Posted on March 29, 2009
This morning (March 29) Treasury Secretary Geithner appeared on Meet the Press to explain his plan for rescue of the financial system. He described a series of actions to not only fix the banks, but to get the securitization markets working as well. For perhaps the first time we heard a (relatively) clear rationale explaining how the Treasury expects the toxic asset rescue plan to lead to the restoration of credit for consumers and entrepreneurial business.
The interview started with an explanation of the difference between bank lending and securitization. Per Geithner, “Typically somewhat less than half of lending for business and consumers comes from the securitization markets.” As I have written previously the current financial crisis was created by an explosion of debt to unsustainable levels in great part through the mechanisms of the shadow banking system, which includes the securitization markets. This created a massive amount of liquidity, much of which was not captured in traditional measures of the Money Supply. The collapse of these mechanisms beginning in August 2007 created the credit crunch. Sec. Geithner believes that, until these non-bank markets are restored, the financial system can’t be fixed.
There’s been much loose talk in the media claiming that lending to small business entrepreneurs can’t be restored until the toxic assets come off the balance sheets of the banks. Here is what Geithner said on the subject of the toxic asset bailout:
“This is a better way to get these markets working again. Let me just step back for one second. What we’re trying to do is get the entire financial system – our complicated financial system – working again so that we get credit where it needs to go in the economy. And that requires strengthening our banking system. It requires making sure there is enough capital in the … read the rest
Permalink | | Comments Off on Geithner Told it Straight (But you really had to listen)
Posted on March 17, 2009
Def. Mark – noun
15. b. Slang. the intended victim of a swindler, hustler, or the like: e.g. “The cardsharps picked their marks from among the tourists on the cruise ship.”
It’s midnight in Vegas. A somewhat paunchy fiftyish guy from the Midwest has just sauntered over to the poker table. With a bourbon in his right hand and a party girl on his left arm, he stumbles slightly before announcing “mind if I join you guys?” The player with the dark glasses looks up briefly, mumbles something unintelligible and looks back at his cards. The one in the cowboy hat says “howdy partner, glad to have you”. Our hero throws his chips on the table and takes his seat. “Boy I’m feeling lucky tonight.”
Guess who’s flying back to river city tomorrow with a lot fewer chips than he came with?
Uncle Sam stumbled into the world’s highest stakes casino last fall. He didn’t know how to play the game, but he certainly knew how to raise the table stakes. Nothing that has happened since then increases my confidence that the U. S. of A. will be leaving this game as a winner.
This morning Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times was on Morning Joe making the case for payment of the AIG bonuses. His core argument in an article in Tuesday’s Times is that we can’t ignore contractual rights just because they’re not politically popular. To do so would cause untold damage to the American economy. On Morning Joe Andrew was brave enough to take the even more unpopular position that the partially nationalized financial institutions must pay up to hire good people or the smart guys at Goldman, et. al. will clean their (and our) clocks.
That this has suddenly become a major political issue should … read the rest
Permalink | | Comments Off on We’re The Marks
Posted on March 1, 2009
We won’t be seeing bloody togas on the Senate steps, but there will be great pain and destruction in the American business community. There’s an annual ritual which starts in March and generally goes through sometime in April, in which tens of thousands of private companies, the heart blood of the American economy, deliver their annual audits and reviewed financial statements to their banks. For many the results will not be pretty.
In the fourth quarter of 2008, firms throughout the manufacturing, retail and distribution economy, and likely in a number of other sectors as well, were hit by a strong downdraft precipitated by the credit crunch of September and October. Many of these companies sustained a precipitous drop-off in revenues and resulting operating losses for the quarter. Others may have seen a dramatic decline in the value of their inventories, particularly if they were in industries dependent on volatile commodities or imported raw materials. The bottom line is that many companies will report a loss for the fourth quarter and a substantial number for the full year 2008 as well.
Contrary to current opinion, banks don’t like to take losses and will do everything in their power to avoid doing so. Until now banks have been relatively lenient with their commercial borrowers other than in industries related to residential construction, where the reality of losses is too obvious to be ignored. Unfortunately for their borrowers, however, banks are subject to strict accounting rules and answer to regulatory supervisors that demand that action be taken to head off potential loan losses. Delivery of the 2008 annual audits and reviewed financial statements will make the potential for problems all too obvious.
Partially in response to the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act), within the last ten years many banks began to apply credit scoring and other “objective” … read the rest