Se siete curiosi di sapere quanto incassano per ogni transazione le società che forniscono carte di credito fate un salto su questo sito: The True Cost of Credit.
Ecco alcuni esempi con la mia carta VISA:
A pack of gum at a convenience store: $1.50
Credit Card Fees: $0.37 (25.0%)
Percent: 1.541% Per-Item: $0.35
Jill's Sandwich Shop: $7.00
Credit Card Fees: $0.36 (5.2%)
Percent: 1.656% Per-Item: $0.24
SuperCheese Pizza Delivery: $25.00
Credit Card Fees: $0.84 (3.4%)
Percent: 1.873% Per-Item: $0.35
Tank of Gasoline at a fueling station: $30.00
Credit Card Fees: $0.64 (2.1%)
Percent: 1.528% Per-Item: $0.15
Books at Bookseller.com: $50.00
Credit Card Fees: $1.14 (2.3%)
Percent: 1.896% Per-Item: $0.15
Groceries at your local Jewel/Osco: $100.00
Credit Card Fees: $1.52 (1.5%)
Percent: 1.332% Per-Item: $0.10
Electricity Bill over the phone: $150.00
Credit Card Fees: $1.11 (0.7%)
Percent: 0.138% Per-Item: $0.76
Flight to California on BlueSky.com: $300.00
Credit Card Fees: $6.76 (2.3%)
Percent: 2.126% Per-Item: $0.11
Flatscreen TV at Electronics Depot: $800.00
Credit Card Fees: $19.05 (2.4%)
Percent: 2.276% Per-Item: $0.11
Friday 30 January 2009
Guerre, attentati e mercati finanziari
Qui di seguito un interessante articolo (di qualche anno fa) in cui sono analizzati gli effetti di eventi straordinari, quali guerre e attentati, sui mercati finanziari.
"The Historical Impact of Crises on Financial Markets
12 September 2001
Amid the horror of the last couple of days, and all the writing and media coverage, we found that the following article provides some useful insight for investors, and have asked permission to reproduce it for our readers.
With the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and elsewhere in the United States took place on September 11, 2001, there were immediate concerns about their impact on world financial markets. Although this event is without precedent, by looking at military and political crises of the past, we can hopefully learn what to expect from this horrible event.
The general pattern we have found is that there is initially a flight to safety in financial markets, producing a decline in stock markets and volatility in commodity markets. The impact of the crisis itself is short-term. After a brief period of time, calm returns and markets return to their situation before the crisis. Although financial markets react quickly to all news, they can also process the information and quickly incorporate the news into the market to reflect the long-term impact of these crises on the markets. Financial markets are only impacted if the crisis creates a long-term change in the fundamental nature of the economy.
Let’s see how markets reacted in the past.
World War I
The assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 28, 1914 precipitated a series of events that led to Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia on July 28 and war throughout Europe within a week. All the world’s financial markets were closed by August 1, 1914. In New York, there was large selling on the New York Stock Exchange in the last days of July 1914 to raise money and return it to Europe. The selling led to the closure of the exchange. The New York Stock Exchange remained closed until it was reopened on December 12, 1914. London’s stock market remained closed until January 1915, and allowed only limited trading during 1915. The Paris Stock exchange reopened in 1915 and the Berlin Stock Exchange reopened in 1917.
Although the New York Stock Exchange itself did not reopen until December, curb trading in New York began in September. The prices of stocks actually hit their lowest point in October of 1914, and by the time the market reopened in December, stocks had returned to the level they had been at before World War I began. The market continued to rise until November 1916. World War I provided an important lesson for financial markets. Closing them does not solve any problems. It is best to let markets digest the information and allow financial prices to reflect the change in circumstances.
Currency market were initially disrupted by the war, with the British Pound rising 20% against the US Dollar as people tried to repatriate money to England, but within a week of the beginning of the war, currency exchange rates returned to their pre-war levels. Bond markets were generally unaffected by the war. Interest rates only began to rise once inflation began to build up later in the war.
This pattern, as we will see, was consistently followed in other crises. Initially, there is a flight to safety, leading to declines in the market and increases in the value of commodities. Once the long-term impact of the crisis is understood, markets return to their conditions before the crisis. Thereafter, markets move up or down as investors perceive that the crisis will be resolved.
World War II
There were several phases to how markets reacted to World War II. There were a series of crises during World War II: the attack of Germany on Poland in September 1939, the attack on France and the collapse of France in May 1940, and the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
Surprisingly, the New York Stock Market rose when Germany attacked Poland on September 1, 1939, primarily because investors thought the United States would benefit from the demand for goods generated by the war. The market barely moved until the collapse of France in May 1940. The collapse of France and Dunkirk precipitated a 25% decline in the market in May 1940 in a massive sell-off. But again, the market jumped back quickly. The market first bottomed on May 22 and hit its final bottom on June 11, 1940. As the news got worse in the war, markets gradually declined throughout 1941, and when Pearl Harbor was attacked, the market declined around 10% in the next two weeks. The market bottomed in April 1942, and moved up after that for the rest of the war as the war moved in the favor of the Allies.
Unlike World War I, the New York Stock Exchange did not close during World War II. The London Stock Exchange was closed for only one week in September when Germany attacked Poland. The New York Stock Exchange remained open throughout the war. In fact, the NYSE was open on Monday, December 8, the day after the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Stock Exchanges found that people will find a way to trade stocks and other financial assets outside of the exchanges if people cannot trade stocks on open markets. Moreover, the quicker markets are allowed to process news, the quicker markets can adjust to the economic and financial changes that have occurred.
The Gulf War
During the Gulf War, the market followed the pattern shown in World War I and World War II. Stock markets sold off and oil prices rose when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Oil prices were at $17 a barrel at the end of June 1990, and peaked at $40 on October 9, 1990. The price then proceeded to decline to $20 a barrel by January of 1991, and continued to decline throughout most of the 1990s.
The stock market had been rising prior to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The market topped out on July 17, 1990 and declined 20% until the market bottomed on October 11, 1990. When the attack on Iraq finally began, the market jumped up, rising almost 20% over the next month. The war was over with in a few days and despite a recession in the United States that followed the Gulf War, the market did not decline and stayed within a trading range for the rest of 1991.
During the Gulf War there was a reduction in airplane travel, which did affect the airline industry. But the long-term impact on stock markets and even oil markets was minimal, even though it was followed by a recession in the United States. In fact, the price of oil continued to decline after the war was over with.
The 1993 World Trade Center Bombing
The World Trade Center was bombed on February 26, 1993. This attack had virtually no impact on the stock market. In fact, the Dow Jones Industrials moved up on that day.
A similar situation occurred in August 1991 when there was an attempted coup in Russia. European markets sold off over 10% within one day, but recovered all of their losses within a week after the coup attempt collapsed. As in other crises, the market quickly recovered and never looked back once it was clear the crisis was over with.
The Terrorist Attack of September 2001
As could be expected, world markets sold off as soon as news of the attack was heard. The London Stock market was down 5%, Germany 8% and Paris 5%. US Stock Markets never opened because the attack occurred before 9:30.
What will be the reaction of financial markets to this crisis?
This event is different from the other crises because it was a direct attack on the financial center of the United States. The World Trade Center houses many of the most important financial firms in the world, including the New York Mercantile Exchange, which physically no longer exists. This raises important concerns because many of the people who operate financial markets in the United States probably died.
But as we have seen, markets bounce back from these crises and bounce back quickly. The reason is that markets are efficient at processing information. They both overreact initially when the crisis occurs, and quickly bounce back once markets have determined the impact of these crises on the economy will be minimal.
The primary way in which this attack could impact financial markets is if it materially impacts the economy. In and of itself, the attack is unlikely to do this. It all depends upon how the government reacts to return the economy and the market to normal in the next few weeks. One fear would be that the attack might lead to greater isolationism in the world economy, but this would be exactly the wrong reaction. Globalization of markets and trade has provided immense benefits over the past decades and in many ways was responsible for the growth in the world economy during the 1990s. If anything, this attack should make provide us with an even greater commitment to free trade to defeat the goals of the terrorists.
Although many people worry that the integration of the world’s stock markets could cause a ripple effect through the world’s markets, and that their integration makes them all vulnerable to attack. The technology that is currently available can also help markets to bounce back. Markets such as Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange require no physical location. One result of the terrorist attack may be to quicken the move of financial markets into cyberspace. Exchanges with a single location where stocks or commodities can be traded are likely to become rarer in the future. Experience of previous crises shows that people find ways to buy and sell financial assets regardless of whether markets are officially open or not.
To conclude, markets quickly assess the impact of crises. The quicker markets are allowed to digest news, the quicker markets can recover from the crisis. The consistent pattern in past crises is a sell off when the news breaks, a short period of evaluation, and a bounce back in financial markets once investors realize that the crisis, in and of itself, will not have a long-term impact on financial markets.
"The Historical Impact of Crises on Financial Markets
12 September 2001
Amid the horror of the last couple of days, and all the writing and media coverage, we found that the following article provides some useful insight for investors, and have asked permission to reproduce it for our readers.
With the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and elsewhere in the United States took place on September 11, 2001, there were immediate concerns about their impact on world financial markets. Although this event is without precedent, by looking at military and political crises of the past, we can hopefully learn what to expect from this horrible event.
The general pattern we have found is that there is initially a flight to safety in financial markets, producing a decline in stock markets and volatility in commodity markets. The impact of the crisis itself is short-term. After a brief period of time, calm returns and markets return to their situation before the crisis. Although financial markets react quickly to all news, they can also process the information and quickly incorporate the news into the market to reflect the long-term impact of these crises on the markets. Financial markets are only impacted if the crisis creates a long-term change in the fundamental nature of the economy.
Let’s see how markets reacted in the past.
World War I
The assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 28, 1914 precipitated a series of events that led to Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia on July 28 and war throughout Europe within a week. All the world’s financial markets were closed by August 1, 1914. In New York, there was large selling on the New York Stock Exchange in the last days of July 1914 to raise money and return it to Europe. The selling led to the closure of the exchange. The New York Stock Exchange remained closed until it was reopened on December 12, 1914. London’s stock market remained closed until January 1915, and allowed only limited trading during 1915. The Paris Stock exchange reopened in 1915 and the Berlin Stock Exchange reopened in 1917.
Although the New York Stock Exchange itself did not reopen until December, curb trading in New York began in September. The prices of stocks actually hit their lowest point in October of 1914, and by the time the market reopened in December, stocks had returned to the level they had been at before World War I began. The market continued to rise until November 1916. World War I provided an important lesson for financial markets. Closing them does not solve any problems. It is best to let markets digest the information and allow financial prices to reflect the change in circumstances.
