Global Economy

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4655
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by hnair »

:shock: :shock: :shock:
WaMu is largest U.S. bank failure
Washington Mutual's collapse is the latest of a series of takeovers and outright failures that have transformed the American financial landscape and wiped out hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder wealth.

These include the disappearance of Bear, government takeovers of mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the insurer American International Group Inc, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, and Bank of America's purchase of Merrill.

JPMorgan, based in New York, ended June with $1.78 trillion of assets, $722.9 billion of deposits and 3,157 branches :twisted: . Washington Mutual then had 2,239 branches and 43,198 employees. It is unclear how many people will lose their jobs.
The late Mr JP Morgan failed in naming an award like Nobel after himself and hence is still not rehabilitated from his robber-baron status. But at least his eponymous firm seems to be taking off from where he left off.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

old school robbers of his calibre would not extend their necks like the current crop of pedicured ibankers did. those people built fortunes from rocks and had grease and grime under the
fingernails and burn marks on their backs. todays 'budding industry leaders' are 24 yr old callow
fanboys aspiring to make a fortune using push-button methods and verbal smartness.

I have some of the current batch at IIM-B because a relative is enrolled there now. these
young men and women scare me - the idea of leaving the financial future of our banks and
MFs in their hands. :eek: running a social networking website is all the business most of
them are fit for.

think of all the stud MF managers yaw jawing on CNBC in the good times? where are they
now? everyone is a hero in the victory parade. who will stay and fight on foot against
tanks with no support?

so far I see no peter lynch in India.
shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by shyam »

Looks like somebody is making money in this impass.

Stock market is going up and down.

I think, McCain is avoiding a public debate in current economic state, and the delay is bail out will make sure that the debate doesn't happen. Let's see tomorrow.
Ameet
BRFite
Posts: 841
Joined: 17 Nov 2006 02:49

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Ameet »

GM.........for whom the bell tolls

Worlds best selling chevy dealer closing all 13 stores

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/09/25/worl ... 13-stores/

Bill Heard Enterprises sells more Chevy cars and trucks than any dealer in the world, but that distinction isn't enough to keep the doors open at the dealer's 13 stores. The soft economy, fuel prices and an over-reliance on the sales of trucks and SUVs were the reasons stated for the demise of these Chevy superstores. Another possible reason for the mass closure could have something to do with a pending suit against Bill Heard Enterprises involving signature forgery and deceptive marketing that could result in up to $50 million in fines.

2,700 people worked at the stores, and now all of those workers are out of a job. The dealer consortium didn't give workers any notice, either. Managers were told yesterday at 2PM that the stores were closing, and the doors are locked today. Customers with vehicles in the service area were told to pick up their cars, fixed or not, and customers arriving to pick up their new cars were given back their trade-ins. What a mess. We know GM is looking to cut back on its overpopulated dealer-body, but we're pretty sure the General would want the situation handled better than this.
SaraLax
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 01 Nov 2005 21:15
Location: redemption land

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by SaraLax »

Knock out punch from 'Mr.Doom' Marc Faber
.
.
Everyone should own gold,” he recommends. “In physical form, not as derivatives with banks, because the banks may not be around tomorrow.” His golden advice: “buy gold, keep it in a safe deposit box in a bank.” {... better in ultra-sarkari banks for us people ...because bank lockers like derivatives may also not exist when the bank goes down }..well..jus kidding....Faber's bank collapse predictions may not apply for India though

Faber’s parting words for financial sector professionals is even more blunt. “You should all become farmers,” he says, “and learn to drive tractors because you wont see those disproportionately large incomes anymore.” The financial sector will “never again see what we’ve seen in the past 25 years, when each time where was a setback in asset price, it rebounded and went ballistic.”
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

people who took out huge student loans for bizness school will be p****ed to hear that.

no $2000 bottle of wine, no cigars, no chelsea pads, more like a $10 bottle of grover shiraz
imported on a tramp steamer from yindia :mrgreen:

I am rooting for UK as the next bakra to be sacrificed to Odin.
Nayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2552
Joined: 11 Jun 2006 03:48
Location: Vote for Savita Bhabhi as the next BRF admin.

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Nayak »

My belief in sarkaari banks has stood rock-solid. All this gee-whiz-suited-booted-oil-slicked-mba doods give me the heebie-jeebies. Smooth-talking with financial slang thrown between sips of starbucks mocha never inspired confidence.

BTW how is CNBC india doing ? :rotfl:

The faithfools should target the reporting desks of CNBC rather than temples, atleast they will do a service to us by saving us from this cretins.
SaraLax
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 01 Nov 2005 21:15
Location: redemption land

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by SaraLax »

French hold out against credit crunch
Unlike Britain, the US and many other countries, France appears to have weathered the credit crunch storm far better.
.
.
Take the level of household debt. In France, it is at 47% of GDP, while in the UK it is well over twice that.

Its not that temptation does not exist in France - the lure of consumerism is just as strong as it is elsewhere.

But it is very difficult to spend money you do not have in France.

French credit cards are little more than debit cards, so there is no question of simply sticking a couple of flat screen TVs on your credit card and hoping to pay for them later - if there are insufficient funds in your account, your bank will immediately block the transaction.
.
.
.
"Generally in France you spend what you have and not more," he explains.

"In the US and the UK, the economy has been driven by household spending, consumption has been driven by credit, and a lot less in France, so that's why when there were periods of expansion France grew a lot more slowly than the UK and the US but conversely when it's slowing down, it will slow down in a more moderate fashion than the UK or the US."
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Philip »

The fall of Communism gleefully celebrated by the Capitalist class (greedy,selfish,US CEOs) wiht the fall of the Soviet Union,has now seen the boot on the proverbial "other foot"! "Capitalism Americanus" is now as dead as the Dodo,as the US administration desperately about-turned and embraced Socialism in this $700 B bailout of the capitalist class and their CEOs,to save the entire US economy.The terms of the bailout have still to be agreed upon still,as enraged US representatives see any act to allow the criminals of the bankrupt institutions to go scot free and post "profits" at the taxpayers' expense,as an obscenity.The foll. report indicates how bitter the debate rages within the White House itself.The UK PM Gordon Brown is rushing to Washington to try and rescue not only the bailout, but in doing so also himself from a party coup and certain defeat in the next election!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 829757.ece

Tempers flare as $700bn US rescue deal stalls
(AFP/Getty)
President Bush leads the meeting with Barack Obama and John McCain at opposite ends of the table

Times Online, Suzy Jagger in New York and Tom Baldwin in Washington
Bailout treated with caution

A deal designed to rescue the banking system and save the world economy from catastrophe - but costing each American taxpayer $5,300 - dissolved into chaos last night after Republicans refused to endorse a $700 billion dollar package.

Talks are due to reopen later today after political high drama in Washington when talks broke into a verbal brawl in the Cabinet Room of the White House amid urgent warnings from the president and pleas from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who reportedly knelt before the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and appealed for her support.

“I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr Paulson’s kneeling, The New York Times reported. She went on: “It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.”

Related Links
McCain and Obama strive to disguise their ambition

US critics gloat over 'crumbling capitalism'

She was referring to the surprise announcement from the House Republican leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, who told those gathered at the White House that his caucus could not support the plan. He pressed an alternative that involved a smaller role for the Government.

Some senior Democratic figures suspect opposition is being choreographed so that John McCain could be seen to deliver an eleventh-hour solution today. Others suggest that with fewer than a hundred House Republicans prepared to vote for the measure, Democrats may be left carrying the can for a deeply unpopular and high-risk deal.

Stock markets had breathed a sigh of relief when Congressional leaders heralded what would be the biggest bailout in history before a weekend deadline set by President Bush.

