Central Perk: 26 aug. 2011

vineri, 26 august 2011

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Obama Seeks Holy Grail of Housing, Proverbial Free Lunch, Gain With No Pain; It's Another Bank Bailout in Disguise
8 Trillion Euros in Borrow-Short Lend-Long Madness at European Banks; Circuit-Breaker Silliness; Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again
Bernanke's Invisible Bazooka Ploy
Can Bank of America Buy Credibility? Global Bank Liquidity Issue or Solvency Issue?

Obama Seeks Holy Grail of Housing, Proverbial Free Lunch, Gain With No Pain; It's Another Bank Bailout in Disguise

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 09:16 PM PDT

President Obama is in Fantasyland or in some alternate universe. He wants to strengthen the housing market provided

The plan helps a broad swath of homeowner
The plan stimulates the economy
The plan costs next to nothing

So says the New York Times in U.S. May Back Refinance Plan for Mortgages

The Obama administration is considering further actions to strengthen the housing market, but the bar is high: plans must help a broad swath of homeowners, stimulate the economy and cost next to nothing.

One proposal would allow millions of homeowners with government-backed mortgages to refinance them at today's lower interest rates, about 4 percent, according to two people briefed on the administration's discussions who asked not to be identified because they were not allowed to talk about the information.

A wave of refinancing could be a strong stimulus to the economy, because it would lower consumers' mortgage bills right away and allow them to spend elsewhere. But such a sweeping change could face opposition from the regulator who oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and from investors in government-backed mortgage bonds.

Investors may suspect a plan is in the works. Fannie and Freddie mortgage bonds had been trading well above their face value because so few people were refinancing, keeping returns on the bonds high. But those bond prices dropped sharply this week.

Uninspiring Nonsense

Frank E. Nothaft, the chief economist at Freddie Mac, said the federal action could instill confidence.

"It almost seems to me you want to have some type of announcement or policy, program or something from the federal government that provides that clear signal that we are here supporting the housing market and this is indeed a good time to really consider buying," Mr. Nothaft said.

Quite frankly that is idiotic as one of my readers noted in an email. That government needs to step in and artificially support housing prices is not inspirational.

Moreover, two tax credits that blew up just proved it.

The idea that you can do something at no cost to fix the housing market is pure lunacy. I am not sure which of the following terms applies best

Holy Grail of Housing
Free Lunch
Perpetual Motion Device
Fountain of Youth
Pain with No Gain

I like number 1 best, but 1, 2, and 5 are solid choices.

The Keynesian clowns are of course very supportive of the general idea, led this time by Treasury Secretary Geithner and Christopher J. Mayer, an economist at the Columbia Business School.

Mayer says "This is the best stimulus out there because it doesn't increase the deficit, it accomplishes monetary policy, and it reduces defaults in housing"

Mayer is obviously another believer in various free lunch ideas that cost nothing but will save housing.

Tom Lawler (on Calculated Risk's site) slammed some of these ideas back in July in Lawler: "Slam-Dunk" Stimulus? MS = Missing Something!!!!

The last few paragraphs of the article are rather interesting.

The government has already encouraged some refinancing through the Federal Housing Administration and through Fannie and Freddie, but participation is limited. For example, the Home Affordable Refinance Program excludes homeowners who owe more than 125 percent of the value of their house. To spur more refinancing, the government may decide to encourage Fannie and Freddie to lift such restrictions.

But government officials cautioned that Fannie and Freddie do not do the administration's bidding, even though they are essentially owned by taxpayers.

A broader criticism of a refinancing expansion is that it would not do enough to address the two main drivers of foreclosures: homes worth less than their mortgages, and a sudden loss of income, like unemployment. American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth.

Got That?

Fannie and Freddie are owned by US taxpayers. The Obama administration wants to dump all of these proposals on the backs of taxpayers, perhaps without addressing the problem that "American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth."

Supposedly this can be done at "little to no cost".

Obama is either too dumb to see what's going on or he simply does not care what it costs to buy votes. I believe both.

Bank Bailout in Disguise

Depending on precisely how the proposal is implemented, the effect may be to take poor performing loans off the balance sheets of banks and hedge funds and dump the risks squarely on the backs of taxpayers via Fannie and Freddie.

