SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: robert b furman who wrote (9844)8/17/2008 7:37:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 33421
 
Bob, I think I'm more inclined to concur with your opinion on this, especially with regard to European banks and their Real Estate issues.

And I definitely have to disagree with ajtj over Georgia. That was a trap the Russians sprang via continuous provocations. The Georgians were foolish to fall for it, but they did, and the Russians have effectively annexed Ossetia and Abkhazia. Now many full independence might be in the offing for Abkhazia, but neither North or South Ossetia have the economic base to go it alone. But that should be our game plan.. Force the Russians to implement what they allegedly been supporting all along.. independence for these two territories.

Georgia will need to be convinced they've lost those territories, but they still can get some "payback" by encouraging the same separatist activities against the Russians. Two separate "buffer zones" against the Russians is better than having the bear pawing at your door.

The reality is that Russia wants to control not only Georgia, but Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the 'Stans from which all that oil transits that pipeline in Georgia to Turkey. One only has to peruse the map to understand this:

google.com

maps.google.com

I personally believe the local Russian leadership in the Caucasus created this situation and then waited for Putin to be out of the country to push the issue. Putin, although having thorough distaste for the Georgians, probably didn't want something like this to transpire during the Olympics, but his people left him little choice. Especially when he knew he would be meeting face to face with Bush. But once the action was started, he certainly couldn't be seen internally as caving in.

But that's just my gut sense over this. It leaves to question who's actually wielding power within Russia. This may have been a play by their military leaders to undermine Putin's position. We'll see in coming months if some of these Generals pay the price.

Sorry if I've polluted this thread with the Georgian issue. Probably not the place for this discussion. But it certainly does impact the future price of oil.

Hawk



To: robert b furman who wrote (9844)8/17/2008 9:31:37 PM
From: ajtj99  Respond to of 33421
 
I hate to say this, but you really don't get it.

I'm not a glass half full or glass half empty kind of person.

It's just a glass with water and potential to become more empty or more full, or stay the same.

You're a glass half full person.

As for the culture of fear stuff, that's so 5-years ago.



To: robert b furman who wrote (9844)8/18/2008 11:22:33 AM
From: John Pitera  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 33421
 
Bernanke Tries to Define What Institutions Fed Could Let Fail

By Craig Torres

Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Ben S. Bernanke is still trying to define which financial institutions it's safe to let fail. The longer it takes him to decide, the tougher the decision becomes.

In the year since credit markets seized up, the 54-year- old Federal Reserve chairman has repeatedly expanded the central bank's protective role, turning its balance sheet into a parking lot for Wall Street's hard-to-finance bonds and offering loans through its discount window to investment banks and mortgage firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The lack of clearly defined limits may put the Fed's independence at risk as Congress discovers that its $900 billion portfolio can be used for emergency bailouts that might otherwise require politically sensitive appropriations and taxes.

``There is some hard thinking that needs to be done,'' Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank President Charles Plosser said in an interview last week. ``The Fed has a terrific reputation as a credible institution. We have to be cautious not to undertake things that put that credibility at risk.''

The expanding role of central banks will be the hottest topic in the room when Bernanke addresses his counterparts from around the world at the Kansas City Fed's Jackson Hole, Wyoming, symposium Aug. 22.

Since taking on $29 billion in Bear Stearns Cos. assets to facilitate the failing firm's takeover by JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bernanke has made several moves that imply further expansion of the central bank's mission.

Student-Loan Collateral

He granted a congressional request to accept bonds backed by student loans as collateral for Fed securities loans. And he didn't object when Congress inserted a provision into the housing bill signed into law last month that makes it easier for the Fed to lend to failed banks under government control.

``They want to placate the Congress and the financial markets,'' says Fed historian Allan Meltzer; doing so sets a ``terrible precedent.''

Policy makers are aware of the concern. The Federal Open Market Committee has ordered a formal study of the implications of the Fed's broader role in fostering financial stability, drawing on research from throughout the Fed system.