But within hours a series of senior Republicans had lined up to insist there was no agreement while a White House meeting between Barack Obama and Mr McCain, as well as key figures from Congress, broke up with all sides accepting more work was needed.

Both presidential candidates sat at opposite ends of a long conference table, with Mr Bush and Congressional leaders in between. Mr Obama was more vocal in his questioning of Mr Paulson that Mr McCain, who said little, according to US media reports.

Before the meeting broke up, Mr Bush issued a warning about the dire consequences if the Bill did not pass. "If money isn't loosened up, this sucker could go down," the President said, according one report.

Richard Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, was first to emerge from the White House summit to announce "the agreement is obviously no agreement".

Last night Mr Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke raced back to Capitol Hill to revive the proposal which could cost as much as $700 billion. Negotiations ceased around 10pm and are due to resume this morning.

Mr Obama said the delay was “pretty frustrating", adding that both sides had appeared ready to strike a deal yesterday morning until “something happened in the intervening hours.”

Mr McCain acknowledged that many members of Congress continue to have concerns about “the biggest event of this kind in history” - but insisted he remained hopeful that agreement can be reached today.

Both presidential candidates stayed in Washington last night. Mr McCain has said that without a deal, he would not turn up at tonight's first debate with Mr Obama.

But neither campaign really wants to be seen to torpedo a plan that, it is hoped, will draw to a close the most turbulent period for the American stock market since the 1929 Wall Street crash. In the past ten days one investment bank has gone bust, the world’s biggest insurer has been nationalised and stock markets across the world gyrated wildly.

The proposal would allow banks to dump toxic assets into a federal fund controlled by the US Treasury. British banks that have significant operations in the US would be able to take part.

Under the accord announced earlier yesterday, Mr Paulson would have been given $250 billion immediately and could have an additional $100 billion if he certified it was needed, an approach designed to give Congress a stronger hand in controlling the rescue schemes spending.

The Bush administration has made a number of concessions on demands to limit pay for executives of bailed-out financial institutions and give the government an equity stake in rescued companies.

Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee Chairman suggested that the injection of presidential campaign politics had caused negotiations to be distracted for "two or three hours by political theatre” and that it had begun to resemble “a rescue plan for John McCain”.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

HSBC Cuts 1, 100 Investment Banking Jobs

By REUTERS
Published: September 26, 2008


HONG KONG (Reuters) - Global bank HSBC Holdings <HSBA.L> is cutting 1,100 jobs in its investment banking operation, or 4 percent of the unit's total, as it weathers the global financial crisis.

"We're doing it because of market conditions and the economic environment, and our cautious outlook for 2009," Hong Kong-based spokesman Gareth Hewett told Reuters on Friday.
HSBC Cuts 1, 100 Investment Banking Jobs

"Markets continue to be challenging and difficult but our strategy leaves us well positioned for the next wave of global growth, when it comes," Hewett said.

The cuts add to more than 80,000 job losses across the banking landscape in the past 18 months as the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression deepens. It has caused unprecedented change on Wall Street and the demise of venerable firms such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers <LEHMQ.PK>.

The HSBC jobs are in front- and back-office operations. About 500 of the cuts will be in Britain and about 300 more will be elsewhere in Europe and the United States. About 100 are in Hong Kong, where the bank's large Asian operations are based.

HSBC will be left with about 26,000 staff in its global banking and markets (GBM) division. It employs about 335,000 people across the bank.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

BW - the UK seems to depend heavily on financial jobs for such a big population
and economy. the corresponding figures in france, germany and italy are likely
much lower.

The dramatic slowing of the financial sector—which accounts for one-fifth of British jobs and has been the second-fastest-growing part of the economy for the past 15 years, after oil and gas—is expected to lead to major job cuts. In May the Centre for Economic & Business Research (CEBR), a London consultancy, forecast job losses of 20,000 in Britain's financial sector in 2008. Now, says Richard Snook, an economist at CEBR, those estimates look overly optimistic. "We expect the number of layoffs to be substantially more," he says.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3801
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Paul »

John Snow Saar: Reg. AIG, do you know if layoffs are just in NY or across the geographies.
John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by John Snow »

They have hired Mackenze (sp?)
To start the process of spin offs will be global. First to go is personal lob.

Also when a policy is sold (insurance product) A nominal reserve of 1 dollar is created only when a claim comes through a reserve is funded
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

insurance claims from the hurricanes will put some stress on them.
John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by John Snow »

Sheik Singha al banglori

England is (has been) a nation of shopkeepers!
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

but in modern statistics I believe shopkeeping is outside of the financial services bucket.
probably it comes under Retail.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by SwamyG »

Ah....reminds me of the days when Chit companies in India fell left, right and center.

All this consolidation of banks is little scary......another failure waiting to happen down the time line.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

it seems UBS_PaineWebber had sold $18b of something called ARS (auction rate securities) to clients saying it was good and liquid as pure cash.

then they tried to mark it down 5% and attracted a Federal lawsuit. Now they agreed to pay
back retail customers by end of 2008 and institutional investors later. I believe only the
principal will be repaid though.

I was told this today in the context of one guy who sold his house and bought into this ARS
with all his life savings. now he is having a daily heart attack wondering if he will ever see
the real money in exchange for his ARS paper certificates.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

got this from wikipedia. seems to be another little scam away from the main subprime tent
just like a good circus has sideshows too. needless to say this new innovation was introduced by none other than the high priest of wall street - Goldman Sachs in 1988. more
Homa, Soma and libations of virgin women to the Gods.

--
n February 2008, the auction market failed, and most auction rate securities have been frozen since then, with holders unable to dispose of their securities. Banks have agreed to repurchase around $50 billion in securities from investors, mostly individuals and municipalities. The future, if any, of the ARS market remains unclear (September 2008).
.........
The auction failures in February 2008, lead to industry-wide freezing of clients accounts, while requiring municipalities to pay excessive interest rates, reported to exceed 20% in some cases. A renewed investigation of the Auction Rate Securities industry has been lead by Mr. Andrew Cuomo, the Attorney General of New York, and by Mr. William Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. These investigations discovered, among other, continued industry-wide violations of the law by misrepresenting Auction Rate Securities as liquid cash alternatives while failing to meet the SEC order, to disclose to clients the liquidity and credit risks involved. Many, but not all, of the firms involved in these practices, chose to settle out of court, refund the Auction Rate Securities they sold to clients and pay respective penalties.
..........
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5019
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Tanaji »

needless to say this new innovation was introduced by none other than the high priest of wall street - Goldman Sachs in 1988.
Quite a nice racket these MBA financial whizz kids have going here. First Goldman Sachs comes up with these interesting instruments and the whole sub prime thingie that melts down, and then they get their former CEO to bail them out for untold billions of $$$. So, not only do you milk the common tax payer of billions indirectly, but you also get hundreds of millions of $$ as pay directly.

Wow, what a racket!
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

under Kilton sahib, one 30yr goldman sachs alum Rubin sahib the treasury secy okayed the
annulment of the glass-steagall act to benefit Citigroup, then left the Govt to become chairman of citigroup wherein he was one of the three highest paid execs.

from wikipedia:

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. [11] Citigroup played a major part in the repeal. Then called Citicorp, the company merged with Travelers Insurance company the year before using loopholes in Glass-Steagall that allowed for temporary exemptions.
.....
In 1999, affirming his career-long interest in markets, Mr. Rubin joined Citigroup. Of note, the supermerger between Travelers Group and Citicorp was facilitated by the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act). This legislation was passed under the Clinton administration, days before Rubin's resignation. Consolidation of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services as practiced by Citigroup under the direction of Rubin, has been implicated in the subprime mortage crisis. He sparked controversy in 2001 when he contacted an acquaintance at the Treasury Department and asked if the department could convince bond-rating agencies not to downgrade the corporate debt of Enron, a debtor of Citigroup. Rubin wanted Enron creditors to lend money to the troubled company for a restructuring of its debt; a collapse of the energy giant might have serious consequences for financial markets and energy distribution. The Treasury official refused. A subsequent congressional staff investigation cleared Rubin of any wrongdoing, but he was still harshly criticized by political opponents.
John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by John Snow »

you want proof History rpeats it self. here is one.