Currency market were initially disrupted by the war, with the British Pound rising 20% against the US Dollar as people tried to repatriate money to England, but within a week of the beginning of the war, currency exchange rates returned to their pre-war levels. Bond markets were generally unaffected by the war. Interest rates only began to rise once inflation began to build up later in the war.
This pattern, as we will see, was consistently followed in other crises. Initially, there is a flight to safety, leading to declines in the market and increases in the value of commodities. Once the long-term impact of the crisis is understood, markets return to their conditions before the crisis. Thereafter, markets move up or down as investors perceive that the crisis will be resolved.
World War II
There were several phases to how markets reacted to World War II. There were a series of crises during World War II: the attack of Germany on Poland in September 1939, the attack on France and the collapse of France in May 1940, and the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
Surprisingly, the New York Stock Market rose when Germany attacked Poland on September 1, 1939, primarily because investors thought the United States would benefit from the demand for goods generated by the war. The market barely moved until the collapse of France in May 1940. The collapse of France and Dunkirk precipitated a 25% decline in the market in May 1940 in a massive sell-off. But again, the market jumped back quickly. The market first bottomed on May 22 and hit its final bottom on June 11, 1940. As the news got worse in the war, markets gradually declined throughout 1941, and when Pearl Harbor was attacked, the market declined around 10% in the next two weeks. The market bottomed in April 1942, and moved up after that for the rest of the war as the war moved in the favor of the Allies.
Unlike World War I, the New York Stock Exchange did not close during World War II. The London Stock Exchange was closed for only one week in September when Germany attacked Poland. The New York Stock Exchange remained open throughout the war. In fact, the NYSE was open on Monday, December 8, the day after the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Stock Exchanges found that people will find a way to trade stocks and other financial assets outside of the exchanges if people cannot trade stocks on open markets. Moreover, the quicker markets are allowed to process news, the quicker markets can adjust to the economic and financial changes that have occurred.
The Gulf War
During the Gulf War, the market followed the pattern shown in World War I and World War II. Stock markets sold off and oil prices rose when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Oil prices were at $17 a barrel at the end of June 1990, and peaked at $40 on October 9, 1990. The price then proceeded to decline to $20 a barrel by January of 1991, and continued to decline throughout most of the 1990s.
The stock market had been rising prior to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The market topped out on July 17, 1990 and declined 20% until the market bottomed on October 11, 1990. When the attack on Iraq finally began, the market jumped up, rising almost 20% over the next month. The war was over with in a few days and despite a recession in the United States that followed the Gulf War, the market did not decline and stayed within a trading range for the rest of 1991.
During the Gulf War there was a reduction in airplane travel, which did affect the airline industry. But the long-term impact on stock markets and even oil markets was minimal, even though it was followed by a recession in the United States. In fact, the price of oil continued to decline after the war was over with.
The 1993 World Trade Center Bombing
The World Trade Center was bombed on February 26, 1993. This attack had virtually no impact on the stock market. In fact, the Dow Jones Industrials moved up on that day.
A similar situation occurred in August 1991 when there was an attempted coup in Russia. European markets sold off over 10% within one day, but recovered all of their losses within a week after the coup attempt collapsed. As in other crises, the market quickly recovered and never looked back once it was clear the crisis was over with.
The Terrorist Attack of September 2001
As could be expected, world markets sold off as soon as news of the attack was heard. The London Stock market was down 5%, Germany 8% and Paris 5%. US Stock Markets never opened because the attack occurred before 9:30.
What will be the reaction of financial markets to this crisis?
This event is different from the other crises because it was a direct attack on the financial center of the United States. The World Trade Center houses many of the most important financial firms in the world, including the New York Mercantile Exchange, which physically no longer exists. This raises important concerns because many of the people who operate financial markets in the United States probably died.
But as we have seen, markets bounce back from these crises and bounce back quickly. The reason is that markets are efficient at processing information. They both overreact initially when the crisis occurs, and quickly bounce back once markets have determined the impact of these crises on the economy will be minimal.
The primary way in which this attack could impact financial markets is if it materially impacts the economy. In and of itself, the attack is unlikely to do this. It all depends upon how the government reacts to return the economy and the market to normal in the next few weeks. One fear would be that the attack might lead to greater isolationism in the world economy, but this would be exactly the wrong reaction. Globalization of markets and trade has provided immense benefits over the past decades and in many ways was responsible for the growth in the world economy during the 1990s. If anything, this attack should make provide us with an even greater commitment to free trade to defeat the goals of the terrorists.
Although many people worry that the integration of the world’s stock markets could cause a ripple effect through the world’s markets, and that their integration makes them all vulnerable to attack. The technology that is currently available can also help markets to bounce back. Markets such as Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange require no physical location. One result of the terrorist attack may be to quicken the move of financial markets into cyberspace. Exchanges with a single location where stocks or commodities can be traded are likely to become rarer in the future. Experience of previous crises shows that people find ways to buy and sell financial assets regardless of whether markets are officially open or not.
To conclude, markets quickly assess the impact of crises. The quicker markets are allowed to digest news, the quicker markets can recover from the crisis. The consistent pattern in past crises is a sell off when the news breaks, a short period of evaluation, and a bounce back in financial markets once investors realize that the crisis, in and of itself, will not have a long-term impact on financial markets.
The key to making sure that this crisis does not impact the rest of the economy and the global economy, and push an already weak global economy into recession is to keep financial markets open and promote international trade".
Dr. Bryan Taylor
Global Financial Data
September 12, 2001
Dr. Bryan Taylor
Global Financial Data
September 12, 2001
Il debito delle famiglie
Indebitamento delle famiglie italiane
525 miliardi di euro
Indebitamento finanziario delle famiglie
(in percentuale del reddito disponibile lordo)
Fonte: Banca d'Italia, Istat
Crescita del mercato del credito al consumo in Italia
(dati in percentuale)
Fonte: Osservatorio Assofin
Honda - 90
Honda Motor Co. said Friday its fiscal third-quarter profit totaled 20.2 billion yen ($222 million), or 11 yen a share, from 200 billion yen, or 110 yen a share, in the same quarter a year before. Like many of its peers with strong export business, the No. 2 Japanese automaker was hit by a strengthening yen and reduced demand due to the global economic slump. Revenue for the quarter was 2.53 trillion yen compared to 3.04 trillion yen in the year-ago period. Honda also said it had reduced its profit outlook for the full fiscal year ending March 31 to 80 billion yen, which would mark an 87% drop from the previous year's results.
Thursday 29 January 2009
Bonus 2008 a Wall Street: 18,4 miliardi
Despite crippling losses, multibillion-dollar bailouts and the passing of some of the most prominent names in the business, employees at financial companies in New York, the now-diminished world capital of capital, collected an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses for the year.
That was the sixth-largest haul on record, according to a report released Wednesday by the New York State comptroller.
While the payouts paled next to the riches of recent years, Wall Street workers still took home about as much as they did in 2004, when the Dow Jones industrial average was flying above 10,000, on its way to a record high.
Some bankers took home millions last year even as their employers lost billions.
The comptroller’s estimate, a closely watched guidepost of the annual December-January bonus season, is based largely on personal income tax collections. It excludes stock option awards that could push the figures even higher.
The state comptroller, Thomas P. DiNapoli, said it was unclear if banks had used taxpayer money for the bonuses, a possibility that strikes corporate governance experts, and indeed many ordinary Americans, as outrageous. He urged the Obama administration to examine the issue closely.
“The issue of transparency is a significant one, and there needs to be an accounting about whether there was any taxpayer money used to pay bonuses or to pay for corporate jets or dividends or anything else,” Mr. DiNapoli said in an interview.
Granted, New York’s bankers and brokers are far poorer than they were in 2006, when record deals, and the record profits they generated, ushered in an era of Wall Street hyperwealth. All told, bonuses fell 44 percent last year, from $32.9 billion in 2007, the largest decline in dollar terms on record.
But the size of that downturn partly reflected the lofty heights to which bonuses had soared during the bull market. At many banks, those payouts were based on profits that turned out to be ephemeral. Throughout the financial industry, years of earnings have vanished in the flames of the credit crisis.
According to Mr. DiNapoli, the brokerage units of New York financial companies lost more than $35 billion in 2008, triple their losses in 2007. The pain is unlikely to end there, and Wall Street is betting that the Obama administration will move swiftly to buy some of banks’ troubled assets to encourage reluctant banks to make loans.
Many corporate governance experts, investors and lawmakers question why financial companies that have accepted taxpayer money paid any bonuses at all. Financial industry executives argue that they need to pay their best workers well in order to keep them, but with many banks cutting jobs, job options are dwindling, even for stars.
Lucian A. Bebchuk, a professor at Harvard Law School and expert on executive compensation, called the 2008 bonus figure “disconcerting.” Bonuses, he said, are meant to reward good performance and retain employees. But Wall Street disbursed billions despite staggering losses and a shrinking job market.
“This was neither the sixth-best year in terms of aggregate profits, nor was it the sixth-most-difficult year in terms of retaining employees,” Professor Bebchuk said.
Echoing Mr. DiNapoli, Professor Bebchuk said he was concerned that banks might be using taxpayer money to subsidize bonuses or dividends to stockholders. “What the government has been trying to do is shore up capital, and any diversion of capital out of banks, whether in the form of dividends or large payments to employees, really undermines what we are trying to do,” he said.
Jesse M. Brill, a lawyer and expert on executive compensation, said government bailout programs like the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, should be made more transparent.
“We are all flying in the dark,” Mr. Brill said. “Companies can simply say they are trying to do their best to comply with compensation limits without providing any of the details that the public is entitled to.”
Bonuses paid by one troubled Wall Street firm, Merrill Lynch, have come under particular scrutiny during the last week.
Andrew M. Cuomo, the New York attorney general, has issued subpoenas to John A. Thain, Merrill’s former chief executive, and to an executive at Bank of America, which recently acquired Merrill, asking for information about Merrill’s decision to pay $4 billion to $5 billion in bonuses despite new, gaping losses that forced Bank of America to seek a second financial lifeline from Washington.
A Treasury department official said that in the coming weeks, the department would take action to further ensure taxpayer money is not used to pay bonuses.
Even though Wall Street spent billions on bonuses, New York firms squeezed rank-and-file executives harder than many companies in other fields. Outside the financial industry, many corporate executives received fatter bonuses in 2008, even as the economy lost 2.6 million jobs. According to data from Equilar, a compensation research firm, the average performance-based bonuses for top executives, other than the chief executive, at 132 companies with revenues of more than $1 billion increased by 14 percent, to $265,594, in the 2008 fiscal year.
