Showing posts with label GS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GS. Show all posts

Friday, October 14, 2011

60% Cut for Greek Bondholders on the Table

 
The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.
Bloomberg reported overnight that Greek bondholders were preparing to lose 60% on their investments. This is much bigger than the constructive default of 21% proposed with the second bailout in July. A big cut in the value of Greek bonds will cause major problems for German and French banks — and the ECB itself.

Rumors have been floating around the markets for days about a managed default of Greek debt at around the 50%, or greater, level and an occasional brief or cryptic comment has been made publically by EU officials. While this news was reported by the Helicopter Economics Investing Guide blog days ago, it is only just now filtering into the mainstream news services even though a large cut on Greek debt is an arithmetic inevitability. The only alternative would be a second bailout package several times larger than the proposed 109 billion euros (say 500 billion euros or more). Considering that populations of the EU countries are hostile to spending even the 109 billion euros, additional bailout funding is highly unlikely.

Bloomberg quoted a number of well-placed financial executives, including the CEO of Deutsche Bank, in its report indicating a general consensus was building that Greek bondholders would accept a deep reduction in their holdings. There ECB (European Central Bank) seems to be a major exception however. The ECB had amassed a considerable holding of Greek debt earlier on in an attempt to hold down interest rates there. Interest rates have since gone as high as 141% on Greek one-year governments. The ECB subsequently bought up debt from Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy to hold interest rates down in those countries. Investors should expect that ultimately these efforts will prove just as successful as they have in Greece.

Recapitalization (a euphemism for "bailout") will be necessary for EU banks if they have to take major losses on their Greek loans. Dexia, the largest bank in Belgium, folded almost overnight recently and its exposure to Greek debt was only a little over 1% of its loan portfolio — and this was before talk of a 60% haircut for Greek bonds. Imagine what would happen to banks with larger exposures? EU banks also hold substantial amounts of loans to Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The largest holders of Greek debt by far are of course Greek banks themselves. Proton Bank recently closed there, but officials made it clear that it was because of alleged criminal activity and not because of the debt crisis.

Sovereign credit and bank downgrades throughout the EU are becoming increasingly common.  S&P downgraded Spain's long-term credit rating from AA to AA- with a negative outlook (meaning more cuts are likely) today. The agency predicted Spain would miss its deficit cutting targets for 2011 and 2012. S&P downgraded the credit ratings of a number of Spanish banks three days ago including Santander (STD). Credit Suisse analysts just declared the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) to be the "most vulnerable" bank in Europe. RBS is 87% owned by the UK government. Credit rating agency Fitch threatened across the board downgrades of the banks yesterday. This potential downgrade would impact Barclays (BCS), BNP Paribas (FR: BNP), Credit Suisse (CS), Deutsche Bank (DB), Goldman Sachs (GS), Morgan Stanley (MS), and Société Générale (FR:GLE) among others.

Perhaps in the next few weeks there will be some temporary resolution to the Greek debt crisis. Unless the cut that bondholders are forced to take is big enough, it won't last however. Whatever happens with Greece won't solve the problems in Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and possibly in Belgium. To be effective, the recapitalization (bailouts) of EU banks will have to be substantial. This will by necessity involve using money printing to resolve a debt crisis.  That's actually already been done since 2008 and look at what great shape the global financial system is in now. 

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Sunday, August 22, 2010

FDIC Swan Song: 8 Banks a Week

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


The FDIC closed down eight banks last week bringing this year's total to 118 so far. Included in this week's closures was the notorious ShoreBank in Chicago. In a separate report, the U.S. Treasury has disclosed that the Obama administration's HAMP (Home Affordable Mortgage Program) seems to be rapidly falling apart. This could further weaken the U.S. banking system.

The FDIC is operating on both borrowed time and borrowed money. This agency is the bulwark protecting American's savings in the case of failed banks, but the FDIC itself is close to going broke. The eight closures this week alone cost the FDIC’s deposit-insurance fund $473.5 million. The deposit insurance fund was already $20.9 billion in the hole at the end of the fourth quarter in 2009. In order to plug the hole and keep going, the FDIC in December forced banks to prepay three years of insurance premiums and raised about $45 billion by doing so. That money had to pay off the deficit already accumulated and then last for the next 156 months of bailouts. There have been weeks this year when the FDIC has had to shell out close to $1 billion for bank rescues. That $45 billion isn't going to last much longer.

ShoreBank was the most significant bailout this week. The bank was founded in the South Side of Chicago in 1973 and was the nation's first community development and environmental bank. Goldman Sachs (GS), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Morgan Stanley (MS), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), American Express (AXP), GE Capital (GE), and Wells Fargo (WFC) were investors. The bank has indirect ties to a number of members of the Obama administration. The bank was under a cease-and-desist order from the FDIC for more than a year before it was finally closed down. Its remaining assets will be transferred to a newly created corporation, Urban Partnership Bank. Some of the same executives from ShoreBank will be running this newly chartered bank (once they drive Urban Partnership Bank into the ground, it too will be bailed out). It looks like the investments of the too-big-to-fail, or even lose any money, big bank funders will also be protected under this arrangement by transferring them to Urban Partnership Bank.