THe current crisis is 1000 X of the Barings Banks collapse.
***
A little refresher from wiki.
Barings Bank was founded in 1762 as the 'John and Francis Baring Company' by Sir Francis Baring, the son of John Baring, originally from Bremen, Germany. The Baring family lives in both Germany and England.

In 1806, his son Alexander Baring joined the firm and they renamed it Baring Brothers & Co., merging it with the London offices of Hope & Co., where Alexander worked with Henry Hope.

Barings had a long and storied history. In 1802, it helped finance the Louisiana Purchase, despite the fact that Britain was at war with France, and the sale had the effect of financing Napoleon's war effort. Technically, the United States did not purchase Louisiana from Napoleon, but from the Baring brothers and Hope & Co.. Payment was made in US bonds, which Napoleon sold to Barings at a discount of 87 1/2 per $100. As a result, Napoleon received only $8,831,250 in cash. Alexander Baring, working for Hope & Co., conferred with the French Director of the Public Treasury François Barbé-Marbois in Paris and then went to the United States to pick up the bonds before taking them to France.

Later, daring efforts in underwriting got the firm into serious trouble through overexposure to Argentine and Uruguayan debt, and the bank had to be rescued by a consortium organized by the governor of the Bank of England, William Lidderdale, in the Panic of 1890. While recovery from this incident was swift, it destroyed the company's former bravado. :mrgreen:
Its new, restrained manner made it a more appropriate representative of the British establishment, and the company established ties with King George V,[/b]{ editorial does that sound Curious George?} beginning a close relationship with the British monarchy that would endure until Barings' collapse. (Diana, Princess of Wales, was the great granddaughter of one of the Barings family.) The descendants of the original five male branches of the Baring family were all elevated to the peerage, with the titles Baron Revelstoke, Earl of Northbrook, Baron Ashburton, Baron Howick of Glendale and Earl of Cromer. The company's restraint during this period would cost it its preeminence in the world of finance, but would later pay dividends when its refusal to take a chance on financing Germany's recovery from World War I saved it the painful losses experienced by other British banks at the onset of the Great Depression.

During the Second World War, the British government used Barings to liquidate assets in the United States and elsewhere to help finance the war effort. After the war, Barings was overtaken in size and influence by other banking houses, but remained an important player in the market, until 1995.[2]


1995 collapse
Despite surviving the Napoleonic Wars and both World Wars, Barings was brought down in 1995 due to unauthorized trading by its head derivatives trader in Singapore, Nick Leeson.

At the time of the massive trading loss, Leeson was supposed to be arbitraging, seeking to profit from differences in the prices of Nikkei-225 futures contracts listed on the Osaka Securities Exchange in Japan and the Singapore International Monetary Exchange. Such arbitrage involves buying futures contracts on one market and simultaneously selling them on another. Since the margins on this are small, the volumes traded by arbitrageurs tend to be large. However, because of the offsetting movements of the hedged position, the strategy is not very risky, and certainly would not have bankrupted the bank. Instead of hedging his positions, however, Leeson gambled on the future direction of the Japanese markets. According to Eddie George, the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr Leeson began doing this at the end


John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by John Snow »

GM to sell Hummer and French factory
Automaker says properties worth $2 billion to $4 billion may sell more assets later this year.

DETROIT (AP) -- General Motors Corp.'s treasurer said Wednesday that the automaker is planning to put its Strasbourg, France, manufacturing operation and its Hummer truck brand up for sale, and it may announce more asset sales later this year


***
Is it Time for OK TATA
:wink:
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by svinayak »

Safe & Sound® ratings
By Bankrate.com


Is your bank safe? Now you can find out.

Explanation
Bankrate.com's Safe & Sound® service is a proprietary system designed to provide information on the relative financial strength and stability of U.S. commercial banks, savings institutions and credit unions. The system employs a series of twenty-two tests to measure the capital adequacy, asset quality, profitability, and liquidity (CAEL) of each rated financial institution. Individual performance levels are determined from publicly available regulatory filings and are compared to asset-size peer norms, industry standards and key absolute benchmarks. Combined results form the basis for our Composite CAEL and Star Ratings, which are described below. When possible, the system also produces a report that provides a detailed explanation of our findings, for each rated financial institution.

Bankrate provides its Safe & Sound CAEL ratings information for businesses and consumers to use as only one factor in connection with their banking decisions. In connection with this decision, Businesses and Consumers are advised to independently evaluate all financial institutions, consider other information, including the strength of the financial institution's management, and to individually contact financial institutions to seek answers to their questions. Bankrate's rating information should not exclusively be relied upon in making banking decisions.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by svinayak »

Who's next? National City?
trading down 43% today to $2.80.

Of course the CEO has come out and said they are well capitalized, which I think is code for "run for the hills!"

... or maybe Wachovia, down 24% today to $10.30 ...
Downey Financial down over 40%.

Archive For writedowns and distress

* Goldman Sachs - $84.2B (3)
Posted on September 23, 2008 5:15 PM
* Morgan Stanley - $24B (0)
Posted on September 23, 2008 10:38 AM
* HBOS PLC - $19.0B (0)
Posted on September 19, 2008 7:45 PM
* Merrill Lynch - >$83.5B (1)
Posted on September 15, 2008 8:49 AM
* National City - $14.9B (0)
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:00 PM
* CIBC - $10.7B (0)
Posted on August 27, 2008 11:44 AM
* Bank of Montreal - $1.2B (0)
Posted on August 26, 2008 1:02 PM
* Deutsche Bank - $155.1B (1)
Posted on August 25, 2008 10:02 PM
* JP Morgan Chase - $20.1B (3)
Posted on August 25, 2008 2:15 PM
* Bank of America - $51.3B (4)
Posted on August 14, 2008 11:16 PM
* Wachovia - $50.5B (4)
Posted on August 13, 2008 3:05 PM
* UBS - $92.5B (2)
Posted on August 12, 2008 11:22 AM
* Royal Bank of Scotland -$41.7B (2)
Posted on August 10, 2008 5:34 PM
* Citigroup - $144.5B (7)
Posted on August 7, 2008 3:43 PM
* BNP Paribas - $3.3B (0)
Posted on August 6, 2008 11:01 AM
* Commerzbank - $1.06B (1)
Posted on August 6, 2008 10:08 AM
* Societe Generale - $30.1B (0)
Posted on August 5, 2008 10:08 PM
* HSBC Bank - $27.7B (0)
Posted on August 4, 2008 1:12 PM
* Credit Suisse - $94.5 B (0)
Posted on August 3, 2008 12:20 PM
* Fifth Third Bancorp - $3.6 B (1)
Posted on July 22, 2008 5:01 PM
* SunTrust - $2.0B (1)
Posted on July 22, 2008 3:33 PM
* Wells Fargo - $27.4 B (2)
Posted on July 16, 2008 12:40 PM
* US Bancorp - $2.2B (0)
Posted on July 15, 2008 12:13 PM
* Barclay’s PLC > $15.0 B (1)
Posted on June 30, 2008 6:02 PM
* Royal Bank of Canada - $1.4B (0)
Posted on May 29, 2008 6:07 PM
* IKB - $14.3 B (0)
Posted on May 27, 2008 8:13 PM
* Mizuho MFG - $5.4B (0)
Posted on May 22, 2008 2:09 PM
* Bayern LB - $9.8B (0)
Posted on May 19, 2008 7:42 AM
* WestLB AG - $4.8B (0)
Posted on May 19, 2008 7:35 AM
* Natixis - $3.4B (1)
Posted on May 19, 2008 7:31 AM
* Credit Agricole SA-$13.8B (0)
Posted on May 12, 2008 5:18 PM
* Mitsubishi Financial Group - $760M (0)
Posted on April 23, 2008 12:54 AM
* Bank of NY Mellon - $118M (0)
Posted on April 9, 2008 11:19 AM
* Sovereign Bancorp - $1.580B (0)
Posted on April 8, 2008 1:29 PM
* DZ BANK AG - $2.1B (0)
Posted on March 7, 2008 9:52 PM
* HSBC - $26.5B (0)
Posted on March 5, 2008 5:25 PM