For New York State and New York City, however, the leaner times on Wall Street will hurt, Mr. DiNapoli said.
Mr. DiNapoli said the average Wall Street bonus declined 36.7 percent, to $112,000. That is smaller than the overall 44 percent decline because the money was spread among a smaller pool following thousands of job losses.
The comptroller said the reduction in bonuses would cost New York State nearly $1 billion in income tax revenue and cost New York City $275 million.
On Wall Street, where money is the ultimate measure, some employees apparently feel slighted by their diminished bonuses. A poll of 900 financial industry employees released on Wednesday by eFinancialCareers.com, a job search Web site, found that while nearly eight out of 10 got bonuses, 46 percent thought they deserved more».
What Red Ink? Wall Street Paid Hefty Bonuses
The Story So Far: Greed + Incompetence + A Belief in Market Efficiency = Disaster
The dominant economic theorists so valued orderliness and rationality that they actually grew to believe it, and this false conviction became increasingly dangerous. It was why Greenspan and Bernanke were not sure that bubbles – outbursts of serious irrationality – could even exist. It was why Bernanke, who had studied the bubble of 1929, could still not see it as proof of irrationality and could still view the Depression (à la Milton Friedman) as a mere consequence of incredibly bad, easily avoidable policy measures.
Of more recent importance, it was why Bernanke could dismiss a dangerous 100-year bubble in U.S. housing as being nonexistent. It was why Hyman Minsky was marginalized as an economist despite his brilliant insight of the “near inevitability” of periodic financial crises. It was why the suggestion in academic circles of stock market inefficiencies, let alone major dysfunctionality, was considered a heresy. It was why Burton Malkiel could rationalize the 1987 crash as being an efficient response to 12 or so triggers. These triggers, however, had a trivial weakness: seasoned portfolio managers at the time had never even heard of most of them. Never underestimate the power of a dominant academic idea to choke off competing ideas, and never underestimate the unwillingness of academics to change their views in the face of evidence. They have decades of their research and their academic standing to defend.
The incredibly inaccurate efficient market theory was believed in totality by many of our financial leaders, and believed in part by almost all. It left our economic and governmental establishment sitting by confi dently, even as a lethally dangerous combination of asset bubbles, lax controls, pernicious incentives, and wickedly complicated instruments led to our current plight. “Surely none of this could happen in a rational, effi cient world,” they seemed to be thinking. And the absolutely worst aspect of this belief set was that it led to a chronic underestimation of the dangers of asset bubbles breaking – the very severe loss of perceived wealth and the stranded debt that comes with a savage write-down of assets. Well, it’s nice to get that off my chest once again!».
CDS: case automobilistiche e Credit Suisse
Il costo per assicurarsi dal default delle case autobilistiche europee continua a crescere così come per Credit Suisse.
CDS Report: Equities spoil the mood in credit markets
CDS Report: Equities spoil the mood in credit markets
Wednesday 28 January 2009
Free Market: fiducia ai minimi
«I started my day in Davos with Richard Edelman of the eponymous public relations company at a breakfast to launch its annual trust barometer report.
The conclusion is that trust in chief executives and private enterprise is at an all-time low. Trust in US business fell from 58 per cent last year to 38 per cent, bringing it in line with levels similar to the other side of the Atlantic.
The statistic I found most interesting is that only 49 per cent of Americans, living in the country of capitalism and free enterprise, thought the free market should be allowed to operate independently».
John Gapper - FT.com/davosblog
The conclusion is that trust in chief executives and private enterprise is at an all-time low. Trust in US business fell from 58 per cent last year to 38 per cent, bringing it in line with levels similar to the other side of the Atlantic.
The statistic I found most interesting is that only 49 per cent of Americans, living in the country of capitalism and free enterprise, thought the free market should be allowed to operate independently».
Paulson chiude le posizioni su RBS e porta a casa 370 milioni
«U.S. hedge fund Paulson & Co made a profit of at least 270 million pounds ($376.2 million) betting on a fall in the share price of Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS.L) over the past four months, the Financial Times reported.
The newspaper said Paulson, run by billionaire John Paulson, covered its short position in RBS on Friday, according to a regulatory filing, dropping below the 0.25 percent disclosure limit.
Paulson & Co was not immediately available for comment.
British banking stocks slumped last Friday after a ban on hedge funds short-selling banks came to an end. Shares in RBS fell by 13 percent that day.
Short-sellers borrow and sell shares in the hope of buying them back for less and making profits after the price has fallen».
The newspaper said Paulson, run by billionaire John Paulson, covered its short position in RBS on Friday, according to a regulatory filing, dropping below the 0.25 percent disclosure limit.
Paulson & Co was not immediately available for comment.
British banking stocks slumped last Friday after a ban on hedge funds short-selling banks came to an end. Shares in RBS fell by 13 percent that day.
Short-sellers borrow and sell shares in the hope of buying them back for less and making profits after the price has fallen».
Tuesday 27 January 2009
- 70.000
+ Drugmaker Pfizer Inc, which is acquiring rival Wyeth, plans to cut 15% of the companies' combined 130,000 workers - about 19,500 jobs.
+ Caterpillar Inc, the world's largest maker of heavy equipment, plans to lay off 17,000 workers and buy out 2,500 others to cut costs.
+ U.S. mobile phone service provider Sprint Nextel Corp plans to reduce staff by 8,000, or 14% of its work force.
+ Home Depot Inc, the world's largest home improvement retailer, said it would eliminate 7,000 jobs, or 2% of its work force, as it closes its Expo home design unit.
+ Amsterdam-based banking and insurance group ING said it plans to cut 7,000 jobs to save US$1.3-billion (1 billion euros) in 2009.
+ Dutch conglomerate Philips Electronics will cut 6,000 jobs after reporting its first loss since 2003.
+ Corus, Europe's No. 2 steelmaker, said it would cut 3,500 jobs worldwide, 8% of its work force.
+ Spanish steel producer Acerinox said it may temporarily lay off workers at its Spanish factory, which employs 2,500 people, if demand does not improve.
+ Caterpillar Inc, the world's largest maker of heavy equipment, plans to lay off 17,000 workers and buy out 2,500 others to cut costs.
+ U.S. mobile phone service provider Sprint Nextel Corp plans to reduce staff by 8,000, or 14% of its work force.
+ Home Depot Inc, the world's largest home improvement retailer, said it would eliminate 7,000 jobs, or 2% of its work force, as it closes its Expo home design unit.
+ Amsterdam-based banking and insurance group ING said it plans to cut 7,000 jobs to save US$1.3-billion (1 billion euros) in 2009.
+ Dutch conglomerate Philips Electronics will cut 6,000 jobs after reporting its first loss since 2003.
+ Corus, Europe's No. 2 steelmaker, said it would cut 3,500 jobs worldwide, 8% of its work force.
+ Spanish steel producer Acerinox said it may temporarily lay off workers at its Spanish factory, which employs 2,500 people, if demand does not improve.
Dopo Madoff e Nadel ecco Cosmo
Un altro Ponzi Scheme è venuto alla luce: Nicholas Cosmo/Agape World Inc (New York's Long Island).
Buco stimato: 400 milioni.
La banda dei 25 al centro della crisi
- Alan Greenspan, chairman of US Federal Reserve 1987- 2006
- Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England
- Bill Clinton, former US president
- Gordon Brown, prime minister
- George W Bush, former US president
- Senator Phil Gramm
- Abby Cohen, Goldman Sachs chief US strategist
- Kathleen Corbet, former CEO, Standard & Poor's
- "Hank" Greenberg, AIG insurance group
- Andy Hornby, former HBOS boss
- Sir Fred Goodwin, former RBS boss
- Steve Crawshaw, former B&B boss
- Adam Applegarth, former Northern Rock boss
- Dick Fuld, Lehman Brothers chief executive
- Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin
- Lewis Ranieri
- Joseph Cassano, AIG Financial Products
- Chuck Prince, former Citi boss
- Angelo Mozilo, Countrywide Financial
- Stan O'Neal, former boss of Merrill Lynch
- Jimmy Cayne, former Bear Stearns boss
- Christopher Dodd, chairman, Senate banking committee (Democrat)
- Geir Haarde, Icelandic prime minister
- The American public
- John Tiner, FSA chief executive, 2003-07
Wednesday 21 January 2009
Quale soluzione adotterà Barack Obama per tentare di risolvere la crisi?
- vendita dei toxic assets sul mercato attraverso apposite aste;
- costituzione di una garanzia da parte dello Stato a favore delle banche in caso di svalutazione (i.e. il modello Citi e BofA);
- creazione di una bad bank sulla base del modello svedese.
Certo non è un problema di facile soluzione per il neo presidente.
Bond anti crisi: e la trasparenza?
Il Sole 24 Ore riporta la notizia che una nuova versione del decreto attuativo del Tesoro per l'emissione dei bond delle banche destinato a essere sottoscritto da via XX settembre e' sui tavoli delle maggiori banche italiane.
Ma sul sito del Ministero non vi è nulla di pubblicato in tema, né la prima bozza né la seconda bozza del decreto sono pubblici. Complimenti per la trasparenza!
Tuesday 20 January 2009
Il sistema bancario USA è fallito? Secondo Roubini sì
Nouriel Roubini is just a day late to make the most depressing day of the year just that little bit more painful, but his latest missive is sure to continue the pain into Tuesday.FT Alphaville
By his calculations we are not even halfway through the fallout from the financial crisis. In fact, we seem at least a couple of trillion away from it:
U.S. financial losses from the credit crisis may reach $3.6 trillion, suggesting the banking system is “effectively insolvent,” said New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini, who predicted last year’s economic crisis.
“I’ve found that credit losses could peak at a level of 3.6 trillion for U.S. institutions, half of them by banks and broker dealers,” Roubini said at a conference in Dubai today. “If that’s true, it means the U.S. banking system is effectively insolvent because it starts with a capital of $1.4 trillion. This is a systemic banking crisis.”
Losses and writedowns at financial companies worldwide have risen to more than $1 trillion since the U.S. subprime mortgage market collapsed in 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg…
“The problems of Citi, Bank of America and others suggest the system is bankrupt,” Roubini said. “In Europe, it’s the same thing.”
On commodities, Roubini is also proving to be the anti-Goldman.
Oil prices will trade between $30 and $40 a barrel all year, Roubini predicted.
“I see commodities falling overall another 15-20 percent,” Roubini said. “This outlook for commodity prices is beneficial for oil importers, it’s going to imply that economic recovery might occur faster, but from the point of view of oil exporters, this will be very negative.”
Krugman, la Spagna e l'Euro
«… isn’t hard to explain. Spain was basically Florida, with a housing bubble inflated by both resident and holiday purchases, and now the bubble has burst.
