Rolling US Economy Into The Shitbin Thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (9719 of them)

Just to add, if some banks are holding them on their books, it's axiomatic to say that they must believe they're worth more than what they can sell them for, and that they've presumably priced in the fact that lots of people are going to start coming teaser rates into that valuation.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:34 (sixteen years ago) link

^^^Ach, meant to emphasise some, not banks.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:34 (sixteen years ago) link

testing

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:39 (sixteen years ago) link

If there isn't a market price, the banks usually use models to come up with a price. That's what they call "Level 3" assets. Goldman may be one of the least exposed to subprime of the major banks, but they still had level 3 assets representing $72B at the end of their third quarter:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/goldmanaug-level-3-asset-value/story.aspx?guid=%7BA5F0CE1D-4004-448D-967B-895CC8213FD6%7D

xpost- Banks may think they can get a better price if they wait, but that's a dangerous game when prices are falling.

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:39 (sixteen years ago) link

(oops, please ignore that "testing" post)

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:40 (sixteen years ago) link

you ever read that book about Long Term Capital Management o. nate ("When Genius Failed")?

Dandy Don Weiner, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:13 (sixteen years ago) link

Book rules.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:21 (sixteen years ago) link

Yes, I've read it. Good book.

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:26 (sixteen years ago) link

Too bad more people haven't read it.

Dandy Don Weiner, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:42 (sixteen years ago) link

when you consider the people who were involved with LTCM, it's fucking frightening.

And my point being that illiquidity and exposure are pretty damn complicated issues at banks in a scary house of cards kind of way.

Dandy Don Weiner, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:44 (sixteen years ago) link

Yeah, they had a quant from GS quoted in the FT a while back saying how crazy the credit squeeze was, and how it shouldn't've happened in three universe lifetimes according to his models, and I thought dude, how can earth can you not've read that book (cause he clearly wouldn't've said that if he had)?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:09 (sixteen years ago) link

There was an entertaining polemic by Nassim Nicholas Taleb (author of Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan) in the FT the other day about the models that generate these kinds of (unrealistic) predictions.

The pseudo-science hurting markets

I think he overstates his case a bit, but he does it with wit and is thought-provoking in a good way.

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:20 (sixteen years ago) link

The dollar can fall against cents, and has been doing so very nicely in the last couple of weeks, the ECB having failed to take my suggestion that a tenth of a Euro be called a Euroling.

Nubbelverbrennung, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:56 (sixteen years ago) link

do you have a point

El Tomboto, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:47 (sixteen years ago) link

Wow! I guess there are a few bright spots (unfortunately not ones in my portfolio).

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:47 (sixteen years ago) link

stocks be rocketing like fogdog.com

wanko ergo sum, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:49 (sixteen years ago) link

once did.

wanko ergo sum, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:51 (sixteen years ago) link

A few big tech stocks with compelling growth stories are doing well. I'm a bit pessimistic on where the broader market is heading though.

o. nate, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:53 (sixteen years ago) link

so am I, but I am usually wrong. It is sticking your neck out calling a crash when the DJIA is all of 5% off the alltime high. But it will be fun watching Jim Cramer forcing a smile and making picks on CNBC here in 5 minutes.

wanko ergo sum, Thursday, 1 November 2007 21:55 (sixteen years ago) link

Wow- this just keeps getting uglier for Merrill:

Deals With Hedge Funds May Be Helping Merrill Delay Mortgage Losses

o. nate, Friday, 2 November 2007 15:28 (sixteen years ago) link

I came across an individual lawsuit plaintiff named Meryl Lynch yesterday.

Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 15:30 (sixteen years ago) link

i wish i knew more about this stuff and bought gold and google a few years ago

artdamages, Friday, 2 November 2007 15:38 (sixteen years ago) link

I have never had much capital to invest really but when I put $2000 into a international/developing markets mutual fund it was EXACTLY one month before a huge sell-off in that sector. So I do tend to call things a little early. OTOH, for a individual investor, I think calling a bear and hedging early is a lot wiser than believing a bull and buying late. Google, Rim and Apple all have nice narratives to their success and have been making headlines for years now, so it's no surprise amateurs are getting into it. "Hey, I use Google/an iPod/my BlackBerry every day! I should invest in these guys!"

El Tomboto, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:11 (sixteen years ago) link

moral for me as an investor (once I cover my recent debt injection) - if you want to invest in any sector, wait it out for a 12 month low. if it doesn't happen, you missed the boat, try again next year.

El Tomboto, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:13 (sixteen years ago) link

I usually make those decisions during the long holidays I take at my country house in the Algarves.