Meanwhile, the poorly thought out and even more poorly run HAMP program is not making a big dent in slowing foreclosures. Nearly half of the 1.3 million homeowners who enrolled in the Obama administration's flagship mortgage-relief program have already fallen or more likely been pushed out. Mortgage holders blame the banks for not cooperating and banks blame the mortgage holders. According to RealtyTrac, the nation is headed toward more than one million foreclosures this year - a higher amount than the 900,000 homes repossessed in 2009. Boy, HAMP is certainly doing a great job in significantly reducing the number of foreclosures. Well, I guess it's just too much too expect that something will be accomplished for only $75 billion in taxpayer money.

Based on this week's events, I have written the following theme song for the FDIC (maybe Sheila Blair will sing it at the next board meeting) to be sung to the tune of the Beatles 'Eight Days a Week':

Oh I'll bail out your bank babe,
Guess you know it's through,
Hope you like the money banker,
When I'm funding you,
Spent it, Lost it, Pay Me, Save Me
Don't do nothing but bailouts,
Eight banks a week


Disclosure: No positions

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Market Sells Off Even Though Bernanke Is Bullish

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Fed Chair Ben Bernanke stated last night that he is 'hopeful' the U.S. economy will not fall into a double dip recession. After a tremendous drubbing on Friday, stocks somehow managed to sell down to even lower levels yesterday. They are down again this morning following Bernanke's comments - a fitting response to his forecasting acumen.

Few people in the United States seem to be as oblivious to the condition of the American economy as is the guy who is in charge of the Federal Reserve. Bernanke notoriously stated that subprime borrowing wouldn't cause any problems only weeks before it blew up into the biggest financial crisis the world has ever seen. Following this, the Fed released a number of statements in the spring of 2008 about how it was hopeful that its policies would prevent the U.S. economy from falling into a recession. Unfortunately, the economy had already fallen into recession months before, but the Fed was blissfully unaware of this even though it has more access to economic data than anyone else. The buffoonish Bernanke has been beating the drum of economic recovery for a long time now, even though analysis of U.S. statistics indicates the private sector is still struggling. The only recovery that seems to have taken place is in increased government spending.

At the moment, the markets don't seem to share Bernanke's rosy view of the future. The Dow dropped 115 points (1.2%) yesterday and most of the selling took place around the close, as is typical in bear markets. The Dow's ending price of 9816 was well below the key 10,000 level. The S&P 500 fell 14 points (1.4%) and closed at a new low for 2010, as did the Dow. Selling was even more pronounced in the tech heavy Nasdaq and the small cap Russell 2000. The Nasdaq lost 45 points (2.0%) and the Russell 15 points (2.4%). As of today, the Dow and S&P 500 have spent 13 trading days below their simple 200-day moving averages, a bearish pattern. Selling was also widespread with market breadth close to three to one negative on the NYSE.

The only areas of the market that did well yesterday were utilities, gold/ gold miners, and treasuries - safe havens. Financials were hit hard with Goldman Sachs (GS) falling 2.5% and Bank of America (BAC) losing 3.4%. U.S. bank failures have reached 81 so far this year and look like they are going to handily exceed 2009's very high figure. Credit card debt has fallen for 19 months in a row and May's employment report indicated private sector hiring has disappeared. Once the 1.2 million temporary Census workers are dismissed, the U.S. unemployment rate should go above 10%. These are not signs of economic recovery and yet the Fed chair keeps spouting one cheerleading remark after another about how recovery is taking place. Herbert Hoover did the same thing in the early 1930s as the Great Depression was developing. Consequently, he is now treated as a historical laughingstock. History may take the same view of Ben Bernanke. 

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

How Accounting Changes Created Wall Street's Good Earnings

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


If you can't win under the existing rules of the game, simply change the rules. Wall Street firms were losing big money during the Credit Crisis, but not only did the federal government come to their rescue with truckloads of taxpayer money, but accounting rule changes were also instituted to make their financial position look much stronger. The much improved earnings for the banks and investment houses showing up today are the result of both and not an improved economy.

After a record earnings year in 2007, built on a highly leveraged sub-prime mortgage pyramid, things started to go terribly wrong on Wall Street in 2008. Mark to market accounting was forcing firms to value their sub-prime paper at fire sale prices. This was causing massive losses. Wall Street's friends in the federal government launched a massive counteroffensive, including TARP - the welfare for Wall Street banker's bill, approximately half a dozen new Fed policies that supported the market for Wall Street's junk paper, legislation to hold up the housing market to give underlying value to that paper, and a change in accounting rules that would allow the big banks to look like they were making money even if they weren't.