SK Mody
BRFite
Posts: 251
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by SK Mody »

Ameet wrote:GM.........for whom the bell tolls

Worlds best selling chevy dealer closing all 13 stores

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/09/25/worl ... 13-stores/

Bill Heard Enterprises sells more Chevy cars and trucks than any dealer in the world, but that distinction isn't enough to keep the doors open at the dealer's 13 stores. The soft economy, fuel prices and an over-reliance on the sales of trucks and SUVs were the reasons stated for the demise of these Chevy superstores. Another possible reason for the mass closure could have something to do with a pending suit against Bill Heard Enterprises involving signature forgery and deceptive marketing that could result in up to $50 million in fines.
...
Big Bill Hell. :lol:
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60306
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by ramana »

So Republicans are re-enacting their role in the Great Depression even though their President has shown leadership and owned up his responsibility to the nation. McCain's role is very dubious. Sad to see hasn't learned anything except play the Christian card.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by svinayak »



FDIC May Need $150 Billion Bailout as Local Bank Failures Mount


By David Evans
Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Deborah Horn tugs on the handle of the glass-paned entrance of the IndyMac Bancorp Inc. branch in Manhattan Beach, California. The door won't budge. The weekend is approaching, and Horn, 44, the sole breadwinner in a family of three, needs cash.
A small notice taped to the window on this Friday afternoon in mid-July tells her why she's been locked out. IndyMac has failed, the single-spaced, letter-sized paper says; the bank is now in the hands of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.
``The Receiver is now taking possession of the Bank,'' the sign says.
``I'm physically shaking,'' says Horn, an academic tutor, as she peers into the bank. Inside, an FDIC examiner is talking to six stone-faced IndyMac employees. ``I don't know when I'm going to be able to get my money,'' Horn says. ``I'm a single mom. This is the money I live on.''
Don't worry about Horn. She'll be all right, as will most of Pasadena, California-based IndyMac's 200,000-plus customers.
That's because the FDIC, created in 1934, insures all accounts up to $100,000 at its member banks, and it has never failed to honor a claim. The people to worry about are U.S. taxpayers.
The IndyMac debacle is taking a large bite out of FDIC reserves, and if scores of other banks fail in the year ahead, the fund will be depleted. Taxpayers will have to step in.
Worst Wave
Americans have gotten used to the idea that bank failures were as rare as a category five hurricane. No banks went bust in 2005 or 2006. Seven collapsed in 2007 as the credit crisis began to exact a toll. So far in 2008, 12 more, with total assets of $42 billion, have fallen -- that's the worst wave of bank failures since 1992.
IndyMac, which had $32 billion in assets when it went into receivership, is the most expensive bank failure the FDIC has ever covered. And that record may not stand for long.
By the end of 2009, about 100 U.S. banks with collective assets of more than $800 billion will fail, predicts Christopher Whalen, managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a Torrance, California-based firm that sells its analysis of FDIC data to investors.
``It's not going to be Armageddon,'' says Mark Vaughan, an economist and assistant vice president for banking supervision and regulation at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Virginia. ``But it's going to be bad.''
FDIC's Secret List
The FDIC knows which banks are at risk; it has a watch list with 117 institutions. The agency won't disclose their names because doing so could cause depositors to panic and pull out all of their funds.
It won't take many more failures before the FDIC itself runs out of money. The agency had $45.2 billion in its coffers as of June 30, far short of the $200 billion Whalen says it will need to pay claims by the end of next year. The U.S. Treasury will almost certainly come to the rescue.
Regardless of who wins control of the White House and Congress in November, no politician is likely to vote in favor of leaving federally insured depositors out in the cold.
A taxpayer bailout of the FDIC would come on the heels of intervention by the U.S. Treasury Department and Federal Reserve to save investment bank Bear Stearns Cos., mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the world's largest insurer, American International Group Inc.
Uninsured Deposits
Emergency federal funding of the FDIC could swell the cost of government rescues of failed financial institutions to more than $400 billion -- not including the $700 billion general Wall Street bailout now under discussion in Congress.
That number would be even higher if the government were on the hook for uninsured deposits -- which amount to $2.6 trillion, 37 percent of the total of $7 trillion held in the U.S. branches of all FDIC member banks.
The subprime crisis -- which started in the suburbs of California and Florida and migrated through the alchemy of securitization to Wall Street investment banks -- has come almost full circle, spreading its toxins to the very lenders who first extended those teaser-rate, no-document mortgages to homeowners.
In 2006, IndyMac was the largest provider of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to provide proof of their incomes. And as of mid-September, investors were worried that Washington Mutual Inc., the biggest thrift in the U.S., would be the next bank to go belly up.
A federal takeover of Washington Mutual, which has assets of $310 billion, could cost taxpayers $24 billion more, according to Richard Bove, an analyst at Miami-based Ladenburg Thalmann & Co.
Slower To Hit
The reckoning that has run through Wall Street, claiming investment banks Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Bear Stearns among its victims, has been slower to hit Main Street. In mid- 2007, Wall Street firms began disclosing losses on their packages of securitized home loans.
From August 2007 to September 2008, banks worldwide wrote down more than $500 billion. Regional banks, by contrast, have waited to write off their bad mortgages, hoping the housing market would improve and defaults would level off. Instead, they've risen.
FDIC-insured banks charged off $26.4 billion of bad loans in the second quarter of 2008, the most since 1991.
U.S. lenders, in their embrace of subprime lending, committed the same analytical fallacy as their Wall Street counterparts. When it came to assessing risk, they relied on the recent past to predict the near future.
Living in the Past
They were blinded by years of rising home prices and low mortgage default rates.
The FDIC fell into the same trap. As recently as March, an internal FDIC memo estimated the cost to cover bank collapses in 2008 would be just $1 billion, dropping to $450 million in 2009. It wasn't even close.
The IndyMac failure alone, which happened four months after that memo was circulated, will cost the FDIC $8.9 billion -- and the bill for all 12 collapses will be about $11 billion, the FDIC says.
FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair says the agency's forecast was based on models using data from the past 20 years, which included long periods with few bank failures.
``Given the change in economic conditions, we need to weight the more recent data more heavily,'' Bair says. ``You also need a good dose of common sense.''
Bair says depositors shouldn't fret about their banks. ``We do have a handful with some significant challenges,'' she says. ``Overall, banks are quite safe and sound.''
Bair is duty bound to say that, says Joseph Mason, an economist who worked for the Treasury from 1995 to 1998. Part of the FDIC's job is to reassure the public and prevent runs on banks. Mason says Bair's rhetoric masks the agency's inability to grasp the scope of the coming crisis.
`Ignoring the Problem'
``The FDIC and the banking regulators are ignoring the problems, hoping they'll go away,'' he says. ``They won't.''
The quake that shook markets in September may make the FDIC's task more complicated and expensive. With investment banks in eclipse, deposit-taking institutions will now play a larger role in financing the economy.
Earlier this month, Bank of America Corp. agreed to buy Merrill Lynch & Co. for $50 billion, and Wachovia Corp. and Morgan Stanley were in talks about a potential merger.
'Would Be Miraculous'
From 2002 to 2007, U.S. lenders made a total of $2.5 trillion in subprime mortgages, according to the newsletter Inside Mortgage Finance. ``Given the magnitude of the bad loans still on bank balance sheets, it would be miraculous for the FDIC to squeak by with losses of less than $200 billion,'' Whalen says. On Sept. 18, in yet another stunning turn of events, Paulson proposed a plan that would cost the government, if not necessarily the FDIC, hundreds of billions of dollars more.
The Treasury secretary says the government will purchase toxic mortgage debt from banks in an effort to cleanse the financial system. In an unprecedented move, the Treasury also pledged $50 billion to insure nonbank money market funds.
Bair says Paulson's plan won't reduce the number of banks on the FDIC's watch list.


