Banks’ Hidden Losses Threaten EU Stress Test, we learn: (more…)
Elizabeth Warren Calls for New Bank Stress Tests
Posted by Larry Doyle on February 11th, 2010 9:34 AM |
The initial Bank Stress Tests run by Treasury Secretary Geithner were largely a sham. I questioned as much last April in writing, “Bank Stress Tests: Major Sham?”:
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.
What does the FDIC, led by Ms. Bair, have to say about the upcoming Bank Stress Tests? The New York Post provides a CHILLING perspective: (more…)
Dollar Devaluation Is a Dangerous Game
Posted by Larry Doyle on October 8th, 2009 9:24 AM |
Can we ‘devalue’ our way back to our days of economic ‘wine and roses?’
Many debt-laden countries throughout economic history have chosen to implicitly or explicitly pursue a devaluation of their currency as a means of improving their economies. Are the ‘wizards in Washington’ taking this approach? Aside from a few perfunctory comments in defense of the greenback, Washington has been largely silent on the topic of the declining value of the dollar. Many believe Washington very much favors a weaker currency as a means of supporting our economy. I believe this of Washington, as well. Let’s navigate.
Going back to the G20 in London last Spring, the Obama administration has attempted to curry political favor with emerging economies, especially the BRIC nations, by ceding dollar sovereigncy as the preeminent international reserve currency in return for support of global economic stimulus programs. Why does Washington believe a weak currency serves our economic interests? A weak currency generates and supports the following:
1. Promotes inflation as imports decline. Washington would like some inflation, given the massive deflationary pressures presented by falling wages and declines in the value of commercial and residential real estate.
2. Promotes exports for corporations with a multi-national presence.
3. Supports labor by making it more attractive for companies to keep jobs here as opposed to opening factories or sending work overseas.
So, in light of our current economic crisis, why wouldn’t we want a substantially cheaper dollar to maximize these benefits?
Recall that economists always need to keep certain variables static in order to study the impact of a change in another variable or multiple variables. This approach, known as ‘ceteris paribus,’ is not quite as easy as some may think. Why? Variables are NEVER static, or ‘ceteris is NEVER paribus.’ (more…)
U.S. Markets Play “Follow the Leader”
Posted by Larry Doyle on October 7th, 2009 9:40 AM |
Yesterday’s rise in rates by the Australian central bank is a bellweather sign of the global shift in the balance of economic power. While the rise in rates by the Aussies is the first central bank move, it certainly will not be the last. Why did the Aussies raise rates and what does it mean both in the short term and for the long haul? Let’s navigate.
The Australian economy did not have near the level of debt that burdens the U.S. and Europe and thus they did not need near the amount of monetary stimulus to weather this global recession. Additionally, Australia has benefited from extensive trade in the Asian hemisphere.
The knee jerk reaction in the markets was focused primarily on a selloff in the greenback which supported a move higher in commodities and global equities via the ‘positive carry trade.’ The commodity which garnered the greatest focus was gold, which moved toward $1040/ounce.
What do these moves mean? I see cross currents on the economic landscape, including:
1. The dollar may not necessarily continue to weaken, but given its current weakness it will support those companies which garner a greater degree of sales overseas.
2. A weak dollar is usually affiliated with inflation. I do not think we are in a position to look at prices in terms of one overall index. Why? Given the technical and fundamental factors in our economy, certain price components will likely project increased inflation while others will not.
To be more specific, given the labor situation in our country, I do not see any appreciable increase in wages anytime soon. In fact, I think it is likely wages will trend lower.
Given the glut of supply and vacancies in both the residential and commercial real estate markets, I have a tough time believing these prices will move appreciably higher anytime soon.
Commodities may very well move higher. Why? High five to MC for sharing with me that there is increased dialogue in the international trade community to move oil away from trading in dollars. In fact, that story likely had a big impact in yesterday’s trading. Even if there is not an immediate shift in this market dynamic, the mere fact that it is being discussed will support oil specifically, oil-based products broadly, and other commodities as well.
Given that these commodities are primarily inputs, the prices for the outputs will likely move higher. This development is clearly inflationary.
3. What happens to interest rates here in the United States? While on one hand we have some deflationary forces at work which would keep rates low, we have the tug of other factors pushing them higher. How does it play out? My gut instinct tells me that overall pools of capital will be flowing away from the United States and, as such, people and private corporations will have to pay more to attract capital here in our country. I think those entities which focus the bulk of their economic activity here in the United States will be forced to pay higher rates to attract funding.
4. What about our equity markets and the Fed? While the Fed will want to keep our rates low for an ‘extended period,’ they may not have that luxury. If other nations follow Australia in raising rates, the U.S. may need to withdraw some liquidity sooner rather than later. Kansas City Fed chair Thomas Hoenig made this very assertion yesterday.
What would higher rates mean or even the thought of higher rates mean? Slower growth and a tough road for equities going forward.
Thoughts, comments, questions always appreciated.
LD
Related Sense on Cents Commentary
Dollar Carry Trade Drives Global Equities (September 16, 2009)
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. (more…)
Company News: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 16th, 2009 8:04 AM |
We have had a stream of earnings results from banks this week. The earnings from Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan have all surprised to the upside. Interestingly, though, the degree of transparency and “quality” of earnings has been decidedly different with each of these institutions.
JP Morgan just released earnings this morning. Earnings per share came in at .40 versus an expectation of .32. The quick snapsot of the numbers reveals broad based positive results across retail banking, equity trading, and fixed income trading. JPM significantly increased loan loss reserves and CEO Jamie Dimon cautioned that the bank may have to further increase reserves given the challenging economic environment. The bank also took significant markdowns in private equity investments.