It's no wonder Geithner supports it.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

8 Trillion Euros in Borrow-Short Lend-Long Madness at European Banks; Circuit-Breaker Silliness; Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 11:13 AM PDT

The Financial Times reports US funds show true state of eurozone banks

Morgan Stanley, calculates that of the €8,000bn funding that is currently in place for the largest 91 eurozone banks, some 58 per cent needs to be rolled over in the next two years. More startling still, some 47 per cent of this funding is less than a year in duration. Much of that is in euros.

However, as the saga of the money market funds shows, eurozone banks have been raising short-term dollar funds too, either to finance their portfolios of dollar assets, or to provide a cheap form of funding (which is then swapped back into euros.) The scale of this reliance is – thankfully – not nearly as large as it was in, say, 2007; back then eurozone banks had a vast network of dollar-funded mortgage vehicles, creating a funding mismatch that was about $800bn, according to the Bank for International Settlements. Nevertheless, some element of this mismatch remains; hence the current crunch.

Is there any solution? In the long term, some eurozone banks probably need to rethink some of their funding profile. In the short term, however, Huw van Steenis, an analyst at Morgan Stanley, has recently been promoting another interesting idea: eurozone authorities should offer joint guarantees for debt issued by banks, as a form of "circuit breaker" to counteract panic.

Circuit-Breaker Silliness

The idea that banks can guarantee each others' debt is complete silliness. I have a better idea. How about banks not borrow-short and lend-long?

All banks have to do is not lend money for longer than they have access to it. If they did that, they would not be constantly rolling loans. If banks want to lend for 5 years they should secure money for 5 years.

It really is that simple.

Might this kill 30-year mortgages? Yes, so what?

Lending money for longer than you have ownership of it (secured right-to-use) should be illegal.

Swelling Deposits From Europe

Please consider U.S. Banks Seek Relief on Swelling Deposits

U.S. regulators have asked some banks to take more deposits from large investors even if it's unprofitable, and lenders in return are seeking relief on insurance premiums and leverage ratios, according to six people with knowledge of the talks.

Deposits are flooding into the biggest U.S. banks as customers seek shelter from Europe's debt crisis and falling stock prices. That forces lenders to raise capital for a growing balance sheet and saddles them with the higher deposit insurance payments. With short-term interest rates so low, it's hard for financial firms to reinvest the new money profitably.

Regulators have asked banks to take the deposits anyway, three people said, with one lender accepting $100 billion. The regulators want lenders to take the deposits because it improves the stability of the financial system, according to one of the people, who said U.S. banks are viewed as places of strength.

Cash Cache

Cash held by domestically chartered U.S. banks, which includes Federal Reserve balances, rose to a record $1.02 trillion earlier this month, up 27 percent from the end of July last year. Deposits held by the 25 largest lenders expanded to $4.69 trillion in the week ended Aug. 10, up 8.5 percent from the end of May. The Fed's balances advanced to $1.61 trillion as of Aug. 24, from $1.05 trillion a year earlier.

The extra deposits are problematic because they're subject to withdrawal, so banks have to park the money in low-yielding short-term investments, Litan said. With few other choices available, banks have stashed their excess deposits at the Fed, which means the cash gets counted as assets.

Charging Depositors

At least one firm, Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BK), tried to recoup some of the costs by charging depositors 13 basis points, or 0.13 percent, for holding unusually high balances.

FDIC insurance fees for large banks typically average more than 0.1 percent, three of the people said. In addition, large banks also may apply an internal capital charge of at least 0.1 percent to such reserves, one bank executive estimated.

Most of JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM)'s almost $53 billion in new deposits in the second quarter were tied to Europe, according to Pri de Silva, a New York-based analyst at CreditSights Inc.

"If you are a bank you don't want to use excess capital for these hot-money deposits," de Silva said.

Yield Curve Table

Duration	U.S.	Japan	Germany	UK
3-Month	-.01	0.10	0.97	0.51
6-Month	0.02	0.11	0.56	0.59
12-Month	0.08	0.12	0.59	0.53
2-Year	0.19	0.14	063	0.59
3-Year	0.32	0.17	0.67	0.75
5-Year	0.93	0.34	1.20	1.36
7-Year	1.52	0.59	1.63	1.84
10-Year	2.18	1.04	2.14	2.49
30-Year	3.55	2.01	2.98	3.75

Dash for Cash Sends Short-Term Rates Negative Again

Note that 3-month T-Bills are yielding a negative .01% as demand for safety has shoved aside any concern to make a profit. However banks pay .10% for FDIC insurance.