Citigroup's first quarter 2010 earnings report provides a good example of the better earnings through accounting chemistry approach. Many market observers maintained that Citi was insolvent during the Credit Crisis. The U.S. Treasury wound up buying 27% of Citigroup's shares to help keep the company afloat. In reaction to the Credit Crisis debacle, Citi set up a company, Citi Holdings, to isolate its questionable assets. That entity had losses of $5.49 billion in the first quarter of 2009. It only lost $876 million in the first quarter of this year. The difference improved Citigroup's earnings in Q1 2010 by $4.61 billion. Total earnings reported for Citi in the quarter were $4.43 billion, so it would have lost money without the boost from Citi Holdings. Nevertheless, mainstream media reports were aglow with Citi's great earning's recovery.

The change in accounting rules took place between September 2008 and April 2009. On September 30, 2008 the SEC and FASB, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, issued a joint announcement that stated that forced liquidations of securities, meaning subprime junk debt, were not indicative of fair value. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which was passed a few days later on October 3rd, codified this into law by allowing the SEC to suspend existing accounting rules if doing so was thought to be in the best interests of the public. In actuality, the 'best interests' being protected were the Wall Street's. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley stock price's hit bottom and began rallying the next month. On March 16, 2009, FASB proposed allowing companies to use more leeway in valuing their assets under "mark-to-market" accounting and this eased balance-sheet pressures on the big banks by letting them cross out the old bad numbers and start replacing them with much better looking new numbers. The overall stock market bottomed right around this date.

The accounting changes came too late to save Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers of course. Bear went under in March 2008 and the events surrounding its demise indicate that existing Wall Street accounting numbers already had a large fantasy component before the gutting of mark-to-market for subprime junk. Bear Stearns was trying to expedite a good first quarter earnings report before it collapsed. When the feds arranged for it to be bought by JP Morgan, they valued it at $2 a share. The book value for Bear Stearns was around $90. If people at the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department think that $90 really means $2 for a Wall Street company, the individual investor might want to take the hint. These people have a lot more information about what is really going on than you do. If they don't believe the numbers, why should you?

Disclosure: None applicable.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Monday, April 19, 2010

Market Sell Off on Goldman News Has Deeper Roots

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


The SEC's announcement on Friday (April 17th) that it was investigating Goldman Sachs on fraud charges seems to have been the cause of a serious market sell off, but other factors were at work as well. While major financial stocks took a hit, so did gold, gold miners, and oil. The tech heavy Nasdaq also had a sharp decline. The market was overbought and options expiration added an extra impetus to the volatility.  In such circumstances, any bad news can cause contagious selling.

While selling was broad based, large cap financials were indeed the epicenter of the damage. Goldman (GS) itself closed down 13% on the day. JP Morgan (JPM) was down 5% and Morgan Stanley (MS) down 6%. XLF, the financial ETF, was down 4.5%. Inexplicably, the gold mining index HUI was down 4.4% and gold and oil were each down over 2%. Gold should have seen safe haven investing flows, but did not.

As for the major market indices, the financial heavy S&P 500 had the biggest drop, falling 1.6%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down only 1.1% and the small cap Russell 2000 ended 1.3% lower. Nasdaq lost 1.4%. On the daily charts, the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 reached overbought territory in the middle of last week. Nasdaq became extremely overbought at the same time. If selling hadn't started on Friday, it would have done so probably at the beginning of this week.

Although the Dow has not gotten to overbought territory, it has other technical issues, namely volume or lack thereof. The Dow finally had a high volume trading day on Friday ... on heavy selling, which added even more weight to the technically negative picture. Overall volume on the Dow has been dropping since the bottom was put in last March, something that should not be taking place during a rally. Even worse, selling has been occurring on above average volume recently. This is known as distribution and indicates big money is getting out of the market. The only above average volume day so far in April was last Friday. The only high volume day in March also saw selling. February was more mixed, but the four highest volume days in January, all well above average, saw selling. 

Where the buying has been taken place in the market is also not encouraging. Only six stocks frequently account for up to 30% of the buying on the NYSE - Citigroup (C), AIG (AIG), Ambac (ABK), Bank of America (BAK), Popular (BPOP) and Fannie Mae (FNM). Considering that AIG and Fannie Mae are nationalized enterprises owned by the U.S. government and Ambac, Citigroup and Popular were penny stocks selling for 1.00 or less during the Credit Crisis, this is not exactly a sterling list of solid growth companies leading the market.

Liquidity is what makes markets go up (good earnings are the result of liquidity, although in the current rally, liberalized accounting standards may be even more important). The fed and other central banks throughout the world have pumped an almost unlimited amount of it into the world financial system since the Credit Crisis began. Too much liquidity over too long a period of time though pumps up stocks to unsustainable levels as happened in 1929, 1987 and 2000. Under such circumstances withdrawing even small amounts of liquidity can have the effect of sticking a pin in a very over inflated balloon.

Disclosure: Long oil.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.