Tracer Hand, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:15 (sixteen years ago) link

lolz. even if i ever have money i doubt i'd ever risk speculating on the market.

artdamages, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:18 (sixteen years ago) link

Yes. My advice to clients these days is to invest in property -- it's as safe as houses! I specifically recommend Florida condos. There are some crackerjack deals all over the coast.

Or, if you want something even safer, stash those dollars in a trunk and bury the trunk. And don't tell anyone where it is. Now THAT money won't be going ANYWHERE. Unless the dollar falls further of course.

Hmm.

Tracer Hand, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:21 (sixteen years ago) link

It's been a while since I thought about finance with any real depth, but that Taleb column seems like such crap. Academic financial models hardly work better than random chance? Is that not entirely the point? If he and his buddies can predict the market so much more effectively than 150,000 business schools teaching the MPT, why the hell is he making his money writing pop-culture social science books and not trading?

webber, Monday, 5 November 2007 02:29 (sixteen years ago) link

haha this buddy of mine was telling me this weekend how his neighbor (whom I know) keeps $20K in cash in his basement in a safe. I'm not sure if I should mention this, but Mr. Sock Drawer is a chiropractor.

Dandy Don Weiner, Monday, 5 November 2007 02:59 (sixteen years ago) link

dude seriously who tells people that shit? good way to put you and your family in danger.

El Tomboto, Monday, 5 November 2007 03:04 (sixteen years ago) link

Academic financial models hardly work better than random chance? Is that not entirely the point? If he and his buddies can predict the market so much more effectively than 150,000 business schools teaching the MPT, why the hell is he making his money writing pop-culture social science books and not trading?

I think his point is not that he can predict the market better than the models, but rather that the models give those who use them a false sense of security.

o. nate, Monday, 5 November 2007 17:31 (sixteen years ago) link

http://ichart.finance.yahoo.com/3m?cadusd=x

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 22:33 (sixteen years ago) link

thanks to abanana

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 22:33 (sixteen years ago) link

November 9, 2007, 12:34 pm
Midday Tidbits — 99 Problems for the Dollar
Posted by Tim Annett

How much Rocawear could these euros buy?
# First Gisele, then China, now Jay-Z? Earlier this week, reports (later denied) that supermodel Gisele Bundchen was demanding to be paid in euros rather than dollars led to many jokes that surely this must be a sign of a bottom for the little-loved greenback. Nobody was laughing much when a Chinese political official badmouthed the buck later in the week, leading to the latest of many dollar selloffs. Now, either as another sign of the bottom, or just another kick to the dollar’s ribs on the way down, rapper Jay-Z has joined the dollar-bashing party. In the video for his new single, “Blue Magic,” at about 1:20 in, when Jay says, “I don’t spin on my head, I spin work in the pots so I can spend my bread,” the “bread” he is preparing to spend is a big stack of euros, not dollars. Et tu, Jay-Z? — Mark Gongloff (Hat Tip: Jesse Pesta)

Hurting 2, Friday, 9 November 2007 18:14 (sixteen years ago) link

http://online.wsj.com/media/jayz_c_20071109113234.jpg

Hurting 2, Friday, 9 November 2007 18:15 (sixteen years ago) link

two weeks pass...

from the Financial Times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b6160be-9b80-11dc-8aad-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1)

In his letter, Mr Lahde said he expected the collapse in value of subprime mortgage-linked securities to be repeated for bonds backed by commercial property loans in a deep recession – which he also predicts.

“Our entire banking system is a complete disaster,” he wrote. “In my opinion, nearly every major bank would be insolvent if they marked their assets to market.” He also said he would be putting some of his own profits into gold and other precious metals.

I re-read the LTCM book ("When Genius Failed") over the holiday, and it's frightening given the pattern of subprime investments.

Dandy Don Weiner, Monday, 26 November 2007 13:50 (sixteen years ago) link

yeah platinum looks really good right about now. are there any metals looking particularly under-valued?

El Tomboto, Monday, 26 November 2007 21:36 (sixteen years ago) link

so if some random dude off the street (i.e. me) wanted to buy platinum or whatever, is that possible? Is that just a recipe for getting screwed? How would one go about it anyway??

askance johnson, Monday, 26 November 2007 22:30 (sixteen years ago) link

call a broker dude and then shop whatever he says.

Dandy Don Weiner, Tuesday, 27 November 2007 00:48 (sixteen years ago) link

there are precious metal mutual funds and stuff, through morningstar and other fairly reputable investment groups. I think those would be easier and less costly than trying to stockpile a bunch of platinum in the commodities markets

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 27 November 2007 00:50 (sixteen years ago) link

not to mention that those funds tend to diversify sources and ideally mitigate risks better than turning your garage into a foundry and hoping you don't get robbed or burn the house down.