Thus banks are losing .11% unless they charge fees. BNY Mellon has done just that, charging .13% for large deposits.

That large deposits keep flowing in from Europe says stress in European banks continues to simmer under the surface.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Bernanke's Invisible Bazooka Ploy

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 08:05 AM PDT

Bernanke is out of tools that make any sense even to him.

Seriously, what can he do he has not already done? Given that $1.6 trillion in excess reserves did not do a damn thing to spur lending or job creation, what possible good can another $1 trillion do?

The answer is none.

Yet Monetarist fools want more QE. Monetarist fools are also hoping for "Operation Twist", technically not QE but an attempt to drive down long-term rates by buying the long end of the curve and selling the short end.

Yield Curve Table

Duration	U.S.	Japan	Germany	UK
3-Month	-.01	0.10	0.97	0.51
6-Month	0.02	0.11	0.56	0.59
12-Month	0.08	0.12	0.59	0.53
2-Year	0.19	0.14	063	0.59
3-Year	0.32	0.17	0.67	0.75
5-Year	0.93	0.34	1.20	1.36
7-Year	1.52	0.59	1.63	1.84
10-Year	2.18	1.04	2.14	2.49
30-Year	3.55	2.01	2.98	3.75

Seriously, what possible good can come from say, driving down 10-year yields to say 1.75% or even 1.5% from here. Mortgage rates are at record low yields, yet new home sales are at the 1963 levels.

Clearly something other than the yield curve is holding down sales.

So what else can Bernanke do? Monetize more debt? How about .....

The Invisible Bazooka Ploy

Bloomberg reports Bernanke Says Fed Still Has Stimulus Tools, Doesn't Signal He'll Use Them

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the central bank still has tools to stimulate the economy without providing details or signaling when or whether policy makers might deploy them.

"In addition to refining our forward guidance, the Federal Reserve has a range of tools that could be used to provide additional monetary stimulus," Bernanke said in a speech today to central bankers and economists gathered at an annual forum in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He said a second day has been added to the next policy meeting in September to "allow a fuller discussion" of the economy and the Fed's possible response.

Translation: "I've got an invisible bazooka in my pocket and I will use it when I have to."

Bernanke is out of tools and he knows it. So does Kansas City Fed member Thomas Hoenig who says "Fed Can't Do It All, No Reason for Operation Twist to Work", Focus Should Shift to Fixing U.S. Fiscal Woes

Of course Bernanke cannot come out and say "I am out of tools".

When it gets serious you have to lie. This is serious, and his statement is a lie.

What else can he do but bluff?

He sounds like a 6-year old bragging about the size of his dog that will protect him against all evils, when the kid does not have a dog at all.

That does not mean Bernankle will not try something. Rest assured he will. I am not sure what, but it will likely be given a creative name hoping to dazzle us with the same misguided Fed policies that got us into this mess in the first place.

Bluff Working?

As of 10:00 Central the market is modestly higher. The S&P is up .8% and the Nasdaq double that. Is the bluff working?

Not really. I do not know a single person who thought today would be anything other than a sell the news event. Perhaps there is a sigh of relief that Bernanke is not doing anything, perhaps too many were looking for "down" and were already positioned that way.

Regardless, down will resume, just give it time.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Can Bank of America Buy Credibility? Global Bank Liquidity Issue or Solvency Issue?

Posted: 26 Aug 2011 01:44 AM PDT

I am somewhat in awe (in a negative sense) of the silliness of analysts and executives who think banks in the US and Europe are being hit with liquidity issues, not solvency issues.

Here is a case in point, from a Telegraph article: Market crash 'could hit within weeks', warn bankers.

Insurance on the debt of several major European banks has now hit historic levels, higher even than those recorded during financial crisis caused by the US financial group's implosion nearly three years ago.

Credit default swaps on the bonds of Royal Bank of Scotland, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo, among others, flashed warning signals on Wednesday. Credit default swaps (CDS) on RBS were trading at 343.54 basis points, meaning the annual cost to insure £10m of the state-backed lender's bonds against default is now £343,540.

