RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeMum’s the Word
Posted by Larry Doyle on April 10th, 2009 12:40 PM |
The 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
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.
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…)
Change The Rules of The Game
Posted by Larry Doyle on March 13th, 2009 8:07 AM |
Well, when you do not like how a game is going, change the rules.
The primary reason for the market rally yesterday was a Congressional hearing pressuring FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) to revise its rule known as the “mark-to-market.” Thank you FL for providing a heads up on this hearing.
In layman’s terms, the mark-to-market is the equivalent of inventory valuation. Nobody likes when inventory declines in value but if that is the reality, then so be it. Would your banker laugh at you if you told him you weren’t going to properly mark inventory? Do you think he’d continue to offer you a line of credit? Are we supposed to invest in banks without a credible mark-to-market?
I have VERY mixed feelings about changing this rule. I do think there are merits in never having imposed this rule for certain less liquid assets, such as commercial real estate. However, the pressure banks are applying on Congress and Congress, in turn, on FASB is for a suspension of the mark-to-market on so called super-senior classes of CDOs.
Make no mistake, if this rule is changed it will provide capital relief because the “inventory will not have to be marked down.” However, it comes at the price of a lack of transparency and full understanding as to a bank’s true capital position. I recall writing in my very first piece on October 14th:
if the government accedes to the pressure being applied to suspend the mark to market accounting principle, I would expect that move would only prolong the underperformance of the economy . . . I view a suspension of the mark to market as the equivalent of an agreement to officially allow one to “cook their books”
I hold the same opinion today. We will see a lot more on this topic over the next few weeks as FASB Pledges Mark-to-Market Guidance Soon.
LD
