Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Let the bad times roll

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Let the bad times roll

    It turns out that there is a huge financial bubble that was a secret until now.

    I'm reading more about the mortgage crisis lately, and attitudes are getting more pessimistic. People are saying this thing could last a decade or longer like the Japanese deflationary period.

    Are we headed for an epic bear market?

    The credit bubble is just starting to unwind, a credit-derivative insider says. And while U.S. borrowers are being blamed for the mess, they were really just pawns in a global game.

    Satyajit Das is laughing. It appears I have said something very funny, but I have no idea what it was. My only clue is that the laugh sounds somewhat pitying.

    One of the world's leading experts on credit derivatives, Das is the author of a 4,200-page reference work on the subject, among a half-dozen other tomes. As a developer and marketer of the exotic instruments himself over the past 30 years. He seemed like the ideal industry insider to help us get to the bottom of the recent debt crunch -- and I expected him to defend and explain the practice.

    I started by asking the Calcutta-born Australian whetherthe credit crisis was in what Americans would call the "third inning." This was pretty amusing, it seemed, judging from the laughter. So I tried again. "Second inning?" More laughter. "First?"

    Still too optimistic. Das, who knows as much about global money flows as anyone in the world, stopped chuckling long enough to suggest that we're actually still in the middle of the national anthem before a game destined to go into extra innings. And it won't end well for the global economy.

    An epic bear market
    Das is pretty droll for a math whiz, but his message is dead serious. He thinks we're on the verge of a bear market of epic proportions.

    The cause: Massive levels of debt underlying the world economy system are about to unwind in a profound and persistent way.

    Like an ex-mobster turning state's witness, Das has turned his back on his old pals in the derivatives biz to warn anyone who will listen -- mostly banks and hedge funds that pay him consulting fees -- that the jig is up.

    Rather than joining the crowd that blames the mess on American slobs who took on more mortgage debt than they could afford and have endangered the world by stiffing lenders, he points a finger at three parties: regulators who stood by as U.S. banks developed ingenious but dangerous ways of shifting trillions of dollars of credit risk off their balance sheets and into the hands of unsophisticated foreign investors; hedge and pension fund managers who gorged on high-yield debt instruments they didn't understand; and financial engineers who built towers of "securitized" debt with math models that were fundamentally flawed.

    "Defaulting middle-class U.S. homeowners are blamed, but they are merely a pawn in the game," he says. "Those loans were invented so that hedge funds would have high-yield debt to buy."

    The liquidity factory
    Das' view sounds cynical, but it makes sense if you stop thinking about mortgages as a way for people to finance houses and think about them instead as a way for lenders to generate cash flow and create collateral during an era of a flat interest-rate curve.Although subprime U.S. loans seem like small change in the context of the multitrillion-dollar debt market, it turns out these high-yield instruments were an important part of the machine that Das calls the global "liquidity factory." Just like a small amount of gasoline can power an entire truck given the right combination of spark plugs, pistons and transmission, subprime loans became the fuel that underlays derivative securities many, many times their size.

    Here's how it worked: In olden days, like 10 years ago, banks wrote and funded their own loans. In the new game, Das points out, banks "originate" loans, "warehouse" them on their balance sheet for a brief time, then "distribute" them to investors by packaging them into derivatives called collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, and similar instruments. In this scheme, banks don't need to tie up as much capital, so they can put more money out on loan.

    The more loans that were sold, the more they could use as collateral for more loans, so credit standards were lowered to get more paper out the door -- a task that was accelerated in recent years via fly-by-night brokers now accused of predatory lending practices.

    Buyers of these credit risks in CDO form were insurance companies, pension funds and hedge-fund managers from Bonn to Beijing. Because money was readily available at low interest rates in Japan and the United States, these managers leveraged up their bets by buying the CDOs with borrowed funds.

    So if you follow the bouncing ball, borrowed money bought borrowed money. And then because they had the blessing of credit-ratings agencies relying on mathematical models suggesting that they would rarely default, these CDOs were in turn used as collateral to do more borrowing.

    In this way, Das points out, credit risk moved from banks, where it was regulated and observable, to places where it was less regulated and difficult to identify.