But Spain is in worse shape than Florida, for two reasons — reasons familiar to anyone who was involved in the great debate about whether the euro was a good idea.
First, Europe doesn’t have a central government; Spain, unlike Florida, can’t draw on Social Security and Medicare checks from Washington. So the burden of recession falls entirely on the local budget — hence the country’s declining credit rating.
Second, the United States has a more or less geographically integrated labor market: workers move from distressed regions to those with better prospects. (The housing bust has, however, reduced mobility because people can’t sell their houses.) Europe does not: yes, there’s a fair bit of mobility both among the elite and among low-wage workers at the bottom, but nothing like the US level.
So what can Spain do? It needs to become more competitive — but it can’t have a devaluation, because it’s a euro country. So the only alternative is wage cuts, which are desperately hard to achieve (and create big problems for debtors.)
Contrary to what everyone seemed to be saying even a few weeks ago, being a member of the eurozone doesn’t immunize countries against crisis. In Spain’s case (and Italy’s, and Ireland’s, and Greece’s) the euro may well be making things worse.
And Britain’s plunging pound, unpopular though it is, may turn out to have been a very good thing».
Pain in Spain
But Spain is in worse shape than Florida, for two reasons — reasons familiar to anyone who was involved in the great debate about whether the euro was a good idea.
First, Europe doesn’t have a central government; Spain, unlike Florida, can’t draw on Social Security and Medicare checks from Washington. So the burden of recession falls entirely on the local budget — hence the country’s declining credit rating.
Second, the United States has a more or less geographically integrated labor market: workers move from distressed regions to those with better prospects. (The housing bust has, however, reduced mobility because people can’t sell their houses.) Europe does not: yes, there’s a fair bit of mobility both among the elite and among low-wage workers at the bottom, but nothing like the US level.
So what can Spain do? It needs to become more competitive — but it can’t have a devaluation, because it’s a euro country. So the only alternative is wage cuts, which are desperately hard to achieve (and create big problems for debtors.)
Contrary to what everyone seemed to be saying even a few weeks ago, being a member of the eurozone doesn’t immunize countries against crisis. In Spain’s case (and Italy’s, and Ireland’s, and Greece’s) the euro may well be making things worse.
And Britain’s plunging pound, unpopular though it is, may turn out to have been a very good thing».
Pain in Spain
Monday 19 January 2009
Fiat acquista un pezzo di Chrysler?
«Fiat SpA is in talks with Chrysler LLC over the possibility of taking a stake in the U.S. automaker as part of a strategic partnership that could allow Fiat to manufacture and sell its small cars in the U.S., according to a person familiar with the matter.
As part of the potential deal, Fiat aims to share its engine and transmission technology with Chrysler, according to the person familiar with the matter. This cooperation would allow the U.S. automaker to also introduce new models of small cars with low emissions to its fleet, this person added.
For months Fiat has been exploring ways to gain a foothold in the North American car market, hunting for a partner that could manufacture its Fiat 500 model and re-launch its high-end Alfa Romeo brand in the U.S.
As part of the deal, Fiat is exploring whether it could sell its cars through Chrysler's US dealership network, the person said.
A Chrysler spokesperson did not immediately return calls seeking comment».
WSJ.com
«Fiat is talking with Chrysler LLC about giving it access to its technology in exchange for a stake in the U.S. car maker, a source close to the Italian group said on Monday.
"Between the two groups there is talk about Chrysler possibly using Fiat technology in exchange for a stake," the source told Reuters, confirming a report by industry publication Automotive News Europe. The source spoke on condition of anonymity.
Citing people familiar with the matter, Automotive News said in a report posted on its website (www.autonews.com) earlier in the day that Fiat could give Chrysler access to platforms, engines and transmissions.
The source told Reuters a deal with Fiat would help Chrysler make vehicles that produce fewer harmful emissions.
"To get financing U.S. (car makers) have to show that they are really committed to developing over the short term a new family of vehicles that pollute less," the source said. "By itself, Chrysler would not be able to meet this condition."
Along with General Motors, Chrysler has gotten billions of euros in government loans to avert collapse in exchange for meeting certain cost-cutting targets and demonstrating that they are viable by the end of March.
Neither Fiat, Chrysler nor its owner, Cerberus Capital Management, were immediately available for comment.
Fiat's stock ended 4.9 percent lower at 4.48 euros, recovering some lost ground after earlier news that it could only meet its 2010 targets if the market returned to normal -- something seen by analysts as being far from likely.
BET ON CHRYSLER'S FUTURE
In an interview with the same publication in December, Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne said Fiat needed a partner because it was too small to survive the crisis alone. He said automakers needed to have scale -- producing at least 5.5-6.0 million cars a year -- to have a chance of making money.
One London analyst said scale was probably the reason behind Fiat's interest in Chrysler, despite the U.S. car maker's desperate situation.
"This is a bet that Chrysler in some form will exist (in the future)," he said on condition of anonymity.
Apart from Ferrari and Maserati, Fiat does not sell cars under its three other brands in the United States.
Before crisis struck the car industry and decimated sales, Fiat had been talking with the three U.S. automakers about using some of their idle production lines to help it make a return to the U.S. market.
A second London analyst said the stake that Fiat could take in Chrysler would likely be a token 5 percent. Fiat would probably use Chrysler's dealership network to sell small cars, something which is lacking from Chrysler's product portfolio, the analyst said.
Although Chrysler denies positioning itself for a sale, it has been in talks with other manufacturers.
Chrysler Vice Chairman Tom LaSorda said last week it was not selling brands but hoped to sell equipment used to make one of its models, the PT Cruiser.
He declined to comment on a Reuters report about Chrysler having discussed selling assets to Renault-Nissan and Magna International.
Seen as the weakest of the Detroit manufacturers, Chrysler is in such a difficult situation that analysts question whether it can survive without a merger partner.
It suffered a 30 percent drop in sales in 2008.
In the second half of 2008, it burned through $9 billion to end the year with $2 billion in cash.
In a bid to cut costs and save cash, it has shut down all 30 of its U.S. plants for a month from the middle of December.
Fiat and other car makers have also been halting production to lower their inventories of unsold vehicles.
Moving the metal has meant offering attractive deals to lure drivers back to showrooms.
In Chrysler's case, its finance arm has begun offering zero percent financing after getting a $1.5 billion loan from the U.S. Treasury».
As part of the potential deal, Fiat aims to share its engine and transmission technology with Chrysler, according to the person familiar with the matter. This cooperation would allow the U.S. automaker to also introduce new models of small cars with low emissions to its fleet, this person added.
For months Fiat has been exploring ways to gain a foothold in the North American car market, hunting for a partner that could manufacture its Fiat 500 model and re-launch its high-end Alfa Romeo brand in the U.S.
As part of the deal, Fiat is exploring whether it could sell its cars through Chrysler's US dealership network, the person said.
A Chrysler spokesperson did not immediately return calls seeking comment».
WSJ.com
«Fiat is talking with Chrysler LLC about giving it access to its technology in exchange for a stake in the U.S. car maker, a source close to the Italian group said on Monday.
"Between the two groups there is talk about Chrysler possibly using Fiat technology in exchange for a stake," the source told Reuters, confirming a report by industry publication Automotive News Europe. The source spoke on condition of anonymity.
Citing people familiar with the matter, Automotive News said in a report posted on its website (www.autonews.com) earlier in the day that Fiat could give Chrysler access to platforms, engines and transmissions.
The source told Reuters a deal with Fiat would help Chrysler make vehicles that produce fewer harmful emissions.
"To get financing U.S. (car makers) have to show that they are really committed to developing over the short term a new family of vehicles that pollute less," the source said. "By itself, Chrysler would not be able to meet this condition."
Along with General Motors, Chrysler has gotten billions of euros in government loans to avert collapse in exchange for meeting certain cost-cutting targets and demonstrating that they are viable by the end of March.
Neither Fiat, Chrysler nor its owner, Cerberus Capital Management, were immediately available for comment.
Fiat's stock ended 4.9 percent lower at 4.48 euros, recovering some lost ground after earlier news that it could only meet its 2010 targets if the market returned to normal -- something seen by analysts as being far from likely.
BET ON CHRYSLER'S FUTURE
In an interview with the same publication in December, Fiat Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne said Fiat needed a partner because it was too small to survive the crisis alone. He said automakers needed to have scale -- producing at least 5.5-6.0 million cars a year -- to have a chance of making money.
One London analyst said scale was probably the reason behind Fiat's interest in Chrysler, despite the U.S. car maker's desperate situation.
"This is a bet that Chrysler in some form will exist (in the future)," he said on condition of anonymity.
Apart from Ferrari and Maserati, Fiat does not sell cars under its three other brands in the United States.
Before crisis struck the car industry and decimated sales, Fiat had been talking with the three U.S. automakers about using some of their idle production lines to help it make a return to the U.S. market.
A second London analyst said the stake that Fiat could take in Chrysler would likely be a token 5 percent. Fiat would probably use Chrysler's dealership network to sell small cars, something which is lacking from Chrysler's product portfolio, the analyst said.
Although Chrysler denies positioning itself for a sale, it has been in talks with other manufacturers.
Chrysler Vice Chairman Tom LaSorda said last week it was not selling brands but hoped to sell equipment used to make one of its models, the PT Cruiser.
He declined to comment on a Reuters report about Chrysler having discussed selling assets to Renault-Nissan and Magna International.
Seen as the weakest of the Detroit manufacturers, Chrysler is in such a difficult situation that analysts question whether it can survive without a merger partner.
It suffered a 30 percent drop in sales in 2008.
In the second half of 2008, it burned through $9 billion to end the year with $2 billion in cash.
In a bid to cut costs and save cash, it has shut down all 30 of its U.S. plants for a month from the middle of December.
Fiat and other car makers have also been halting production to lower their inventories of unsold vehicles.
Moving the metal has meant offering attractive deals to lure drivers back to showrooms.
In Chrysler's case, its finance arm has begun offering zero percent financing after getting a $1.5 billion loan from the U.S. Treasury».
La RIIA sconfitta?
The Recording Industry Association of America (R.I.A.A.) has quietly ended its campaign to sue illicit digital music sharing into oblivion, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The first R.I.A.A. lawsuits were filed in September 2003, against individuals allegedly caught sharing music illegally online. By the time R.I.A.A. halted its legal campaign this past fall, they’d managed to issue 35,000 suits, win none of them, spend more money on legal fees than they recovered in settlements, and plunge the industry into a public relations quagmire — all the while failing to stop either music piracy or the continuing decline of CD sales.