Dandy Don Weiner, Tuesday, 27 November 2007 00:58 (sixteen years ago) link

there's also buying gold and silver coins at your local coin shop - unfortunately the dealer knows the value of a buck so you won't be getting any super deals

brownie, Tuesday, 27 November 2007 01:00 (sixteen years ago) link

When my mom worked as a bank teller she bought every silver coin that crossed her window for 20 years.

Rock Hardy, Tuesday, 27 November 2007 01:26 (sixteen years ago) link

oh, bernankepaws ...

http://ichart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5EDJI

Eisbaer, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 20:29 (sixteen years ago) link

long overdue

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 20:33 (sixteen years ago) link

Added wonkiness just now from Stratfor:

---

China and the Arabian Peninsula as Market Stabilizers
By George Friedman

The single most interesting thing about today's global economy is what has not occurred. In 1979, oil prices soared to slightly more than $100 a barrel in current dollars, and they are approaching that historic high again. Meanwhile, the subprime meltdown continues to play out. Many financial institutions have been hurt, many individual lives have been shattered and many Wall Street operators once considered brilliant have been declared dunderheads. Despite all the predictions that the current situation is just the tip of the iceberg, however, the crisis is progressing in a fairly orderly fashion. Distinguish here between financial institutions, financial markets and the economy. People in the financial world tend to confuse the three. Some financial institutions are being hurt badly. Those experiencing the pain mistakenly think their suffering reflects the condition of the financial markets and economy. But the financial markets are managing, as is the economy.

What we are seeing is the convergence of two massive forces. Oil prices, along with primary commodity prices in general, have soared. Also, one of the periodic financial bubbles -- the subprime mortgage market -- has burst. Either of these alone should have created global havoc. Neither has. The stock market has not plummeted. The Standard & Poor's 500 fell from a high of about 1,565 in mid-October to a low of 1,400 on Oct. 19. Since then, it has rebounded as high as 1,550. Given the media rhetoric and the heads rolling in the financial sector, we would expect to see devastating numbers. And yet, we are not.

Nor are the numbers devastating in the bond markets. By definition, a liquidity crisis occurs when the money supply is too tight and demand is too great. In other words, a liquidity crisis would be reflected in high interest rates. That hasn't happened. In fact, both short-term and, particularly, long-term interest rates have trended downward over the past weeks. It might be said that interest rates are low, but that lenders won't lend. If so, that is sectoral and short-term at most. Low interest rates and no liquidity is an oxymoron.

This is not the result of actions at the Federal Reserve. The Fed can influence short-term rates, but the longer the yield curve, the longer the payoff date on a loan or bond and the less impact the Fed has. Long-term rates reflect the current availability of money and expectations on interest rates in the future.

In the U.S. stock market -- and world markets, for that matter -- we have seen nothing like the devastation prophesied. As we have said in the past, the subprime crisis compared with the savings and loan crisis, for example, is by itself small potatoes. Sure, those financial houses that stocked up on the securitized mortgage debt are going to be hurt, but that does not translate into a geopolitical event, or even into a recession. Many people are arguing that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg, and that defaults in other categories of the mortgage market coupled with declining housing markets will set off a devastating chain reaction.

That may well be the case, though something weird is going on here. Given the broad belief that the subprime crisis is only the beginning of a general financial crisis, and that the economy will go into recession, we would have expected major market declines by now. Markets discount in anticipation of events, not after events have happened. Historically, market declines occur about six months before recessions begin. So far, however, the perceived liquidity crisis has not been reflected in higher long-term interest rates, and the perceived recession has not been reflected in a significant decline in the global equity markets.

When we add in surging oil and commodity prices, we would have expected all hell to break loose in these markets. Certainly, the consequences of high commodity prices during the 1970s helped drive up interest rates as money was transferred to Third World countries that were selling commodities. As a result, the cost of money for modernizing aging industrial plants in the United States surged into double digits, while equity markets were unable to serve capital needs and remained flat.

So what is going on?

Part of the answer might well be this: For the past five years or so, China has been throwing around huge amounts of cash. The Chinese made big, big money selling overseas -- more than even the growing Chinese economy could metabolize. That led to massive dollar reserves in China and the need for the Chinese to invest outside their own financial markets. Given that the United States is China's primary consumer and the only economy large and stable enough to absorb its reserves, the Chinese -- state and nonstate entities alike -- regard the U.S. markets as safe-havens for their investments. That is one of the things that have kept interest rates relatively low and the equity markets moving. This process of Asian money flowing into U.S. markets goes back to the early 1980s.