    Turning $1 into $20
    The liquidity factory was self-perpetuating and seemingly unstoppable. As assets bought with borrowed money rose in value, players could borrow more money against them, and it thus seemed logical to borrow even more to increase returns. Bankers figured out how to strip money out of existing assets to do so, much as a homeowner might strip equity from his house to buy another house.

    These triple-borrowed assets were then in turn increasingly used as collateral for commercial paper -- the short-term borrowings of banks and corporations -- which was purchased by supposedly low-risk money market funds.

    According to Das' figures, up to 53% of the $2.2 trillion commercial paper in the U.S. market is now asset-backed, with about 50% of that in mortgages.

    When you add it all up, according to Das' research, a single dollar of "real" capital supports $20 to $30 of loans. This spiral of borrowing on an increasingly thin base of real assets, writ large and in nearly infinite variety, ultimately created a world in which derivatives outstanding earlier this year stood at $485 trillion -- or eight times total global gross domestic product of $60 trillion.

    Without a central governmental authority keeping tabs on these cross-border flows and ensuring a standard of record-keeping and quality, investors increasingly didn't know what they were buying or what any given security was really worth.

    A painful unwinding
    Now here is where the U.S. mortgage holder shows up again. As subprime loan default rates doubled, in contravention of what the models forecast, the CDOs those mortgages backed began to collapse. Because they were so hard to value, banks and funds started looking at all CDOs and other paper backed by mortgages with suspicion, and refused to accept them as collateral for the sort of short-term borrowing that underpins today's money markets.

    Through late last month, according to Das, as much as $300 billion in leveraged finance loans had been "orphaned," which means that they can't be sold off or used as collateral.

    One of the wonders of leverage is that it amplifies losses on the way down just as it amplifies gains on the way up. The more an asset that is bought with borrowed money falls in value, the more you have to sell other stuff to fulfill the loan-to-value covenants. It's a vicious cycle. In this context, banks' objective was to prevent customers from selling their derivates at a discount because they would then have to mark down the value of all the other assets in the debt chain, an event that would lead to the need to make margin calls on customers already thin on cash.

    Now it may seem hard to believe, but much of the past few years' advance in the stock market was underwritten by CDO-type instruments which go under the heading of "structured finance." I'm talking about private-equity takeovers, leveraged buyouts and corporate stock buybacks -- the works.

    So to the extent that the structured finance market is coming undone, not only will those pillars of strength for equities be knocked away, but many recent deals that were predicated on the easy availability of money will likely also go bust, Das says.

    That is why he considers the current market volatility much more profound than a simple "correction" in prices. He sees it as a gigantic liquidity bubble unwinding -- a process that can take a long, long time.

    While you might think that the U.S. Federal Reserve can help prevent disaster by lowering interest rates dramatically, as they did Wednesday, the evidence is not at all clear.

    The problem, after all, is not the amount of money in the system but the fact that buyers are in the process of rejecting the entire new risk-transfer model and its associated leverage and counterparty risks.

    Lower rates will not help that. "At best," Das says, "they help smooth the transition."

    The fine print
    Das notes that Japan in the 1990s lowered interest rates to zero and the country still suffered through a prolonged recession. His timetable for the start of the next serious phase of the unwinding is later this year or early 2008. . . . Das' most readable book for laypeople is "Traders, Guns & Money," an amusing exposé of high finance, published last year. Das occasionally writes a blog at his publisher's Web site. Also available are a boxed set of his reference books on derivatives and his book specifically on CDOs. . . .

    Perhaps the oddest line on the subject by a world leader was uttered by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the president of Brazil. Asked if he was worried about the effects of the credit crunch in his country, he dismissively called it "an eminently American crisis" caused by people trying to make a lot of "third-class money." . . . CDOs were first widely used back in the late 1980s by Drexel Burnham Lambert junk-bond king Michael Milken to sell off damaged and previously unsellable debt in a way that was more palatable to customers.
    Last edited by Kidlicious; September 21, 2007, 19:42.
    I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
    - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

  • #2
    Then it is a good thing you have a president who is fiscally responsible.

    http://www.hardware-wiki.com - A wiki about computers, with focus on Linux support.

    Comment


    • #3
      They really just need to screw everyone involved.

      1. People invested in housing markets they knew were already overpriced.
      2. Giving out loans to people who were incredibly risky.
      3. The people who weren't responsible with loan payments and thought they could get away with it.