Under Bernanke's predecessor Alan Greenspan, the Fed drew a clear line against using its portfolio to influence specific markets. An internal study published in 2002 warned that ``the favoring of specific entities'' might ``invite pressure from special-interest groups.''

Refusing a Request

Just three days after the Fed approved a loan against Bear Stearns securities, Pennsylvania Democratic Representative Paul Kanjorski and 31 other lawmakers sent Bernanke a letter asking him to open the discount window to nonbank education-loan companies. Bernanke refused.

The 2002 study said such pressures ``could pull the Fed into fiscal debates'' and ``compromise its objectives'' for monetary policy: keeping employment high and inflation low.

``How can you be independent on one score and dependent on another?'' asks Vincent Reinhart, former director of the Fed's Monetary Affairs Division, who advised both Bernanke and Greenspan. Officials ``are overburdening the Federal Reserve, and that sets up the potential for multiple conflicts,'' he says. ``They use up their credibility on nonmonetary issues, they lose their independence and they dilute their expertise.''

Reinhart, now a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, is one of several Fed alumni who say they are concerned the central bank will next face requests to rescue hedge funds or insurance companies whose failure might damage the financial system.

Hard to Say No

``It is much harder to say no when you have the precedent,'' says J. Alfred Broaddus Jr., former president of the Richmond Fed. ``Congress needs to find a way to structure something else to take the Fed out of this.''

The Fed chairman's decisions are a decisive break with Greenspan's aversion to government interference in markets, a conviction that even permeated the central bank's day-to-day operations.

On Aug. 10, 2005, when Greenspan was chairman, 94 percent of the Fed's $24 billion in outstanding repurchase agreements with Wall Street were in U.S. Treasury notes. On Aug. 10, 2008, only 14 percent were in Treasuries, with the rest in mortgage bonds and agency securities, according to Wrightson ICAP LLC in Jersey City, New Jersey. The New York Fed says agency and mortgage-backed securities ``became more attractive.''

Abandoning Principles

``They have had to abandon all principles that guided their earlier debates,'' says Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson. The objective now is ``how you get the most market impact.''

To Bernanke, the decisions of the past 12 months may well have protected the Fed's independence from far greater erosion that might have occurred if the central bank had stood aloof while financial markets melted down.

The former Princeton University scholar views the Great Depression as a fiasco that compromised the Fed's credibility, bringing an onslaught of regulation and a congressional review of the Federal Reserve Act. If the Fed had walked away from Bear Stearns, it would have led to higher unemployment, a deeper downturn and a longer recovery, all of which would have brought even greater political pressure on the Fed, the chairman's defenders argue.

``It is not an easy sell,'' Bernanke told Senator Evan Bayh, an Indiana Democrat, during an April 3 hearing on the Bear Stearns rescue. ``But the truth is that the beneficiaries of our actions were not Bear Stearns and were not even principally Wall Street. It was Main Street.''

Under Stress

Bernanke added that ``the financial system has been under a lot of stress and that has affected our ability to grow. It's affected employment. It's affected credit availability.''

Bernanke's actions have been informed by his own research with New York University's Mark Gertler showing that damaged banks accelerate economic downturns.

That threat has multiplied in a new financial system where mortgage lenders may not even be banks, and mortgages are warehoused in funds off the books of banks.

``We are in a new environment, and the Fed had to do something different,'' Gertler says. ``Moving forward, the regulatory structure has to adjust.''

Fed officials have been cautious about suggesting what new supervisory powers they would like or how their lender-of-last- resort powers should function in the future.

Expanding Authority

Bernanke said in a July 8 speech that a ``strong case can be made'' for expanding the Fed's authority over the U.S. payment system, the complex network of financial plumbing that handles the exchange of money from such transactions as options trades in Chicago and stock sales in New York. The Fed also is pushing for better settlement and trading systems for securities that aren't bought and sold on exchanges.

Beyond that, the Fed chairman has expressed wariness over the U.S. Treasury's recommendation that the Fed become the ``market-stability regulator.''