Meanwhile, innovations in legal distribution of digital music, especially music-based video games like Guitar Hero and Rock Band, have fueled a major rise in legitimate purchases of digital music, outside the music industry’s traditional business model.
To get a sense of the marketing power of these games, consider this: after Aerosmith’s song “Same Old Song and Dance” (released in 1974) was released for Guitar Hero, online sales of the old song surged, up 446 percent on iTunes and other legal sites for the two months after the Guitar Hero release.
Independent record labels are coming into their own, eating away at the market share of the four major music conglomerates. Musicians, from Radiohead to Jonathan Coulton and many others, are striking out on their own, distributing music themselves online, without having to give up any of their earnings to a label.
With these innovations changing the way we listen to music, and with more on the way, what is the likelihood that major record labels become as superfluous as full-fee real-estate agents, whose commissions rarely add value for homesellers?
Are Record Labels the New Realtors?
Direttiva Prospetto: consultazione
La Commissione Europea ha avviato una consultazione pubblica sulle proposte di modifica alla Direttiva Prospetto (Direttiva 2003/71/EC), con l’obiettivo di migliorarne e semplificarne l’applicazione a livello dei singoli Stati membri (è anche disponibile un cd. background document).
La Direttiva, attuata nel nostro ordinamento con il d.lgs. n. 51 del 2007 che ha modificato il Tuf, ha instaurato, tra l’altro, un sistema di regole di disclosure in materia di offerta pubblica o di ammissione alla negoziazione di strumenti finanziari.
A distanza di cinque anni dall’ entrata in vigore, la Commissione Europea ha ritenuto necessario, procedere ad un riesame del provvedimento elaborando proposte di revisione, parte delle quali suggerite dal Gruppo ESME.
La consultazione terminerà il 10 Marzo 2009.
Le proposte di modifica di interesse per gli emittenti riguardano:
La consultazione terminerà il 10 Marzo 2009.
Le proposte di modifica di interesse per gli emittenti riguardano:
1. Definizione di investitore qualificato: l’attuale nozione di “investitore qualificato” non comprende le figure, introdotte dalla Direttiva 2004/39/CE (MiFID), di “cliente professionale” e “controparte qualificata”. Ciò genera inevitabili difficoltà di coordinamento nonché maggiori costi di compliance per gli emittenti, specialmente per quanto riguarda l’individuazione dei soggetti destinatari dell’offerta di strumenti finanziari. La proposta mira ad estendere la portata della definizione di “investitore qualificato” per allinearla a quella dettata dalla MiFID.
2. Casi di esonero dall’obbligo di pubblicazione del prospetto: la proposta di modifica riguarda i casi di successive rivendite di valori mobiliari (cd “retail cascade”), che si realizzano quando il collocamento di strumenti finanziari avviene tramite intermediari finanziari e non attraverso l’emittente. La Commissione ritiene che la pubblicazione di un nuovo prospetto corrispondente rappresenti un requisito eccessivamente gravoso per gli emittenti e ne suggerisce pertanto l’eliminazione.
3. Strumenti finanziari offerti a dipendenti: l’offerta di strumenti finanziari ad amministratori o dipendenti rientra tra le ipotesi di esenzione dall’obbligo di pubblicazione del prospetto. Tale previsione non trova applicazione nei confronti delle società non quotate e nei confronti delle società quotate in un mercato regolamentato extra UE. La Commissione ritiene opportuno estendere l’esenzione anche a queste società poiché la redazione del prospetto impone costi che non sono giustificati in termini di protezione degli investitori.
4. Informazioni: la previsione attuale che impone agli emittenti la pubblicazione di un documento annuale riepilogativo di tutte le informazioni rese disponibili nei precedenti dodici mesi, risulta superata e ridondante in virtù della disciplina introdotta dalla Direttiva Transparency (Direttiva 2004/109/CE) che prevede la pubblicazione delle cd. informazioni regolamentate che include buona parte di quelle pubblicate nel documento ex art. 10 della Direttiva Prospetto. La Commissione propone pertanto la rimozione dell’articolo in commento.
5. Revoca dell’accettazione del prospetto: oggi, qualora, dopo la pubblicazione del prospetto, sopravvengano nuovi fatti significativi in grado di influire sulla valutazione degli strumenti finanziari, gli investitori possono revocare l’accettazione del prospetto entro un certo termine dalla pubblicazione del supplemento. Dall’esame delle soluzioni adottate nei singoli Stati emerge una carenza di armonizzazione nella definizione di questo termine. Si ritiene pertanto necessario fissare in due giorni lavorativi dopo la pubblicazione del supplemento del prospetto l’intervallo temporale comune.
6. Modifica delle soglie per la determinazione dello Stato membro d’origine: gli emittenti di strumenti finanziari diversi dai titoli di capitale possono scegliere lo Stato membro d’origine solo laddove il valore nominale unitario degli strumenti suddetti sia almeno 1000 euro; la rimozione di tale soglia permetterebbe agli emittenti di scegliere, case-by-case, l’autorità competente più appropriata.
La crisi dei mutui: un aiuto dal mondo dell'eros
Jayshree Gupta reclined on an English-style sofa in her Beverly Hills penthouse as crews buzzed around taping protective paper over the hardwood floors and wheeling in crates of camera gear.
She was hosting a television-commercial shoot. It meant allowing dozens of strangers and 400-pound klieg lights into her home for a full day, and it was worth every minute, Gupta said.
“I am doing it because I need money to maintain my lifestyle,” she said, perched near a portrait of herself painted by her friend Barbara Carrera, the Bond girl in 1983’s “Never Say Never Again.” “A lot of my money is either gone or tied up. Right now I am hurting.”
Gupta, a clothing and jewelry designer, is among an increasing number of recession-pinched Los Angeles homeowners turning to Hollywood for help, offering their houses as sets for feature films, commercials and even adult movies.
“We are getting a lot of calls,” said Joseph Darrell, whose Los Angeles-based Joe Darrell Location Service represents Gupta. “They say, ‘Can you help me to bring a production to my home, because I have trouble making my payments.’”
The daily fee paid for the sort of work done at Gupta’s 3,000-square-foot condo in the city’s signature 90210 ZIP code is usually $2,000 to $3,000, Darrell said. That would cover about half of her monthly household bills, including maid service.
Bloomberg.com
She was hosting a television-commercial shoot. It meant allowing dozens of strangers and 400-pound klieg lights into her home for a full day, and it was worth every minute, Gupta said.
“I am doing it because I need money to maintain my lifestyle,” she said, perched near a portrait of herself painted by her friend Barbara Carrera, the Bond girl in 1983’s “Never Say Never Again.” “A lot of my money is either gone or tied up. Right now I am hurting.”
Gupta, a clothing and jewelry designer, is among an increasing number of recession-pinched Los Angeles homeowners turning to Hollywood for help, offering their houses as sets for feature films, commercials and even adult movies.
“We are getting a lot of calls,” said Joseph Darrell, whose Los Angeles-based Joe Darrell Location Service represents Gupta. “They say, ‘Can you help me to bring a production to my home, because I have trouble making my payments.’”
The daily fee paid for the sort of work done at Gupta’s 3,000-square-foot condo in the city’s signature 90210 ZIP code is usually $2,000 to $3,000, Darrell said. That would cover about half of her monthly household bills, including maid service.
Bloomberg.com
Gordon si è risentito
Gordon Brown today said he was "angry" with the Royal Bank of Scotland over a strategy that has left it with potential losses of £28 billion, as the Prime Minister defended the Government’s second attempt to rescue Britain’s struggling lenders.
Mr Brown said this morning that Britons had a right to be furious at "irresponsible" behaviour which saw RBS spend billions last year acquiring ABN Amro, the Dutch bank which had exposure to US sub-prime mortgages, as well as investing directly in the American home loan market.
“Yes, I’m angry about what happened at the Royal Bank of Scotland," he said.
(...)
Mr Brown added: "Now we know that so much was lost in sub-prime loans in the US and now we know that some of that was related to the purchase of ABN Amro, I think people have a right to be angry that these write-offs are happening and that these write-offs were caused by decisions that were made about international investments that were clearly wrong investments.”
RBS confirmed this morning that it will report a full-year loss in February which could hit £28 billion - with £20 billion of the total related to the acquisition of ABN.
It is the biggest-ever loss in British corporate history and is nearly double to current £15 billion record set by Vodafone, the UK telecoms giant, in 2006.
RBS also confirmed that the Government is set to increase its stake in the bank from 58 per cent to 70 per cent. Last October, the Treasury sank £37 billion into the banking sector – the Government’s first attempt to stabilise the market – with RBS taking £20 billion of funding.
Mr Brown said this morning that Britons had a right to be furious at "irresponsible" behaviour which saw RBS spend billions last year acquiring ABN Amro, the Dutch bank which had exposure to US sub-prime mortgages, as well as investing directly in the American home loan market.
“Yes, I’m angry about what happened at the Royal Bank of Scotland," he said.
(...)
Mr Brown added: "Now we know that so much was lost in sub-prime loans in the US and now we know that some of that was related to the purchase of ABN Amro, I think people have a right to be angry that these write-offs are happening and that these write-offs were caused by decisions that were made about international investments that were clearly wrong investments.”
RBS confirmed this morning that it will report a full-year loss in February which could hit £28 billion - with £20 billion of the total related to the acquisition of ABN.
It is the biggest-ever loss in British corporate history and is nearly double to current £15 billion record set by Vodafone, the UK telecoms giant, in 2006.
RBS also confirmed that the Government is set to increase its stake in the bank from 58 per cent to 70 per cent. Last October, the Treasury sank £37 billion into the banking sector – the Government’s first attempt to stabilise the market – with RBS taking £20 billion of funding.
RBS - 28
Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) confirmed today that losses for the full-year could reach as much as £28 billion ...
The bank said this morning that it will make an annual loss of between £7 billion and £8 billion, when it announces its results on February 26.
However, it also expects to announce a charge of between £15 billion and £20 billion related to last year's acquisition of ABN Amro, the Dutch bank, which it acquired with Spain's Santander and Fortis, the Belgium bank.
The potential £28 billion loss is nearly twice the size of Vodafone's £15 billion deficit in 2006, currently the biggest-ever corporate loss in UK history.
Times Online
The bank said this morning that it will make an annual loss of between £7 billion and £8 billion, when it announces its results on February 26.
However, it also expects to announce a charge of between £15 billion and £20 billion related to last year's acquisition of ABN Amro, the Dutch bank, which it acquired with Spain's Santander and Fortis, the Belgium bank.
The potential £28 billion loss is nearly twice the size of Vodafone's £15 billion deficit in 2006, currently the biggest-ever corporate loss in UK history.