One reason the rolling financial crisis is hitting regional banks later than it walloped Wall Street is because the very system that is meant to protect depositors -- federal insurance -- has also served to prop up weak lenders. So has the ready supply of credit extended to banks by another government- chartered group, the Federal Home Loan Banks.
Because all deposits up to $100,000 are insured, most savers can be agnostic about where they put their money. They don't have to know -- or care -- whether a bank is making sound or foolish loans.
Unlike buyers of stocks or bonds, people who put their money in banks rarely do research about the soundness of the institution. That makes it easy for banks -- both prudent and reckless ones -- to raise cash.
Brokered Deposits Loophole
Banks have taken the FDIC's protection and run with it, thanks to the phenomenon of brokered deposits -- and a giant loophole in federal regulations.
As of June 30, Whalen says banks held $644 billion from brokers who offer customers a way to gain FDIC insurance for multiple accounts.
Promontory Interfinancial Network LLC, an Arlington, Virginia-based company founded in 2002 by former federal officials --including some from the FDIC itself -- has figured out how to help wealthy clients insure as much as $50 million each by putting their money into separate accounts at 500 different banks.
While the law does limit insurance to $100,000 per account, it places no ceiling on the number of different banks where an individual can hold accounts -- a loophole Congress failed to close even after the savings and loan debacle of 1984- 1992.
Missing Discipline
Bair says brokered deposits can provide quick cash but also create potential danger.
``It is quite easy to get brokered deposits, and there's not a lot of market discipline with the brokered deposits,'' she says. ``When there's excessive reliance on them, particularly to fuel rapid growth on the balance sheet, that's definitely a high-risk factor.''
The other big source of money for banks is the FHLB, an under-the-radar network of 12 regional banks created by Congress in 1932 to help lenders finance mortgages. Lenders had borrowed a total of $840.6 billion from the FHLB system as of June 30, up 38 percent from $608 billion in the same period a year earlier.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, in a little-noticed action on Sept. 7, the day after he announced the bailout of Fannie and Freddie, extended a secured credit line to the FHLB to provide an emergency source of funding if needed.
FHLB Advances
Vaughan says credit from the FHLB is keeping some sick banks afloat and postponing the inevitable.
`What's going to happen,'' he says, ``is that weak banks will use FHLB advances to avoid discipline from funding markets. In some cases, that will keep their doors open longer than they otherwise would, all-the-while offloading more and more potential losses onto the FDIC and taxpayers.''
Normally, the FDIC is no more than four initials customers see when they walk into their banks. In recent years, the agency hasn't had to close many banks, as it collected small amounts of insurance premium payments.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the law creating the FDIC in the middle of the Depression. As part of the New Deal, Congress created a system of federal insurance to end bank runs by reassuring the public that depositing money in banks was safe. All banks paid the same rate for insurance.
Wave of Failures
The FDIC shares regulatory authority with other agencies. The Office of Thrift Supervision oversees federally chartered savings and loans, the Comptroller of the Currency monitors national banks, and state banking regulators review state- chartered banks.
The FDIC is the only one of these agencies that insures deposits.
By and large, the government's insurance system worked until the 1980s, when thrifts went on a commercial real estate lending binge, triggering a wave of failures and consolidation that lasted from 1984 to 1992.
In 1991, Congress changed the way FDIC premiums were assessed, requiring banks to pay rates based on how well capitalized they were for the risks they faced. As bank failures subsided to less than a dozen a year by 1995, the FDIC's reserves began to swell.
As a result, the agency cut to zero the premiums it charged to the 90 percent of the banks deemed safest. That free ride continued for 10 years.
`No Good Way'
In 2006, Congress increased insurance payments for most banks, averaging $5-$7 per $10,000 of deposits.
The insurance premiums imposed by the FDIC on the riskiest banks -- running as high as $43 per $10,000 -- are still far below the rates private insurers would charge, says Sherrill Shaffer, former chief economist of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
At the same time, charging struggling banks a fair price for insurance premiums may drive them into insolvency, he says.
``That can be destabilizing,'' says Shaffer, who's now a professor of banking at the University of Wyoming in Laramie. ``There's really no good way around that. It's an issue that policy makers and analysts have wrestled with for decades.''
Bair says the FDIC is gearing up for the coming wave of bank failures. She says she's developing a plan to raise insurance premiums.
The agency's Division of Resolutions and Receiverships has boosted authorized staffing levels by 48 percent, to 331, this year. It has hired 178 new financial specialists and called up 65 retirees for temporary service under a special program.
Bair vs. Enron
Bair, 54, an attorney who graduated from the University of Kansas School of Law, has challenged financial institutions as a regulator for more than a decade. President George W. Bush nominated her as chairman, and she was sworn in on June 26, 2006.
She replaced Donald Powell, a former Texas banker. In 1992, as a member of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Bair cast the lone vote against Enron Corp.'s effort to exempt certain energy contracts from the agency's anti-fraud and anti- market manipulation enforcement powers.
Nine years later, Enron blew up in one of the biggest financial scandals in U.S. history.
As assistant secretary of the Treasury for financial institutions in 2002, Bair criticized abusive subprime mortgage brokers.
``Lenders have made loans with little or no regard for a borrower's ability to repay and have engaged in multiple refinance transactions that result in little or no benefit to a borrower,'' she told the Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment Group on March 18, 2002.
`Rock and Brock'
Bair has published two children's books. One of them, ``Rock, Brock, and the Savings Shock'' (Albert Whitman, 2006) is a tale of two twins -- Rock the Saver and Brock the Spender -- that encourages thrift and explains the benefits of compound interest to elementary school readers.
Some of those lessons seem to have been lost on America's bankers and lawmakers, starting with the dangers of brokered deposits. During the S&L crisis, banks financed their lending spree by raising billions of dollars by selling FDIC-insured CDs, often at high interest rates, through brokers.
When banks rely on brokers to garner as much as 15 percent of their deposits, it's a red flag calling for closer examination by regulators, Yeager says.
'I Was Death'
William Isaac, who chaired the FDIC from 1981 to '85, tried to ban brokered deposits.
``I was death on brokered deposits,'' says Isaac, 64, now chairman of Vienna, Virginia-based Secura Group of LECG LCC, a bank consulting firm. ``I waged a major war against them. I lost that battle with courts and the Congress.''
In 1991, Congress passed a law banning banks that weren't classified as ``well capitalized'' by the FDIC from using brokered deposits. The law left open a loophole, and the FDIC made it wider. Banks that are just ``adequately capitalized'' are allowed to petition the agency for exemptions from the law.
From 2005 to 2007, 88 banks asked the FDIC for waivers, according to agency records. The FDIC granted approval to all of them.
``There are always financial incentives for banks in the U.S. to use brokered deposits to take on excessive risk without having to pay for it,'' Shaffer says. ``It allows them to bring in large chunks of money relatively quickly.''
In 1980, following lobbying from the S&L industry, Congress raised the ceiling on accounts that qualified for FDIC insurance to $100,000 from $40,000. That ceiling has holes in it.
$2 Million FDIC-Insured
A family of two adults and two children can get up to $2 million of FDIC insurance at just one bank.
Here's how: Each person opens an individual account, insuring a total of $400,000. They can hold four more insured joint accounts, each in the names of two family members, protecting another $400,000.
The family can protect $600,000 more if each spouse opens an account that's payable upon death to family members. Each adult can also insure $250,000 for individual retirement holdings in the same bank.
And a family-owned incorporated business qualifies for another $100,000 of insurance.
Banks don't always explain these rules to customers. They might not even know about them.
``They're very complex for depositors to understand,'' says Alan Blinder, 62, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve. ``My mother every once in a while asks me a question, and I don't always get it right. I have to scurry back to the rule book. It is complicated.''
Biggest Loophole
Blinder is now vice chairman of Promontory Interfinancial, the deposit broker that exploits the biggest FDIC loophole of all -- the one that allows individuals to have insured accounts at an unlimited number of banks. Isaac serves as an adviser to Promontory.
Along with the flood of brokered deposits that flows into their coffers, banks can also tap another source of money: loans from the Federal Home Loan Banks.
They lend money to banks at low interest rates, accepting mostly real estate debt worth as much as twice the value of the bank loans as collateral.
In 1989, until which FHLBs lent just to savings banks, Congress expanded the charter to allow most commercial banks to tap into the inexpensive source of loans. New York-based Citigroup Inc., the largest U.S. bank by assets, was the largest borrower this year, with $84.5 billion from the FHLBs as of June 30.
Lacks Staff
Former Fed economist Tim Yeager says FHLB offices lack the staff to keep up with financial conditions of their thousands of member banks.
``The Federal Home Loan Banks cannot effectively control or monitor the risks that are in these institutions,'' says Yeager, now a finance professor at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. ``As long as they have collateral, they're just going to lend.''
Behind the scenes, the surge of FHLB lending has created a clash of federal authorities. Bair says the ability of struggling banks to borrow billions from FHLB branches is likely to lead to large losses for her agency.
The FDIC can't start recovering assets from a failed bank until after the FHLB collects 100 percent of its loans. ``We really get a double whammy,'' says Bair, who has short dark hair and is dressed in a well-tailored gray suit, with a pearl necklace, as she speaks in San Francisco before participating in a panel discussion on financial education.
