Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tom who wrote (1235)	1/20/1998 6:43:00 AM
From: Stitch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Tom, Thanks for your thoughts. I have been thinking about the debt moratorium notion. One outcome could be bank failures in Europe and Japan, perhaps also in the U.S. Do you think the respective governments should support their banks with low cost loans or some other method in the case of a moratorium? How long do you think the moratorium would have to last? How does a moratorium resolve attrraction of foreign capital for the immediate? Asia still will require investment. Keep in mind that this is primarily a case of corporate debt and not government debt. Who decides the merits and , in fact, would it be a case by case basis? I am not sure a moratorium in and of itself would solve the whole problem. Best, Stitch

To: tom who wrote (1235)	1/20/1998 6:50:00 AM
From: Mohan Marette	Respond to of 9980

tom, 'Fire Sale'? May be that was the idea. You smell conspiracy??? <<<They will need to do this at fire-sale prices which probably do not reflect the long term value of the assets (eg. you can buy a Semen Cibinong (a cement company in Indonesia) for 20% of replacement cost and a Indah Kiat (a pulp company in Indonesia), the lowest cost producer in the world, for 25% of replacement cost.>>>

To: tom who wrote (1235)	1/20/1998 7:11:00 AM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9980

Tom, >>Why should multi-national banks be bailed out by the IMF for their staggeringly stupid lending decisions (see earlier post re: lending to Steady Safe Taxis)? I'll join you in what people may deride as "the simplistic thinking department." Seems to me that lenders lend at their risk, and the interest they demand depends on their assessement of that risk. Since everyone is groping for the extra basis point of yield (Chrysler selling 100 year bonds at 75 basis points over treasurys), let these lenders face up to the risks they're taking. I don't think taxpayers of any country should have to pay for banks who make stupid loans. Yet it happens again and again. How long can/will this go on? Jack