Times Online
Collapse of confidence in banks
As I said this morning, this is not a bank rescue plan. But if it had been, it would have failed miserably.
Barclays' share price has fallen again today. At the current price of 90p, this bank's entire market value is £7.5bn. And remember, this is a bank that said on Friday night that its profits for 2008 were considerably more than £5.3bn.
In other words, investors currently value this giant international bank at a little over one year's profits. Which is little short of extraordinary.
And let's not even mention that Royal Bank of Scotland's shares are down by more than 50%, on the supposedly reassuring news that taxpayers will be sharing in its future pain.
Confidence has drained from the banking system. And to state the obvious, today's myriad announcements from the Treasury have not succeeded in rebuilding that confidence, which is so vital to a functioning economy.
Peston's Pick
Barclays' share price has fallen again today. At the current price of 90p, this bank's entire market value is £7.5bn. And remember, this is a bank that said on Friday night that its profits for 2008 were considerably more than £5.3bn.
In other words, investors currently value this giant international bank at a little over one year's profits. Which is little short of extraordinary.
And let's not even mention that Royal Bank of Scotland's shares are down by more than 50%, on the supposedly reassuring news that taxpayers will be sharing in its future pain.
Confidence has drained from the banking system. And to state the obvious, today's myriad announcements from the Treasury have not succeeded in rebuilding that confidence, which is so vital to a functioning economy.
Peston's Pick
OECD says EU Should Consider Single Financial Supervisor
The OECD urges a more centralized and integrated approach to financial regulation in European Union, including considering a single supervisor.
In its just released Economic Survey of the Euro Area, the OECD accepts that the current regulatory regime in the EU does have a number of advantages. It aligns regulatory and legal responsibility for firms with political and fiscal responsibility, should things go wrong, and with the operation of national insolvency law and the operation of national deposit guarantee schemes. “However, the EU’s current regime and the patchwork of different instruments, institutions and responsibilities does carry some disadvantages, especially as large complex financial institutions have extensive cross-border activities and the potential to have a significant impact on the wider economy, the OECD says.
In its just released Economic Survey of the Euro Area, the OECD accepts that the current regulatory regime in the EU does have a number of advantages. It aligns regulatory and legal responsibility for firms with political and fiscal responsibility, should things go wrong, and with the operation of national insolvency law and the operation of national deposit guarantee schemes. “However, the EU’s current regime and the patchwork of different instruments, institutions and responsibilities does carry some disadvantages, especially as large complex financial institutions have extensive cross-border activities and the potential to have a significant impact on the wider economy, the OECD says.
Ue, crollo del Pil nel 2009:-1,9%
MILANO - La crisi economica e finanziaria si farà sentire anche nel 2009. E gli effetti saranno preoccupanti: crollo della produzione, milioni di posti di lavoro in meno, aumento del deficit dei vari Paesi. E l'Italia, in questo contesto, appare piuttosto esposta alle turbolenze. A dipingere un quadro tutt'altro che rassicurante sono le previsioni intermedie pubblicate da Eurostat. Primo dato: la Commissione Ue rivede drasticamente al ribasso le sue precedenti stime di crescita dell'economia europea e prevede per il 2009 un crollo del Pil (prodotto interno lordo) a quota -1,9%. Bruxelles, comunque, spera che la ripresa possa manifestarsi già entro la fine dell'anno, e prevede che il 2010 si chiuderà con un +0,4%. Tra i principali Paesi della zona euro, la Germania chiuderà il 2009 a quota -2,3%, la Francia -1,8% e la Spagna, come l'Italia, a -2%.
DEFICIT - La recessione, riducendo il Pil, fa schizzare in alto proporzionalmente i deficit pubblici dei paesi dell'eurozona (4,0% del Pil) e dell'Ue nel complesso (4,4%). Secondo le stime, fra i membri dell'euro il deficit più alto rispetto al Pil è quello dell'Irlanda (11,0%), che già nel 2008 era a 6,3%. Ma le previsioni sul deficit (vale a dire la spesa pubblica non coperta dalle entrate) sono molto oltre la barra del 3% anche per la Spagna (6,2%), la Francia (5,4%), e il Portogallo (4,6%). Sforamento, ma più lieve, anche per l'Italia (3,8%) e la Grecia (3,7%), mentre restano vicini ai limiti di Maastricht la Germania (2,9%) e il Belgio (3%). Fuori dall'eurozona, la caduta più impressionante è quella del Regno Unito (8,8%), ed è significativo anche il dato della Romania (7,5%). Va male anche per la Lituania (6,3%), mentre gli altri due Paesi baltici restano sul 3% (Lettonia) o poco sopra (Estonia, 3,2%).
DISOCCUPAZIONE - La disoccupazione fa, purtroppo, un balzo in avanti. Nella zona euro il dato sarà del 9,3% e nei Ventisette dell'8,7%, con 3,5 milioni di posti di lavoro in meno. In Italia il tasso di disoccupazione sarà dell'8,2%, contro il 6,7% del 2008. L'inflazione, nel nostro Paese, scenderà all'1,2% nel 2009, per poi risalire al 2,2% nel 2010. Nelle zona euro l'inflazione scenderà all'1% nel 2009 per poi salire all'1,8% il prossimo anno.
ITALIA - A proposito del nostro Paese, la Commissione europea spiega che «l'elevatissimo debito pubblico impedisce al governo di ricorrere in maniera più ampia a strumenti fiscali» per far fronte alla crisi. «Un ricorso agli stabilizzatori automatici - prosegue - porterebbe il disavanzo delle amministrazioni pubbliche ben al di sopra del 3% del Pil nel 2009, con un solo un marginale miglioramento atteso nel 2010. Questo, insieme con una crescita non certo esuberante - prosegue la Commissione Europea - implica l'aumento del debito. Ed eventuali ricapitalizzazioni bancarie potrebbero far salire ancora di più l'alto debito».
ALMUNIA - «Le misure anticrisi prese dal governo italiano - afferma il commissario Ue agli Affari economici, Joaquin Almunia - costituiscono una adeguata combinazione tra l'esigenza di stimolare l'economia e l'esigenza di mantenere prudenza» di bilancio. «L'8 febbraio - ha aggiunto Almunia - faremo una prima valutazione sui Paesi che si trovano con un deficit superiore al 3%. Io non posso dire al momento se ci sarà una procedura nei confronti dell'Italia».Corriere.it
DEFICIT - La recessione, riducendo il Pil, fa schizzare in alto proporzionalmente i deficit pubblici dei paesi dell'eurozona (4,0% del Pil) e dell'Ue nel complesso (4,4%). Secondo le stime, fra i membri dell'euro il deficit più alto rispetto al Pil è quello dell'Irlanda (11,0%), che già nel 2008 era a 6,3%. Ma le previsioni sul deficit (vale a dire la spesa pubblica non coperta dalle entrate) sono molto oltre la barra del 3% anche per la Spagna (6,2%), la Francia (5,4%), e il Portogallo (4,6%). Sforamento, ma più lieve, anche per l'Italia (3,8%) e la Grecia (3,7%), mentre restano vicini ai limiti di Maastricht la Germania (2,9%) e il Belgio (3%). Fuori dall'eurozona, la caduta più impressionante è quella del Regno Unito (8,8%), ed è significativo anche il dato della Romania (7,5%). Va male anche per la Lituania (6,3%), mentre gli altri due Paesi baltici restano sul 3% (Lettonia) o poco sopra (Estonia, 3,2%).
DISOCCUPAZIONE - La disoccupazione fa, purtroppo, un balzo in avanti. Nella zona euro il dato sarà del 9,3% e nei Ventisette dell'8,7%, con 3,5 milioni di posti di lavoro in meno. In Italia il tasso di disoccupazione sarà dell'8,2%, contro il 6,7% del 2008. L'inflazione, nel nostro Paese, scenderà all'1,2% nel 2009, per poi risalire al 2,2% nel 2010. Nelle zona euro l'inflazione scenderà all'1% nel 2009 per poi salire all'1,8% il prossimo anno.
ITALIA - A proposito del nostro Paese, la Commissione europea spiega che «l'elevatissimo debito pubblico impedisce al governo di ricorrere in maniera più ampia a strumenti fiscali» per far fronte alla crisi. «Un ricorso agli stabilizzatori automatici - prosegue - porterebbe il disavanzo delle amministrazioni pubbliche ben al di sopra del 3% del Pil nel 2009, con un solo un marginale miglioramento atteso nel 2010. Questo, insieme con una crescita non certo esuberante - prosegue la Commissione Europea - implica l'aumento del debito. Ed eventuali ricapitalizzazioni bancarie potrebbero far salire ancora di più l'alto debito».
ALMUNIA - «Le misure anticrisi prese dal governo italiano - afferma il commissario Ue agli Affari economici, Joaquin Almunia - costituiscono una adeguata combinazione tra l'esigenza di stimolare l'economia e l'esigenza di mantenere prudenza» di bilancio. «L'8 febbraio - ha aggiunto Almunia - faremo una prima valutazione sui Paesi che si trovano con un deficit superiore al 3%. Io non posso dire al momento se ci sarà una procedura nei confronti dell'Italia».Corriere.it
Il disastro della finanza globale
La storia degli ultimi trent’anni insegna: le recessioni peggiori dopo le crisi bancarie. Ne parla Massimo Mucchetti su Corriere.it.
USA: deflazione o inflazione?
Sunday 18 January 2009
Governance: più esperti nei board migliori risultati?
Secondo Hau, Steinbrecher e Thum le banche tedesche nel cui consiglio di sorveglianza sedevano o siedono persone competenti hanno sofferto minori perdite legate alla crisi dei subprime. Perciò una governance migliore potrebbe essere una soluzione per risolvere gli attuali problemi dell'industria finanziaria, senza dover attivare altri più penetranti strumenti di controllo di fonte normativa nei confronti delle banche.
Board (in)competence and the subprime crisis
Board (in)competence and the subprime crisis
I costi straordinari della finanza
Dicembre 2007 - gennaio 2009: stanziati 7,8 trillioni, spesi 3,3
Economy rescue: Adding up the dollars
Economy rescue: Adding up the dollars
Friday 16 January 2009
La mappa dei pignoramenti a fine 2008
RealtyTrac reported this week that in 2008, the U.S. had a total of 3,157,806 foreclosure filings — default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions — on 2,330,483 U.S. properties. This was an 81% increase over 2007, and a 225% percent increase from 2006.
The report also shows that 1.84 percent of all U.S. housing units (one in 54) received at least one foreclosure filing during the year, up from 1.03 percent in 2007.
The Big Picture
Altri Madoff all'orizzonte?