`I Have a Beef'
``The Federal Home Loan Bank has priority over us in the claims queue if we have to close the bank,'' she says. ``I have a beef with excessive reliance on Federal Home Loan Bank advances.''
John von Seggern, president of the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks, a nonprofit trade association that lobbies Congress on behalf of the 12 independently operated regional offices, says the FHLB provides an essential service, quickly dispatching low-interest loans to member banks.
``We are not the regulator,'' he says. ``Our role is to be the liquidity provider.'' He says the FHLBs would halt lending to a weak bank if a bank regulator asked; he doesn't remember that ever happening.
``If we turn off the tap, that bank would positively fail,'' he says. ``Even healthy banks would fail.''
Von Seggern opposes Bair's efforts to increase insurance premiums for FDIC member banks that rely on FHLB advances for a large share of their funding.
`Making Good Loans?'
``The question should be, `Are you making good loans?' as opposed to `Where did you get the money to fund those loans?''' von Seggern says. ``This is a tough issue. We are very interested in working with the FDIC in coming to an agreement that works for both of us.''
Vaughan of the Richmond Fed says the FHLBs will be stretched with more banks on the cusp of failing.
``U.S. bank supervisors barely have the staff to handle routine bank exams,'' he says.
``Now, when a bank falls into problem status, there's a lot of stuff you got to do,'' he says. ``You've got to monitor the condition of that institution continuously, put all kinds of enforcement on them and stay in contact with the bank to make sure they're doing what they need to do. Dealing with a long list of problem banks takes resources, and there aren't a lot of bodies to spare.''
As FDIC examiners find the truth about a bank's deteriorating condition, the agency faces a conundrum. It knows which banks are on the verge of failure, but in order to avoid customer panic, it doesn't make its watch list public.
No Warning
The FDIC gave no warning to the public or depositors that IndyMac was nearing collapse. The agency knew that IndyMac was at risk a month earlier when it placed it on the watch list, the FDIC says.
Still, as recently as May 12 -- two months before it failed -- IndyMac declared it was ``well capitalized'' by FDIC standards as of March 31.
When IndyMac collapsed, $10 billion, or a third of the bank's assets, were funded by FHLB advances. Another $5.5 billion came from brokered deposits.
Indymac specialized in so-called Alt-A loans, also known as liar loans because they didn't require borrowers to provide documentation of their income. The bank accepted whatever borrowers said they had in annual wages.
Bundled Loans
From 2003 to 2007, the bank had bundled many of its loans into securities and sold them to Wall Street firms. As the credit crisis took hold on Wall Street, the bank could no longer offload its mortgages.
It had $2.7 billion in bad loan reserves on its books on June 30, up from $813 million a year earlier. Over its final nine months, the bank reported losses totaling $896 million.
The agency almost always closes banks on Friday afternoons, after the close of the U.S. stock market. That timing allows FDIC examiners a weekend to prepare the bank to reopen the next business day.
Customers generally have uninterrupted access to their insured funds over the weekend through the use of debit cards and checks.
No Buyers
The FDIC shut down IndyMac at 6 p.m. New York time on Friday, July 11. The FDIC tried to find a buyer for IndyMac, as it had for every other bank that failed this year. That usually is the least-expensive solution.
No bank was willing to purchase IndyMac for a fair price, the FDIC says. So the FDIC took over bank management itself -- just the 13th time in the agency's 74-year history that it has taken control of a bank, spokesman Andrew Gray says.
The agency is now working to sell IndyMac's assets. One of its goals is to recoup customer losses of uninsured deposits from remaining bank holdings, Bair says.
The FDIC told 10,000 customers that it wasn't certain it could repay their $1 billion in deposits in excess of the $100,000 insurance limit. The agency told these depositors it would pay them 50 percent of their uninsured money in so-called dividends.
Further recovery of those uninsured assets will depend on the salvage value of the bank's holdings.
`A Big Mistake'
One IndyMac customer who had uninsured funds is Jeff Capistran, an architect undergoing chemotherapy for colon cancer. Capistran, 46, had planned to close his $127,000 account at the bank a few days before it was shut down, but he was unable to because of his medical treatment.
``I'm somewhat worried,'' he says. ``I made a big mistake.'' Still, the FDIC has told him he'll get half of his deposit above $100,000. ``I have faith they will come through with the rest,'' he says. ``This is an election year.''
On Monday, July 14, three days after the FDIC closed IndyMac, the bank reopened under FDIC supervision. More than a hundred depositors lined up to pull their money from the bank's Manhattan Beach branch.
Horn, the single mother who had shown up the previous Friday to find the branch shuttered, transferred all of her funds to a new account at Wells Fargo & Co. She says her new bank allowed her to withdraw just $5,000 and held the balance, $27,000, for two weeks.
``The mere fact that it was from IndyMac, they put a hold on it,'' she says. Wells Fargo spokeswoman Julia Bernard says her bank wouldn't have placed a hold on an IndyMac check unless it was unable to verify it.
`What's Going On?'
Which will be the next bank to fail? Depositors like Capistran and Horn have no way of knowing. Even the experts can be stumped.
``How are people supposed to know what's going on in the depths of the bank's balance sheets when the regulators, as we've learned in this crisis, don't even know?'' Blinder asks.
One warning sign may be the size of a bank's brokered deposits, Shaffer says.
``Banks that are in distress, facing a reluctance by the general public to place money in these banks, may be forced to turn to brokered deposits,'' he says.
Six of the 12 banks across the U.S. that failed this year relied on brokered deposits for more than 15 percent of their customer holdings. The average rate among all U.S. banks is 7.5 percent.
ANB Financial NA of Bentonville, Arkansas, had received 87 percent of its deposits from brokers; Columbian Bank & Trust Co. of Topeka, Kansas, had received 44 percent; and Silver State Bank of Henderson, Nevada, had received 41 percent.
Bite the Dust
In mid-September, investors were signaling that Seattle- based Washington Mutual, the nation's largest thrift, would be the next big lender to bite the dust.
It had reported losses totaling $6.3 billion during the previous three quarters.
WaMu, which has 2,300 branches, has a 98 percent chance of defaulting on its debt over the next five years, according to credit-default-swap traders, as of yesterday.
On Sept. 8, Washington Mutual fired CEO Kerry Killinger and disclosed that the Office of Thrift Supervision had heightened scrutiny of the bank.
Five percent of WaMu's $182 billion of residential mortgage holdings were in default on June 30, according to Moody's. On Sept. 11, Moody's reduced WaMu's senior unsecured debt rating to Ba2 from Baa3.
Since November 2007, Moody's has slashed that rating by six grades, to Ba2 from A2.
Tripled FHLB Loans
WaMu owns $53 billion of option-adjustable-rate mortgages, according to Moody's. Because these mortgages allow the homeowner to skip payments by adding them to their existing loans, WaMu failed to receive about $2.5 billion of interest payments in 2006 and 2007.
As of June 30, WaMu had gathered $34 billion through deposit brokers, which amounted to 18 percent of all its deposits, according to the FDIC. As bad loans grew, the bank raised cash by tripling its borrowing from the FHLBs during a 12-month period to $58.4 billion.
Advances as of June 30 represent 19 percent of WaMu's assets, up from 7 percent a year earlier.
About $45 billion of the deposits at WaMu aren't insured by the FDIC.
Across the U.S., still-standing banks large and small have similarities to the 11 that have failed.
Florida's Largest Bank
BankUnited Financial Corp., based in Coral Gables, Florida, is the state's largest bank. Hard hit by the collapse of the state's real estate market, BankUnited for the first time began using brokered deposits in the quarter ended on June 30.
It raised $268 million through such long-distance deposits in three months, according to its SEC filings, which showed $7.6 billion of total deposits on June 30. It brought in another $506 million the same way during the next six weeks.
BankUnited has borrowed $5.1 billion from the FHLB of Atlanta, amounting to 36 percent of its $14 billion in assets. The bank reported delinquent payments on $982 million, or 8 percent, of its loans as of June 30.
Fifty-eight percent of the bank's loans are option- adjustable-rate mortgages. Customers took advantage of that deferral option in 92 percent of those loans, filings show.
BankUnited reported losses of $117.7 million in the quarter ended in June. On Sept. 5, the OTS reclassified the bank to ``adequately capitalized'' from ``well capitalized.'' Without a waiver, the bank will be banned from receiving brokered deposits.
`Prospects Fraying'
The bank's stock has lost more than half of its value since it began trying unsuccessfully in June to raise $400 million in a stock sale.
``We see the prospects for viability increasingly fraying,'' says analyst David Bishop, who follows the bank at Stifel Nicolaus & Co. in Baltimore. BankUnited spokeswoman Melissa Gracey didn't return calls and e-mails requesting comment.
Investors may or may not be right about which banks will fail next. Only the regulators know, and even they may not be sure. What's in little doubt, though, is that more collapses are on the way.
Banks still hold too much toxic debt, says Kenneth Rogoff, chief economist of the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2003.
``Like any shrinking industry, we're going to see the upset of some major players,'' says Rogoff, who's now a finance professor at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
`Doesn't Make Sense'
``The only way to put discipline into the system is to allow some companies to go bust,'' he says. ``You can't just have an industry where they make giant profits or they get bailed out. That doesn't make any sense.''
Horn, the IndyMac depositor, has already experienced the fear of being separated from her life savings and watching hundreds of anxious fellow customers lined up outside her branch -- like a scene from a 1930s newsreel.
Even with FDIC insurance, she no longer takes it for granted that making a bank deposit is risk free.
``I just don't know if any investment -- even a bank deposit -- is safe anymore,'' she says.
To contact the reporter on this story: David Evans in Los Angeles at [email protected]
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by SwamyG »