The cost of insuring RBS bonds is now higher than before the taxpayer was forced to step in and rescue the bank in October 2008, and shows the recent dramatic downturn in sentiment among credit investors towards banks.

"The problem is a shortage of liquidity – that is what is causing the problems with the banks. It feels exactly as it felt in 2008," said one senior London-based bank executive.

Not a Liquidity Issue

Did you catch the silly quote? If not here it is: "The problem is a shortage of liquidity – that is what is causing the problems with the banks. It feels exactly as it felt in 2008," said one senior London-based bank executive.

This is not a liquidity issue. Banks are undercapitalized. I am not sure who that bank executive is, but he sounds like Rochdale Securities' analyst, Dick Bove.

I recently commented on Dick Bove, Bank of America, and undercapitalization in Hello Richard Bove, Repeating Nonsense Does Not Make It True; Bank of America Will Not Survive in One Piece.

On the chance you need a second opinion about Dick Bove, please consider Dick Bove – Open Mouth Insert Foot on the Big Picture blog, from April 17, 2010.

At 9:43 AM ET on CNBC, Dick Bove (Rochdale Securities) said Goldman would pay a fine and this will pass (3:00). He also called the stock an aggressive buy at $171 (4:45). At 6:00 minutes Mark Haines begged him to reconsider his position arguing that fraud is a big deal. Bove was undeterred and reiterated his buy recommendation stating a second time this was a short-term issue (7:00).
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1470603264&play=1

Then at 6:35 PM ET with the stock at $160.70 ($11 below his aggressive buy recommendation this morning) …
Bloomberg.com – Goldman Sachs Executives Should Resign, Bove Says
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein and finance chief David Viniar should resign over fraud allegations, according to Dick Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities. "Will Lloyd Blankfein, CEO, and David Viniar, CFO, maintain their positions in the company? I do not think so," Bove wrote in a note to clients today. "Someone must 'fall on their swords' for the devastating decline in this company's persona and they may be forced to do so for public relations reasons."
Just six months ago Bove stuck his foot in his mouth by offering instant analysis on Wells Fargo by exciting giving a positive instant reaction to their earnings only to change his opinion to a sell for clients six hours later.
As a result of this embarrassment, Bove told Dow Jones newswires:

"I'm not going to do it anymore. I'm going to have to see the numbers before I go on air," Bove told Dow Jones Newswires Thursday. "It creates an untenable situation."

Dick, maybe you should expand your self-imposed gag order beyond numbers and not offer an opinion on a SEC complaint until you actually read it, or at least the three paragraph summary.

Goldman Sachs Weekly

The very best someone could have done on that recommendation is get out break even, after a substantial initial loss. Those who held on are in far worse shape. Perhaps in a couple years they too can get back to even.

Dick Bove: Bank Of America Shares Could Rocket To $32

Flashback December 16, 2010: Dick Bove: Bank Of America Shares Could Rocket To $32

Bank of America(BAC) will likely hit $32 per share, according to the latest bullish forecast by Rochdale Securities analyst Richard Bove.

Bove has been touting bank stocks for several months now, and in May he argued Citigroup(C) and Bank of America would sextuple by 2015.

Bove said in a voice message left with TheStreet that he estimates it will take roughly three years for Bank of America to reach $32.

Can Bank of America Buy Credibility?

Bloomberg reports Bank of America 'Buying Credibility' With Buffett's $5 Billion Investment

The Bank of America cash injection may have little impact on capital and doesn't resolve mounting legal claims linked to mortgages, many of which stem from the 2008 acquisition of Countrywide Financial Corp. Shares of the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank pared their initial gains today, rising 9.4 percent to $7.65 in regular New York trading.

"He's buying credibility," Richard Bove, an analyst at Rochdale Securities LLC in Lutz, Florida, said of Moynihan.

Still, Moynihan cut a "bad deal for Bank of America shareholders," Bove said.

"It's an excessive price to pay if, in fact, he didn't need capital," he said. "There's no way in hell that he can make 6 percent after tax on any investment he can make."

I do not believe one can buy credibility. However, let's assume you can. Can you still buy credibility if you

"Pay an excessive price"
"Cut a bad deal"
"Raise capital when you do not need to"

Bove makes all those statements. I want to know how a company can make three major mistake and still "buy credibility".