Politico suggests that the Obama Administration is concerned that during the current financial turmoil matters may become even more destabilized by the surfacing of additional frauds. One commentator noted that there was probably "another Bernie Madoff out there." Possible evidence?
Are there other firms out there with unblemished quarterly records? Yes. According to research done for Politico by Morningstar Inc., there are 1,684 hedge funds that have disclosed their results for the past 20 consecutive quarters. Of those, Morningstar found that 34 have never reported a down quarter in the past five years. And of those 34, at least seven funds, or their parent firms, are in some way connected to the Madoff scandal as investors in Madoff’s operation. That leaves 27 firms that have a five-year track record of gains and no known connection to Madoff.
To the extent that additional frauds surface and hedge funds rest at the center (either as the perpetrators of the fraud or as depositors with advisors who commit the fraud), it is worth remembering that on this issue the Securities and Exchange Commission tried to be proactive.
Are there other firms out there with unblemished quarterly records? Yes. According to research done for Politico by Morningstar Inc., there are 1,684 hedge funds that have disclosed their results for the past 20 consecutive quarters. Of those, Morningstar found that 34 have never reported a down quarter in the past five years. And of those 34, at least seven funds, or their parent firms, are in some way connected to the Madoff scandal as investors in Madoff’s operation. That leaves 27 firms that have a five-year track record of gains and no known connection to Madoff.
To the extent that additional frauds surface and hedge funds rest at the center (either as the perpetrators of the fraud or as depositors with advisors who commit the fraud), it is worth remembering that on this issue the Securities and Exchange Commission tried to be proactive.
It adopted a rule that required hedge funds to register with the agency and file reports about its activities.
What happened to the rule? The DC Circuit, the circuit full of political appointees who are often too toxic to get appointed in their own circuit (and who often want to attract the attention of those looking for prospective Supreme Court nominees), struck down the modest rule. Why? Parsing through the contorted reasoning of the decision, the panel largely objected to increased government regulation of the markets. In other words, it was less about law and more about an excessive deference to the market place. That philosophy explains in large part why we are in the current mess.
What happened to the rule? The DC Circuit, the circuit full of political appointees who are often too toxic to get appointed in their own circuit (and who often want to attract the attention of those looking for prospective Supreme Court nominees), struck down the modest rule. Why? Parsing through the contorted reasoning of the decision, the panel largely objected to increased government regulation of the markets. In other words, it was less about law and more about an excessive deference to the market place. That philosophy explains in large part why we are in the current mess.
The 10 most unethical people in business
- Bernard Madoff. Turns out a lot of people were suspicious of Madoff's ability to deliver high percentage returns like clockwork for long periods of time. It also turns out that he allegedly ran a $50 billion Ponzi scheme that, when discovered, ruined many a life savings. It's not yet clear how many people at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities knew of the scam, but it's clear that Madoff was the mastermind.
- David Colby. Colby, the former CFO of Wellpoint, was caught carrying on multiple affairs, even once texting "ABORT!!" to one of his many girlfriends after discovering she was pregnant. He carried on relationships with over 30 women and proposed to at least 12 of them.
- Rod Blagojevich. Blagojevich is the governor of Illinois who allegedly tried to "sell" the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama. Some reports say he tried to trade the seat for ambassadorships, money and positions within pro-union groups and even a $150,000 salary for his wife.
- Heinz-Joachim Neubürger, Karl-Hermann Baumann and Johannes Feldmayer. The two former CFOs and former chairman of Siemens, respectively, got busted over bribery and their company was fined billions. The bribes that they paid to earn contracts could not have been worth more than the $1.4 billion settlement the company agreed to pay.
- Ted Stevens. Stevens is the former senator from Alaska who was found guilty of failing to report gifts given to him by various contractors. He faces up to five years for each of the seven counts against him. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for February 25.
- Bruno A Kaelin. Kaelin, a former senior vice president and head of corporate compliance at Alstom, was arrested in Switzerland in August following a joint Franco-Swiss-Italian investigation into his alleged role in running a bribery slush fund and laundering hundreds of millions of euros. Prior to that, Kaelin was convicted in a separate bribery case in Italy involving payoffs to two officials of the Italian electric company Enel.
- Adam Vitale. Vitale was sentenced to 30 months in prison and $180,000 restitution to be paid to AOL after he found a way to spam 1.2 million AOL users in a way that avoided being caught by AOL's spam filter. Vitale also had 22 prior convictions, including running an online prostitution ring through Craigslist.
- Robert Rubin. Rubin, like it or not, became one of the faces tied to the 2008 financial crisis. His position of deregulation when he was Treasury secretary is now faulted by some for many of the problems of today. He also became the fall guy for Citigroup's business strategy of leveraging more risk.
- Marco Benatti. Benatti, a former Italian director of advertising for WPP, was accused of libel last year for calling WPP chief executive Sir Martin Sorrell a "mad dwarf" and was alleged to have secretly pocketed millions of pounds from a deal he helped to broker. WPP's lawyers, claiming up to 12.5 million pounds for breach of "fiduciary duty," alleged at a court hearing in London that Benatti was the "secret beneficiary" of most of the proceeds from a 17 million pound takeover of Media Club, an Italian advertising company. Benatti sued back, alleging unfair dismissal. He argued that he was really let go because he had fallen out with Daniela Weber, WPP's chief operating officer in Italy, with whom he alleged Sorrell was having a relationship. In last year's libel case, Sorrell accused Benatti of circulating a computer-generated image showing him with Weber labeled "the mad dwarf and the nympho schizo."
- James M. DiBlasio. DiBlasio makes the list for going on a three-day bender and hacking into the computers of his company, Ski.com, while drunk. Fortunately for him, the CEO of Ski.com wasn't too angry about the situation and decided not to pursue charges.
Citi e Merrill Lynch
Citigroup on Friday reported a net loss of $8.29 billion
Merrill Lynch results indicate a fourth-quarter loss of $15.31 billion.
Wednesday 14 January 2009
Nortel in Chapter 11
Toronto-based Nortel is reeling from the sudden drop in demand for its voice-only telecom-network equipment and has been trying to cut costs and sell assets to survive the downturn. It is expected to file for protection from creditors in Canada, as well.
Nortel was facing a $107 million bond interest payment this week. The company owes bondholders more than $3.8 billion, according to court filings.
In December, the company had received notice from the New York Stock Exchange that it faced delisting if it couldn't bring its share price above the required $1 minimum in the next six months. It was last trading at 32 cents a share.
Nortel's shares plunged last year as customers reduced spending amid the economic downturn.
The company also filed for protection under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Chapter 15, added to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in 2005, opens the door for a company or court-appointed administrator to seek a U.S. bankruptcy court's recognition of a foreign bankruptcy case as the main, or controlling proceeding.
WSJ.com
Tuesday 13 January 2009
Alitalia / Air France
CAI ha acquistato gli assets di Alitalia pagandoli 427 milioni.
CAI, dopo soli 3 mesi, ha rivenduto ad Air France il 25% per 323 milioni, attribuendo così alla Nuova Alitalia un valore complessivo di circa 1,2 miliardi.
Non male come rivalutazione dell'investimento.
A noi contribuenti restano invece da pagare circa 600 milioni per i debiti della Vecchia Alitalia.
I tagli delle rating agencies alla Nuova Zelanda e alla Spagna
«The New Zealand dollar plunged more than 3 per cent against both the Japanese Yen and the US dollar on Tuesday, after ratings agency Standard & Poor’s warned it could downgrade the Kiwi’s foreign currency debt rating.
S&P lowered its outlook for New Zealand’s rating to negative from stable, citing the country’s rising current account deficit and worsening fiscal outlook, though confirmed a stable outlook for the local currency rating.
The Kiwi was sold off heavily in the wake of the news, sinking 3.5 per cent against the US dollar to US$0.55, and breaking through the psychologically important Y50 level against the Japanese yen, at one point losing 4 per cent to touch an intraday low of Y49.20.
Analysts said the Kiwi was further hurt by deteriorating demand for commodities amid the global economic downturn, and news that business confidence in the country had hit a 34-year low, according to the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research’s quarterly survey.
The dismal survey results increased speculation that New Zealand’s national bank would cut interest rates by at least 100 basis points on January 29.
David Woo at Barclays Capital said the Kiwi could have further to fall: “Waning investor optimism, declining equity and commodity markets and a very weak reading in business confidence are likely to weigh significantly on the NZD, while the S&P news adds to the downward pressure.”
On Monday, S&P cut its outlook for Spain’s foreign currency debt to negative from stable. Analysts warned this might not only damage the market for Spanish bonds, but would also put pressure on the euro. The eurozone currency extended two sessions of losses against the dollar to slide 0.4 per cent at $1.33, and also fell 0.6 per cent against the yen at Y118.44.
Steve Barrow at Standard Bank said: “We definitely think that we will hear more and more talk about downgrades within the periphery eurozone bond markets this year and, who knows, maybe the ratings agencies will actually get their knives out and cut. Hence, this story is set to get bigger, with the implication that it eventually starts to unsettle the euro.”
Elsewhere, a broad based return to risk aversion in the markets saw the safe haven yen stage gains against all the major currency crosses. Against the dollar, the yen extended Monday’s move below the significant Y90 level, slipping a further 0.2 per cent to Y89.05. The yen also jumped 1.8 per cent against the high yielding Australian dollar, to Y59.69, and added 0.5 per cent against the Swiss franc to Y79.68.
Sterling was weaker across the board after the release of worse than expected retail sales and housing data, and an exceptionally grim business survey from the British Chamber of Commerce. The pound fell 1.1 per cent against the euro to £0.9115, and was 1.5 per cent lower against the dollar at $1.4595».
S&P lowered its outlook for New Zealand’s rating to negative from stable, citing the country’s rising current account deficit and worsening fiscal outlook, though confirmed a stable outlook for the local currency rating.
The Kiwi was sold off heavily in the wake of the news, sinking 3.5 per cent against the US dollar to US$0.55, and breaking through the psychologically important Y50 level against the Japanese yen, at one point losing 4 per cent to touch an intraday low of Y49.20.
Analysts said the Kiwi was further hurt by deteriorating demand for commodities amid the global economic downturn, and news that business confidence in the country had hit a 34-year low, according to the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research’s quarterly survey.
The dismal survey results increased speculation that New Zealand’s national bank would cut interest rates by at least 100 basis points on January 29.
David Woo at Barclays Capital said the Kiwi could have further to fall: “Waning investor optimism, declining equity and commodity markets and a very weak reading in business confidence are likely to weigh significantly on the NZD, while the S&P news adds to the downward pressure.”