Acharya wrote:Who's next? National City?
trading down 43% today to $2.80.

Of course the CEO has come out and said they are well capitalized, which I think is code for "run for the hills!"

... or maybe Wachovia, down 24% today to $10.30 ...
Downey Financial down over 40%.
If the bail-out deal goes through, there will be a little relief; else few more big guys might come tumbling down. Morgan Stanely is not fully out of danger yet.

ps: By the way, one of the blogs that I read calls Goldman Sachs as Gollum Sachs :-)
paramu
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 20 May 2008 11:38

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by paramu »

Britain's Brown wants new global financial order
By Michael Astor, Associated Press Writer
Gordon Brown calls for new global financial order at UN General Assembly

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- British Prime Minister Gordon Brown called Friday for "a new global financial order" to resolve the financial crisis currently roiling world markets.
In his address before the U.N. General Assembly, Brown said the world was facing the "first real financial crisis" of the global era and that it required an international solution.

"The international institutions created in the aftermath of World War II have not kept pace with the changing global economy. We need national regulators to be cooperative, rules and principles to be consistent and international movements of capital to be transparent," Brown said.

He said the immediate priority was to stabilize financial markets and then work to rebuild the world financial system around clear principles, including increased transparency, regulation, responsibility and global oversight of international capital flows.

"For we must build a new global financial order founded on transparency, not opacity, rewarding success not excess, responsibility, not impunity, and which is global not national," Brown said. "We must clearly state that the age of irresponsibility must be end."

Britain is dealing with the current credit crunch by making over $184 billion available and extending a special liquidity scheme until the end of Jan. 2009, Brown said.

The country also has placed a temporary ban on short-selling.

Brown bemoaned wildly fluctuating oil prices and called for a restart of the stalled Doha round of World Trade Organization talks.

The Doha talks broke down earlier this year after rich nations were unable to reach agreement with developing nations over these agricultural tariffs and subsidies.

On Friday, Brown called for the removal of protectionist trade barriers and subsidies, which he acknowledged denied developing countries some $15 billion in agricultural income each year.

At end of the year, Brown said he would host a global energy summit in London.

Finally, he warned against a tendency toward isolationism in the face of the current crises involving food, fuels and world finance.

"Some say in a time of difficulty we should look inwards and cut aid. That we have excuse for tolerating famine, or for walking by on the other side," Brown said. "Now is not the time to pull up the drawbridge. To seek solace in isolation or revert to an outdated and futile protectionism."
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Sanjay M »

Image
vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by vsudhir »

TN Ninan's column in Biz std.