``Attention should be paid to the risk that market participants might incorrectly view the Fed as a source of unconditional support,'' he said in the July 8 speech.

Even so, the Fed has already expanded its supervisory reach. It has become a temporary consulting regulator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, working with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. An agreement with the Securities and Exchange Commission allows the Fed to make recommendations on the capital and liquidity positions of investment banks. The Fed is also more actively using its authority to supervise nonbank consumer-finance subsidiaries of bank holding companies, such as the CitiFinancial unit of Citigroup Inc.

`A Major Regulator'

To ``a large degree,'' it appears the Fed `` is going to become a major regulator of financial institutions,'' says Ross Levine, a Brown University economist who has written a book on bank regulation.

With that comes the danger that measures the Fed has to take to enhance stability may end up restraining economic growth, Levine says. ``That can come at a very big cost to innovation and the welfare of the country,'' he says.

Plosser, the Philadelphia Fed president, says the central bank is struggling internally with such concerns.

``What has been put on the plate is the broader role of central banks in their effort to promote or ensure financial stability,'' he says. ``We have to face up to the potential risks to the conduct of sound monetary policy from acquiring these other responsibilities.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Craig Torres in Washington at ctorres3@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: August 17, 2008 19:01 EDT



To: robert b furman who wrote (9844)8/24/2008 7:44:56 PM
From: John Pitera  Respond to of 33421
 
Libor Signals Credit Seizing Up as Banks Balk at Money Lending

By Liz Capo McCormick and Gavin Finch

Aug. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Most of the bond strategists and salesmen that Resolution Investment Management Ltd.'s Stuart Thomson talked to last August expected the credit crunch to be long over by now. Instead, money markets show there's no end in sight, and it may even worsen.

``It's like an ongoing nightmare and no one is sure when we're going to wake up,'' said Thomson, a money manager in Glasgow at Resolution, which oversees $46 billion in bonds. ``Things are going to get worse before they get better.''

In a replay of the last four months of 2007, interest-rate derivatives imply that banks are becoming more hesitant to lend on speculation credit losses will increase as the global economic slowdown deepens. Binit Patel, an economist in London at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., said in an Aug. 21 report that nations accounting for half of the world's economy face a recession.

The premium banks charge for lending short-term cash may approach the record levels set last year, based on trading in the forward markets, where financial instruments are sold for future delivery. Back then, concern about the health of the banking system led investors to shun all but the safest government debt, sparking the biggest end-of-year rally for Treasuries since 2000.

``These problems going into year-end are likely to be worse this time round because of the amount banks have to refinance in December,'' Thomson said, citing a figure of $88 billion. ``The suspicion is that banks are still hiding losses. The banking system relies on trust and at the minute there quite simply isn't any.''

Rate Spreads

Banks are charging each other a premium of 77 basis points over what traders predict the Federal Reserve's daily effective federal funds rate will average over the next three months to lend cash. The spread is up from about 24 basis points in January, and may widen to 85 basis points, or 0.85 percentage point, by mid-December, prices in the forwards market show.

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said in June that this spread, which is the difference between the three-month London interbank offered rate for dollars and the overnight indexed swap rate, should serve as a measure for telling when markets have returned to normal.

A narrowing to 25 basis points in the so-called Libor-OIS spread would be viewed as a positive, he said. Forward markets signal that won't happen until sometime after June 2010. The premium averaged 11 basis points, or 0.11 percentage point, in the 10 years prior to August 2007.

Another 2007

Increased turmoil in the money markets may again serve as a catalyst for a surprise year-end rally in Treasuries like the one in 2007.

``The trade to do in December will be to get back into the most liquid thing you can find,'' such as Treasury bills or notes, said David Keeble, head of fixed-income strategy in London at Calyon, a unit of Credit Agricole SA, France's second- largest bank by assets. ``We are having a period now of a second round of pressures on banks. It's weak economic growth which is now piling the pain onto the banks.''