On Monday, S&P cut its outlook for Spain’s foreign currency debt to negative from stable. Analysts warned this might not only damage the market for Spanish bonds, but would also put pressure on the euro. The eurozone currency extended two sessions of losses against the dollar to slide 0.4 per cent at $1.33, and also fell 0.6 per cent against the yen at Y118.44.
Steve Barrow at Standard Bank said: “We definitely think that we will hear more and more talk about downgrades within the periphery eurozone bond markets this year and, who knows, maybe the ratings agencies will actually get their knives out and cut. Hence, this story is set to get bigger, with the implication that it eventually starts to unsettle the euro.”
Elsewhere, a broad based return to risk aversion in the markets saw the safe haven yen stage gains against all the major currency crosses. Against the dollar, the yen extended Monday’s move below the significant Y90 level, slipping a further 0.2 per cent to Y89.05. The yen also jumped 1.8 per cent against the high yielding Australian dollar, to Y59.69, and added 0.5 per cent against the Swiss franc to Y79.68.
Sterling was weaker across the board after the release of worse than expected retail sales and housing data, and an exceptionally grim business survey from the British Chamber of Commerce. The pound fell 1.1 per cent against the euro to £0.9115, and was 1.5 per cent lower against the dollar at $1.4595».
Qualcuno uscirà dall'Euro?
Secondo FT le probabilità che qualche Paese esca dall'area Euro non sono così remote come si potrebbe pensare.
Greece has always been treated as a peripheral eurozone member, not only in geography. Even before last year's civil unrest, its bonds traded at a significantly higher yield than those of Germany - showing a higher perceived default risk.
The market is nervous about other nations on the eurozone's periphery, notably Ireland and Spain, which grew overextended during the credit bubble.
A eurozone country defaulting and leaving the euro is close to an unthinkable event. But Friday's news from Standard & Poor's that Greece and Ireland were on review for a possible downgrade, followed yesterday by Spain, left many thinking the unthinkable.
The spread of Greek bonds over German bunds is 2.32 percentage points, almost 10 times its level of two years ago. Spanish spreads yesterday rose above 90 for the first time. An Intrade prediction market future puts the odds on a current eurozone member leaving the euro by the end of next year at about 30 per cent.
The euro dropped more than 1 per cent against the dollar within minutes of the Spanish news, and is down 9.8 per cent in the last few weeks.
A crisis over Greece might be the euro's ultimate "stress test" (to borrow a phrase from Daniel Katzive of Credit Suisse). If the eurozone could find a way to deal with a default, that might confirm the euro's status as the world's next reserve currency.
But if the eurozone could not work out a solution, and a country exited, any such ambition would be over.
The dollar-euro exchange rate affects many other assets.
Now that fears are in the open that Greece (or another peripheral country) could be the Trojan horse that breaks up the euro, any news on this front could shake many other markets».
Sony e Toshiba
Sony ha chiuso con una perdita dell'8,9% sulla base di un report gionalistico in cui si prevede che il colosso giapponese chiuderà i conti del 2008 - per la prima volta dopo 14 anni - in perdita, mentre Toshiba ha perso l'8,6% dopo che NHK ha previsto per la stessa Toshiba una perdita dopo 7 anni.
I conti di BofA e Citi
Sta per arrivare il momento in cui le banche americane comunicano ai mercati i dati contabili di periodo.
Citi prevede per BofA (che comunicherà i dati il 20 gennaio) una perdita di circa 3,6 miliardi.
Mentre per Citi (che comunicherà i dati il 22 gennaio) è prevista, salvo sorprese, una perdita di circa 10 miliardi.
Monday 12 January 2009
Commerzbank/Dresdner
Come il tempo cambia le cose.
Biggest German Bailout Stands Now At € 18.3 Billion & Counting...
Quattro mesi fa Commerzbank annunciava al mercato l'acqusizione di Dresdner. Ora l'acquisizione è via di completamento grazie a sussidi statali concessi a Commerzbank per circa 18 miliardi.
Rileggere la presentazione dell'operazione pubblicata nel mese di settembre lascia un po' stupiti (soprattutto pagina 25).
Wednesday 7 January 2009
Continuano le difficoltà per i titoli di stato
Da FT.com
«Investors shunned one of the most liquid and safest assets in the world on Wednesday as a German bond auction failed in a warning for governments seeking to raise record amounts of debt to stimulate their slowing economies. It is the first eurozone bond auction of the year and an ominous sign of potential trouble ahead for governments around the world, with an estimated $3,000bn expected to be issued in sovereign debt this year — three times more than in 2008.
The auction of 10-year bonds failed to attract enough bids to reach the €6bn the government wanted to raise. Although a number of German bond auctions failed last year, it was almost unheard of before the credit crisis.
Meyrick Chapman, a fixed-income strategist at UBS, said: “When a German bond auction fails, then that does suggest there is trouble ahead for governments wanting to raise money in the debt markets.
“There was certainly a supply/demand imbalance because of the large amount of issuance in the last quarter of 2008 and the large amount due in the coming months. Before the financial crisis, German bond auctions just did not fail».
Da FT Alphaville
«In fact, the timing of this failed bond auction is far from ideal. US Treasuries have been in under pressure in recent days partly because a glut of new issuance is about to hit the market. A total of $166bn in fact, this week.
All of which may explain why the yield on the 10-year US Treasury rose on Wednesday, in spite of dismal US job numbers rekindling deflation fears elsewhere. For the record, the yield on the 10-year note is currently above 2.5%, against 2.46% late on Tuesday.
Perhaps the bond bubble is starting to deflate.
For a more in-depth take on the bond market bubble, this morning’s analysis piece in the FT, Onerous issuance, is well worth a read».
«Investors shunned one of the most liquid and safest assets in the world on Wednesday as a German bond auction failed in a warning for governments seeking to raise record amounts of debt to stimulate their slowing economies. It is the first eurozone bond auction of the year and an ominous sign of potential trouble ahead for governments around the world, with an estimated $3,000bn expected to be issued in sovereign debt this year — three times more than in 2008.
The auction of 10-year bonds failed to attract enough bids to reach the €6bn the government wanted to raise. Although a number of German bond auctions failed last year, it was almost unheard of before the credit crisis.
Meyrick Chapman, a fixed-income strategist at UBS, said: “When a German bond auction fails, then that does suggest there is trouble ahead for governments wanting to raise money in the debt markets.
“There was certainly a supply/demand imbalance because of the large amount of issuance in the last quarter of 2008 and the large amount due in the coming months. Before the financial crisis, German bond auctions just did not fail».
Da FT Alphaville
«In fact, the timing of this failed bond auction is far from ideal. US Treasuries have been in under pressure in recent days partly because a glut of new issuance is about to hit the market. A total of $166bn in fact, this week.
All of which may explain why the yield on the 10-year US Treasury rose on Wednesday, in spite of dismal US job numbers rekindling deflation fears elsewhere. For the record, the yield on the 10-year note is currently above 2.5%, against 2.46% late on Tuesday.
Perhaps the bond bubble is starting to deflate.
For a more in-depth take on the bond market bubble, this morning’s analysis piece in the FT, Onerous issuance, is well worth a read».
Madoff e le società di revisione
A quanto pare PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ernst & Young e KPMG saranno a breve poste sotto accusa per non aver saputo scovare e svelare la gigantesca truffa orchestrata da Bernie Madoff.
Su Naked Short è pubblicata una interessante discussione sul tema e una analisi degli standard che debbono essere seguiti per effettuare la revisione degli hedge funds.
Tuesday 6 January 2009
Alcoa
Alcoa Inc. late Tuesday said it plans to cut 13% of its global workforce, sell four business units, cut output, freeze salaries and hiring efforts. The Pittsburgh-based aluminum giant said it is taking the steps to conserve cash in the current economic downturn. The meausures will result in a fourth-quarter charge of $900 million to $950 million after tax, or $1.13 to $1.19 a share.
MarketWatch
MarketWatch
La FED rischia la propria indipendenza?
«John Taylor, who was under secretary of treasury for international affairs from 2001 to 2005, said the explosive growth of the Fed's balance sheet since September was "unbelievable."
"This doesn't really seem like quantitative easing in the sense of finding a growth rate in the money supply," he told a panel discussion during the annual meeting of the American Economics Association.
"What you are looking at now is really being determined by other considerations. How much should we buy of mortgage-backed securities? How much should we loan to foreign central banks? This is really more like an industrial policy," he said.
The Fed's balance sheet has more than doubled in size to over $1.2 trillion in recent months as it has tried to shield the U.S. economy from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression by supporting key credit markets.
This has included direct purchases of mortgage-backed bonds by the Fed and support for top-rated non-financial borrowers in the crucial commercial paper market, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars lent to banks on the basis of collateral.
"If you have a situation where the Fed is borrowing to invest in all these sectors it seems to me you have a huge governance issue...that demands a lot of thought," Taylor said.
Taylor said the U.S. Congress has a legitimate right to demand a say in who the Fed lends money to. The outcome would be "radical reform" that would risk monetary policy independence, he said».
Reuters UK
"This doesn't really seem like quantitative easing in the sense of finding a growth rate in the money supply," he told a panel discussion during the annual meeting of the American Economics Association.
"What you are looking at now is really being determined by other considerations. How much should we buy of mortgage-backed securities? How much should we loan to foreign central banks? This is really more like an industrial policy," he said.
The Fed's balance sheet has more than doubled in size to over $1.2 trillion in recent months as it has tried to shield the U.S. economy from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression by supporting key credit markets.
This has included direct purchases of mortgage-backed bonds by the Fed and support for top-rated non-financial borrowers in the crucial commercial paper market, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars lent to banks on the basis of collateral.
"If you have a situation where the Fed is borrowing to invest in all these sectors it seems to me you have a huge governance issue...that demands a lot of thought," Taylor said.
Taylor said the U.S. Congress has a legitimate right to demand a say in who the Fed lends money to. The outcome would be "radical reform" that would risk monetary policy independence, he said».
Reuters UK
La prossima Islanda
Iceland was the biggest emerging market causality of 2008, but could another country run into similar problems in 2009? Arnab Das from Dresdner Kleinwort considers the outlook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
L I N K S
-
-
-
-
Peston Picks is moving12 years ago
-
FTX and an old blog post1 year ago
-
-
Goodbye to Credit Writedowns2 years ago
-
-
-
-
Volatility Lessons5 years ago
-
-
-
If you can’t beat them, join them7 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Links 5/7/20221 year ago
-
On hiatus15 years ago
-
The Blog Moves On6 years ago
-
-
Farewell9 years ago
-
RTO Gets Serious: October 17 months ago
-
-
-
-
The US Treasury’s missed opportunity6 years ago
-
About Me
Iscriviti
Posts
All Comments