The lifeblood for any bank is the deposit base, the ultimate source of relative cheap funds. JPM’s deposit base has grown 62% year over year with the acquisition of Washington Mutual.
Dimon and JPM distinguish themselves as the true leader in U.S. banking.
Goldman’s earnings gamed the calendar as they did not make an apples to apples comaprison versus a year ago. What does that mean? Goldman changed its reporting calendar from a December-November reporting period to January-December reporting. In doing so, Goldman did not fully highlight the disastrous numbers in December 2008. While Goldman’s franchise and risk management are superb, the headline report was not totally forthcoming.
Let’s revisit the Wells Fargo report. Many analysts initially questioned the lack of transparency and overall quality of earnings reported by Wells. Jonathan Weil of Bloomberg again stands out by the depth of his analysis. He reports Wells Fargo Profit Looks Too Good To Be True. Weil highlights 4 gimmicks: (more…)
Market Fades on the Close
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 16th, 2009 6:30 PM |
Monday’s price action in the equity markets was particularly interesting. The market opened firm, up approximately 1%, and continued to trade with a very firm tone all day. What precipitated the strong tone? Fed chair Ben Bernanke was interviewed on 60 Minutes last evening. On that show, Bernanke Defends Recovery Efforts in Rare TV Interview.
First and foremost, it is very uncharacteristic for anybody from the Fed to consent to an interview targeted at a general audience. I view this as Bernanke trying to make the case for himself, the Fed, and the economy during these challenging times. In fairly short order, Bernanke has gained significantly greater credibility than his colleague, Secretary Geithner. Bernanke also spoke well of the economy turning around later this year IF the financial system recovers. That is a mighty big IF!! (more…)
What About Commercial Real Estate
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 16th, 2009 12:31 PM |
On my radio show last evening, I touched on some of the pressing issues facing our economy and, in turn, our markets. These issues include residential housing, municipal finance, automotive, and commercial real estate. While the first three issues seem to get a wealth of very personal and humanistic coverage from the media, the world of commercial real estate seems much more opaque. The site of large office buildings, suburban shopping malls, upscale hotels, warehouses, and apartment complexes do not evoke the level of human emotion involved in a foreclosed home, municipal layoffs, or factory closings. That said, the problems in the commercial real estate industry should generate just as much concern if not more. Why?
These commercial properties are the glue in our entire world of global finance. While the development of the commercial mortgage-backed securities market brought a large amount of liquidity to this sector, the shutdown of that market has just as quickly sucked the oxygen right back out. What has happened as a result? The lack of a transparent market has caused an overwhelming lack of liquidity and as a result properties are not trading. Why? The disparity between perceived value from the buyers’ and sellers’ perspectives is so wide that we could drive that proverbial Mack truck through it. (more…)
Is My Insurance Insured?
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 12th, 2009 6:30 PM |
The world of insurance occupies almost every corner of our lives. Life, home, auto, disability, long term care, personal articles. Rather than addressing what is insured, an easier question may be to ask what isn’t insured.
Given the intricate web of products and accompanying risks, we clearly are not currently dealing with your grandfathers’ insurance companies.
All that said, insurance is a relatively simple business. A policy is underwritten, premiums are collected and invested, and on and on we go. In fact, with major policies incorporating outsized risks, insurers can “lay off” risk with reinsurers, such as Munich Reinsurance, Swiss Reinsurance, and General Reinsurance. One would think this should be a steady and stable, if not quiet, industry. It would be such if companies did not reach for outsized returns through ever greater risks, primarily in the products in which they invested. While The Quiet Company, Northwestern Mutual invests primarily in high quality corporate bonds, entities like AIG trafficked in esoteric CDS. Hartford Financial Services played in the lower credit sectors of the commercial mortgage space, sub-prime mortgages, and junk bonds. (more…)
We Still Have To Pay The Bill
Posted by Larry Doyle on May 5th, 2009 4:16 PM |
Equity markets have rallied back to unchanged on the year. Libor is back to 1%. Housing is showing signs of life. Other economic indicators are declining at a less rapid rate. Fed chair Bernanke provides a cautiously optimistic tone in his testimony today. So why am I as concerned as ever?
Where are the losses? Well, the results of the Bank Stress Tests have been leaked and 10 of 19 banks will supposedly need more capital. The commercial real estate market is totally dependent on the government committing to 5 yr loans via the TALF. I view the rebound in the residential real estate market as mortgage mayhem, not mortgage magic. None other than the IMF continues to highlight that our economy has another $1 trillion plus in losses.
I will grant Obama and Bush and their respective administrations credit for succeeding to this point in what they were trying to accomplish. However, that success, in my opinion, only means that longer term costs will be steeper and longer term benefits will be further off as a result.
Nouriel Roubini and Matthew Richardson address these points in today’s WSJ, We Can’t Subsidize The Banks Forever.
From my perch, I view Obama and team as indiscriminately allocating capital across too many programs. I am becoming somewhat concerned that Bernanke is wondering if they have put too many chips on the table.
Roubini and Richardson offer:
While the tone feels better, there is no doubt we still have challenges. Private enterprise’s interaction with Uncle Sam is one of the biggest challenges.
All this said, the government had a choice between immediate losses with excruciating pain or buying time with long term underperformance. They chose the latter.
We still have to pay the bill.
LD
Tags: Bank Stress Tests, bernanke's commentary, commercial real estate, equity market rally, government intervention, IMF estimate of losses, Libor at 1%, mortgage mayhem, TALF
Posted in General | No Comments »