Some of the numbers he pulls out can only be described as stunners.....shocka!

Sample this:
The amazing thing is that most European banks seem to have leveraged their capital even more than New York’s former investment banks. Deutsche Bank’s leverage, for instance, is said to be 50:1 (Morgan Stanley’s was “only” 30:1).
This has given birth to a new concept. As a parallel to the familiar idea of a financial firm being “too big to fail” (which therefore has to be bailed out by the government), now we have banks that are “too big to save” — in other words, even governments may not be able to save them. Deutsche Bank, as an excellent Financial Times article spells out, has liabilities that are equal to 80 per cent of Germany’s GDP, and Barclays Bank’s liabilities are actually the size of UK’s GDP. The risk is that all this rides on balance sheets with precious little shareholder capital. If the unthinkable happens, and markets were to up-end otherwise solid banks, who will have the financial power to do a bail-out? Not, it would seem, the governments of the UK and Germany. The risk therefore is not just to an institution but a whole economy.
In the US, meanwhile, the financial firms’ debt jumped from 21 per cent of GDP in 1980 to an incredible 116 per cent in 2007 — data pulled out by Martin Wolf of the FT. From being the smallest component among the major categories of debt in the country, this became by far the biggest, and can only be described as a consequence of financial capitalism having run amok. Instead of finance serving the rest of the economy, the tail began wagging the dog — aided by theories about markets always being right, about financial innovation yielding productivity gains and therefore generating growth.

The people who advocated such a system were, of course, its biggest beneficiaries. Bloomberg reports that the five investment banks which have been swallowed up by this crisis paid their top executives $3.1 billion (yes, billion) in 2003-07. Half their incomes went into employee salaries and bonuses. Even after that, the financial sector accounted for 40 per cent of all corporate profits in the US. You can understand why, across the US, there is anger at the unfairness of a Wall Street bail-out when little has been done to help distressed homeowners and troubled manufacturing companies.


OMG onlee.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

the british PM is being too clever by half. when the cash was rolling london was even more of
a cowboy outpost than NYC, courtesy its Alternative Exchange and offshore black money.
now they have discovered dharma and want to become more hindu than us.

typical hubaidiya/taquiya behaviour.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

I had posted an article about new tent cities coming up to house the homeless

others are managing in their cars...middle class people but without ability to
pay their inflated mortgages

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7585696.stm
shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by shyam »

Singha wrote:the british PM is being too clever by half. when the cash was rolling london was even more of
a cowboy outpost than NYC, courtesy its Alternative Exchange and offshore black money.
now they have discovered dharma and want to become more hindu than us.

typical hubaidiya/taquiya behaviour.
Not sure if the entire meltdown is a strategy to force other countries to open their economy according to new international guidelines. I hope others will be able to see through that attempt.
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

thief vs politician

Post by Sanjay M »

What's the difference between a thief and a politician?

Image
Image
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by svinayak »

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB122 ... _weekend[b]
The market has shrugged off more good news and that tells us it remains locked in its downtrend. – Michael Kahn Sept 24, 2008[/b]

A weekly chart shows the Dow moving below the bottom of a complex head-and-shoulders pattern in June and successfully testing that move in August (see Chart 1). In other words, demand was no longer able to hold the market up in June and, after a pause, supply came flooding in to overwhelm demand again in August.

Chart watchers see this as a long-term topping pattern with further downside potential.

A head-and-shoulders comprises two peaks called "shoulders" surrounding a central peak call a "head." The support line at the bottom of the pattern is called the "neck" and when prices move below the neck we get a sell signal. Analysts measure the height of the neck to the head and project that distance down from the breakdown point to get a downside target.

To be sure, I have taken liberties with the pattern's construction to make it a bit easier for the untrained eye to follow. The result, however, works quite well in that it conforms to multiyear support and resistance levels.

The downside target for the pattern is roughly 9700 and that coincides with the major low set in August 2004. It is a brutal forecast and likely the worst-case scenario.

Keep in mind that there is still potential for a short-term upside reversal as there are a few more days to go in the follow-through day window. But given how the market rocks to news each day, it would seem that betting on a market recovery sooner rather than later is a rather risky game.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by svinayak »

People created the problems are writing the Bill for Bail out !!!!!

http://online.barrons.com/article_print ... 80395.html

Sample:

1997: Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's famous "irrational exuberance" speech in 1996 was somehow ignored by, um, Fed Chairman Greenspan. The Fed missed the opportunity to change margin requirements. Had the Fed acted, the bubble would not have inflated as much, and the subsequent crash would not have been as severe.

1998: Long Term Capital Management was undercapitalized, used enormous amounts of leverage to purchase all manner of thinly traded, hard-to-value paper. It failed, and under the authority of the Federal Reserve a "private-sector" rescue plan was cobbled together. Had these bankers suffered big losses from LTCM, they might have thought twice before jumping into the exact same business model of undercapitalized, overleveraged, thinly traded, hard-to-value paper. Instead, they reaffirmed Benjamin Disraeli's famous aphorism: "What we learn from history is that we do not learn from history."

1999: The Financial Services Modernization Act repealed Glass-Steagall, a law that had separated the commercial-banking industry from Wall Street, and the two industries, plus insurance, came together again. Banks became bigger, clumsier, and hard to manage. Apparently, risk-management became all but impossible, even as banks had greater access to larger pools of capital.

2000: The Commodities Futures Modernization Act defined financial commodities such as "interest rates, currency prices, and stock indexes" as "excluded commodities." They could trade off the futures exchanges, with minimal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission, nor the Federal Reserve, nor any state insurance regulators had the ability to supervise or regulate the writing of credit-default swaps by hedge funds, investment banks or insurance companies.

2001-'03: Alan Greenspan's Fed dropped federal-fund rates to 1%. Lulled into a false belief that inflation was not a problem, the Fed then kept rates at 1% for more than a year. This set off an inflationary spiral in housing, and a desperate hunt for yield by fixed-income managers.

2003-'07: The Federal Reserve failed to use its supervisory and regulatory authority over banks, mortgage underwriters and other lenders, who abandoned such standards as employment history, income, down payments, credit rating, assets, property loan-to-value ratio and debt-servicing ability. The borrower's ability to repay these mortgages was replaced with the lender's ability to securitize and repackage them.

2004: The SEC waived its leverage rules. Previously, broker/dealer net-capital rules limited firms to a maximum debt-to-net-capital ratio of 12 to 1. This 2004 exemption allowed them to exceed this leverage rule. Only five firms -- Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Morgan Stanley -- were granted this exemption; they promptly levered up 20, 30 and even 40 to 1.

2005-'07: Unscrupulous home appraisers found that they could attract more business by inflating appraisals. Intrinsic value was ignored, so referrals kept coming in. This helped borrowers obtain financing at prices that were increasingly unsupportable. When honest appraisers petitioned both Congress and the bureaucracy to intervene in the widespread fraud, neither branch of government acted.

THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT MORE we could add to these items. We could mention impotent supervision of Fannie and Freddie by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight; the negligent oversight on ratings agencies; the Boskin Commission's monkeying around with how inflation gets measured; the "Greenspan Put," etc.........
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Singha »

Wachovia is the next bakra with $122b of sub prime and...

LONDON -- The U.K. government is set to nationalize embattled British mortgage lender Bradford & Bingley PLC, a person familiar with the matter said.

After months of searching for a private buyer, the government now plans to take control of the mid-sized mortgage lender and may then sell off pieces to other banks, the person said. UK-based banking giant HSBC PLC and Spain's Banco Santander are among potential buyers of B&B assets, the person said.
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: GLOBAL ECONOMY

Post by Sanjay M »

Post Reply