Bank of America Needed to Raise Capital

Actions speak louder than words.

Regardless, of what anyone says, Bank of America needed to raise capital or they would not have done this deal on extremely onerous terms. Bank of America has problems somewhere, perhaps multiple problems.

Statements to the contrary by Moynihan are meaningless. They remind me of statements by Bear Stearns, Lehman, and Morgan Stanley, lies, lies, and more lies by all three companies.

Dick Bove An Embarrassment to Rochdale Securities

In general, do not care about bad calls. Everyone who makes predictions is going to have a number of them. I certainly have made a number of them over the years. It is extremely difficult to get both timing and direction correct every time you say something. Indeed, it's impossible.

What's important are thought processes, sheer recklessness, and a repeated history of horrendously inept calls with few good ones.

In this case, it's crystal clear Dick Bove is an embarrassment to Rochdale Securities, and if Rochdale had any common sense they would fire Bove immediately, if not sooner. That they have not done so, just may say something about Rochdale Securities.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Damn Cool Pics

Street Sharks
Don't Ever Complain About Your Job
Celebrities When They Were Young
Ode to Steve Jobs [Infographic]
Rich Spanish Duchess of Alba to Wed at Age 85

Street Sharks

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 10:22 PM PDT

After Hurricane Irene hit Puerto Rico, the streets were so flooded that a shark managed to be swimming around. Now we not only have to look both ways before we cross the street, but also under the rising tide!

Don't Ever Complain About Your Job

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 09:49 PM PDT

I have seen those at the Huangshan mountain. It's terrible to see them climb kilometers of stairs with such heavy burdens. Some carried two baskets on poles and the balancing movement of the baskets had their supporting leg bend backwards at the knee... all this pain for a miserable salary.

People! stop complaining about your job

Celebrities When They Were Young

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 09:17 PM PDT

Although it doesn't look like it, everybody was young once. Yes, even your favorite celebrity. Here are 31 celebrities when they were much younger than they are now.

When Martha Stewart was 20

When Ian McKellen was 24

When Helen Mirren was 25

When Beyonce was born

When Hugh Hefner was 20

When George Clooney was 15

When Bruce Willis was 17

When Steven Tyler was 18

When Charlize Theron was 14

When Sean Connery was 23

When Dr. Dre was 21

When Larry David was 20

When Ryan Seacrest was 13

When Clint Eastwood was 26

When Jamie Foxx was 17

When Steve Carrell was 22

When Harrison Ford was born

When Billy Corgan was 14

When Drew Carrey was 22

When Christopher Walken was 22

When Eminem was 16

When Jack Nicholson was 30

When Michael Stipe was 21

When Nancy Pelosi was 17

When James Lipton was 27

When William Shatner was 24

When Chuck Norris was 27

When Alex Trebek was 44

When Rupert Murdoch was a little boy

When Steve Jobs was 18

When Stephen Colbert was 22

Ode to Steve Jobs [Infographic]

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 09:02 PM PDT

With the resignation of Steve Jobs, Apple has lost both a product visionary and outspoken leader. This timeline is an ode to the ideas and words of perhaps the greatest technological revolutionary of the past century.

Click on Image to Enlarge.

Source: columnfivemedia

Rich Spanish Duchess of Alba to Wed at Age 85

Posted: 25 Aug 2011 08:41 PM PDT

One of Spain's richest nobles is to marry at the age of 85, wedding a man 25 years her junior despite initial opposition from her children. The Duchess of Alba whose full name is Maria del Rosario Cayetana Alfonsa Victoria Eugenia Francisca Fitz-James Stuart y de Silva, released a statement Tuesday saying she'll tie the knot with Alfonso Diez, 60, in early October. He is a civil servant in the government's social security administration, and this would be her third marriage.

The Duchess' offspring have been known to oppose the marriage. She said in a rare interview early this year she wanted to wed Diez but her children were against the idea. In July, however, she apparently placated them by dividing up much of her vast wealth among them, assigning castles, palaces and other property of the 500-year-old House of Alba which they will inherit upon her death. They are reported to be satisfied with the divvying up of her estate, and media have since been speculating as to when wedding bells might toll.