Another part of the answer might lie in the self-stabilizing feature of oil prices, the rise of which should be devastating to U.S. markets at first glance. The size of the price surge and the stability of demand have created dollar reserves in oil-exporting countries far in excess of anything that can be absorbed locally. The United Arab Emirates, for example, has made so much money, particularly in 2007, that it has to invest in overseas markets.

In some sense, it doesn't matter where the money goes. Money, like oil, is fungible, which means that if all the petrodollars went into Europe then other money would flow into the United States as European interest rates fell and European stocks rose. But there are always short-term factors to consider. The Persian Gulf oil producers and the Chinese have one thing in common -- they are linked to the dollar. As the dollar declines, assets in other countries become more expensive, particularly if you regard the dollar's fall as ultimately reversible. Dollars invested in dollar-denominated vehicles make sense. Therefore, we are seeing two massive inflows of dollars to the United States -- one from China and one from the energy industry. China's dollar reserves are derived from sales to the United States, so it is stuck in the dollar zone. Plus, the Chinese have pegged the yuan to the dollar. The energy industry, also part of the dollar zone, needs to find a home for its money -- and the largest, most liquid dollar-denominated market in the world is the United States.

The United States has created an odd dollar zone drawing in China and the Persian Gulf. (Other energy producers such as Russia, Nigeria and Venezuela have no problem using their dollars internally.) Unhinging China from the dollar is impossible; it sells in dollars to the United States, a linkage that gives it a stable platform, even if it pays relatively more for oil. Additionally, the Arabian Peninsula sells oil in dollars, and trying to convert those contracts to euros would be mind-bogglingly difficult. Existing contracts and new contracts managed in multiple currencies -- both spot and forward managed -- would have to be renegotiated. Any business working in multiple currencies faces a challenge, and the bigger the business, the bigger the challenge. The Arabian Peninsula accordingly will not be able to hedge currencies and manage the contracts just by flipping a switch.

This provides an explanation for the resiliency of U.S. markets. Every time the news on the subprime situation sounds so horrendous that it seems the U.S. markets will crash, the opposite occurs. In fact, markets in the United States rose through the early days, then sold off and now have rallied again. Where is the money coming from?

We would argue that the money is coming from the dollar bloc and its huge free cash flow from China, and at the moment, the Arabian Peninsula in particular. This influx usually happens anonymously through ordinary market actions, though occasionally it becomes apparent through large, single transactions that are quite open. Last week, for example, Dubai invested $7 billion in Citigroup, helping to clean up the company's balance sheet and, not incidentally, letting it be known that dollars being accumulated in the Persian Gulf will be used to stabilize U.S. markets.

This is not an act of charity. Dubai and the rest of the Arabian Peninsula, as well as China, are holding huge dollar reserves, and the last thing they want to do is sell those dollars in sufficient quantity to drive the dollar's price even lower. Nor do they want to see a financial crisis in the U.S. markets. Both the Chinese and the Arabs have far too much to lose to want such an outcome. So, in an infinite number of open market transactions, as well as occasionally public investments, they are moving to support the U.S. markets, albeit for their own reasons.

It is the only explanation for what we are seeing. The markets should be selling off like crazy, given the financial problems. They are not. They keep bouncing back, no matter how hard they are driven down. That money is not coming from the financial institutions and hedge funds that got ripped on mortgages. But it is coming from somewhere. We think that somewhere is the land of $90-per-barrel crude and really cheap toys.

Many people will see this as a tilt in global power. When others must invest in the United States, however, they are not the ones with the power; the United States is. To us, it looks far more like the Chinese and Arabs are trapped in a financial system that leaves them few options but to recycle their dollars into the United States. They wind up holding dollars -- or currencies linked to dollars -- and then can speculate by leaving, or they can play it safe by staying. In our view, these two sources of cash are the reason global markets are stable.

Energy prices might fall (indeed, all commodities are inherently cyclic, and oil is no exception), and the amount of free cash flow in the Arabian Peninsula might drop, but there still will be surplus dollars in China as long as it is an export-based economy. Put another way, the international system is producing aggregate return on capital distributed in peculiar ways. Given the size of the U.S. economy and the dynamics of the dollar, much of that money will flow back into the United States. The United States can have its financial crisis. Global forces appear to be stabilizing it.

The Chinese and the Arabs are not in the U.S. markets because they like the United States. They don't. They are locked in. Regardless of the rumors of major shifts, it is hard to see how shifts could occur. It is the irony of the moment that China and the Arabian Peninsula, neither of them particularly fond of the United States, are trapped into stabilizing the United States. And, so far, they are doing a fine job.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 21:27 (sixteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.