      Really, which of these groups getting hurt in this market should really be bailed out?

      Just cut and run and we should be fine.
      "Yay Apoc!!!!!!!" - bipolarbear
      "At least there were some thoughts went into Apocalypse." - Urban Ranger
      "Apocalype was a great game." - DrSpike
      "In Apoc, I had one soldier who lasted through the entire game... was pretty cool. I like apoc for that reason, the soldiers are a bit more 'personal'." - General Ludd

      Comment


      • #4
        So how much is the decifit? If he is fiscally responsible, then what is the decifit? I mean isn't it simple to see if he has been responsible or not?

        I can't say that I know a lot about economy. I better start stacking them strong euros and go for nice houses when the prices hits the bottom
        In da butt.
        "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
        THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
        "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Thue
          Then it is a good thing you have a president who is fiscally responsible.
          Bill Clinton has been returned to office?!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Apocalypse
            They really just need to screw everyone involved.

            1. People invested in housing markets they knew were already overpriced.
            2. Giving out loans to people who were incredibly risky.
            3. The people who weren't responsible with loan payments and thought they could get away with it.

            Really, which of these groups getting hurt in this market should really be bailed out?

            Just cut and run and we should be fine.
            QFT. We shouldn't bail out folks who were irresponsible and make it seem somehow that it wasn't a big deal (leaving them to do something similar in the future).
            “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
            - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

            Comment


            • #7
              I have a bag of potatos that are growing eyes.
              Long time member @ Apolyton
              Civilization player since the dawn of time

              Comment


              • #8
                My God, Lancer! They're pod-people aliens!! Don't go to sleep or they'll suck out your brains!!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Nay! They're the future of dinner. One possible future, I don't know tech stuff.
                  Long time member @ Apolyton
                  Civilization player since the dawn of time

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
                    QFT. We shouldn't bail out folks who were irresponsible and make it seem somehow that it wasn't a big deal (leaving them to do something similar in the future).
                    My very limited grasp of economics... (correct me if I'm wrong)

                    The half point rate cut seems to point to we have already started to try to bail them out. And our dollar is suffering for it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In a way, yeah.

                      The collapse of the mortgage market was cascading into other areas, threatening to throw the county (and maybe the world) into a recession. Cutting of the prime, makes borrowing easier, which takes some of the downward pressure off.

                      The danger, of course, is that cutting interest rates could lead to inflation.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I personally have lost considerably due to the half point rate cut, but on the other hand there's responsible people that are losing because of the current crisis.

                        The problem is this: some people made bad loans. Those people sold those bad loans to many other people as part of securities that the ratings agencies rated AAA (aren't new financial instruments clever?). Now the proverbial **** hit the fan and a lot people lose a lot of money, more bad stuff happens. Now, suddenly, lenders don't trust eachother and don't want to lend money because they just got burned. Some (more) responsible banks suddenly have a hard time borrowing money to finance business as usual. (Here I define repsonsible as: didn't make bad loans, not... kept enough cash to weather a sudden credit crunch.)

                        Letting some of them fail is all nice and good until your whole financial system collapses. Ideally, you have enough losses so that some (formerly) rich people learn their lesson, but not so many as to start a recession.
                        "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                        -Joan Robinson

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Zkribbler
                          In a way, yeah.

                          The collapse of the mortgage market was cascading into other areas, threatening to throw the county (and maybe the world) into a recession. Cutting of the prime, makes borrowing easier, which takes some of the downward pressure off.

                          The danger, of course, is that cutting interest rates could lead to inflation.
                          Well, there is the additional problem that the cause of the financial turmoil is poor debt quality. And since cutting interest rates essentially reduces the value of debt, it could exacerbate the problem.

                          Still, not really anything else you can do at this point. As Victor points out, you can't let the whole economy go down the tubes to try teach a lesson to people. They wouldn't learn anything anyway.
                          VANGUARD

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Meh. I wanted higher interest rates. Of course, I need to get off my ass and invest that money instead of leaving it in savings, but that's another matter...

                            -Arrian
                            grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                            The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I wanted a stronger dollar, but you know... That's what I get for taking a job where I was paid in USD.
                              "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists."
                              -Joan Robinson

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X