A year ago, 10-year note yields fell about half a percentage point to 4 percent between September and December, even though the median estimate of 65 economists surveyed by Bloomberg was for a rise to 5 percent. Treasuries returned 3.98 percent, versus 1.92 percent for company debt and a loss of 3.82 percent in the Standard & Poor's 500 Index, according to Merrill Lynch & Co.

And just like last year, economists and strategists are again calling for an increase in yields. The median of 52 estimates in a Bloomberg survey between Aug. 1 and Aug. 8 was for 10-year Treasury yields to rise to 4 percent by the end of 2008.

Flow of Cash

The yield on the benchmark 4 percent note due in August 2018 closed at 3.87 percent last week, rising from 3.31 percent after the Fed engineered the bailout of Bear Stearns Cos. in March and inflation accelerated to the highest level in 17 years.

``The credit crunch remains the centerpiece of our bond strategy,'' said Resolution's Thomas. He said he's bullish on Treasuries maturing in five years or less.

Banks began to hoard their cash when rising defaults on subprime mortgages led two Bear Stearns hedge funds to seek bankruptcy protection on July 31, 2007, as creditors forced them to liquidate at least $4 billion of securities tied to the loans.

Then on Aug. 9, 2007, Paris-based BNP Paribas SA halted withdrawals from three investment funds because it couldn't ``fairly'' value their subprime debt holdings and the European Central Bank took the unprecedented action of offering to pump unlimited cash into the banking system. The BNP funds had about 1.6 billion euros ($2.2 billion) of assets.

`Systemic' Problems

Losses and writedowns on securities related to home loans to people with poor credit now exceed $504 billion at financial institutions. Last month Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was forced to seek congressional authority to inject unlimited capital into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are responsible for about 42 percent of the $12 trillion U.S. home loan market, after their shares tumbled about 90 percent, wiping out some $54 billion of stock market value.

Trust among banks remains low even after the Fed cut its target rate for overnight loans to 2 percent from 5.25 percent in September and created three emergency lending programs, including the Term Auction Facility, or TAF. In total, the Fed has provided almost $1 trillion of emergency loans.

The Fed's most recent lending survey released Aug. 11 said that more banks tightened credit standards for consumers and business borrowers since April as defaults and delinquencies on home loans climbed.

Libor Validity

``The problem is much more systemic than was widely anticipated a year ago,'' said Michael Darda, chief economist for MKM Partners LLC in Greenwich, Connecticut. ``Not only bank balance sheets but home balance sheets are under pressure due to falling house prices.''

The seizure in the credit markets and rise in short-term borrowing costs this year triggered questions over the validity of Libor, a benchmark administered by the London-based British Bankers' Association and used to calculate rates on $360 trillion of financial products worldwide.

The Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, said in March some members of the BBA may have understated their borrowing costs to avoid being seen as having difficulty raising financing.

``Libor markets aren't reflective of the entire banking system but of three or four major banks that continue to have pressure on liquidity,'' said Saumil Parikh, a money manager who helps oversee $688 billion at Pacific Investment Management Co., in Newport Beach, California. ``That spreads to the entire system because you are not really sure who you are going to end up lending to through the Libor market.''

`Not Over'

Restrictive lending makes it harder for growth to accelerate in U.S. economy, where gross domestic product may slow to 1.5 percent this year, according to the median forecast of 76 contributors in a Bloomberg survey that puts a greater weighting on most recent estimates.

Meanwhile, Europe's GDP unexpectedly fell 0.2 percent in the second quarter, while Japan's economy shrank at an annual rate of 2.4 percent in the same period.

The crisis is ``not over and I'm not exactly sure when it's going to end,'' Nobel Prize-winning economist Myron Scholes said Aug. 21 at a conference in Lindau, Germany, featuring 14 Nobel laureates in economics.

To contact the reporters on this story: Liz Capo McCormick in New York at Emccormick7@bloomberg.net; Gavin Finch in London at gfinch@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: August 24, 2008 11:00 EDT