Showing posts with label banks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label banks. Show all posts

Friday, December 06, 2013

Banks need to take on Amazon and Google or die


Some bankers and analysts think that Google, Facebook, Amazon or the like will not fully enter a highly regulated, low-margin business such as banking. I disagree. 

Eye on the Ball

What is more, I think banks that are not prepared for such new competitors face certain death.

Technology has already transformed many industries. Next in line is banking. In two or three years, only 5 per cent of consumer interaction will be through branches.

The rules have changed and a new league of competitors is emerging.

Continue reading in the FT

+Bob DeMarco

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Nonperforming Loans Chart -- Get Under Your Desk


NonPerforming Loans, Banks, Chart

Non Performing Loans 521
Subscribe to All American Investor via Email
When I looked at this chart this thought came to my mind -- get under your desk.

Nonperforming loans have more than doubled, year over year.

Wonder why stocks are shaky and gold is soaring. This is one reason.

This is not the kind of information that creates confidence. When uncertainty creeps into the market, stocks go down.
Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist and twenty year Wall Street veteran. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. Content from All American Investor has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, Blog Critics, and a growing list of newspaper websites. Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.


Kindle: Amazon's Wireless Reading Device (Latest Generation)


Follow All American Investor on Twitter

Sunday, March 29, 2009

$200.4 Trillion derivatives in U.S. Commercial Banks


The notional value of derivatives held by U.S. commercial banks increased $24.5 trillion in the fourth quarter (2008), or 14%, to $200.4 trillion.

•The notional value of derivatives held by U.S. commercial banks increased $24.5 trillion in the fourth quarter, or 14%, to $200.4 trillion, due to the migration of investment bank derivatives business into the commercial banking system.

• U.S. commercial banks lost $9.2 billion trading in cash and derivative instruments in the fourth quarter of 2008, and for the year they reported trading losses of $836 million. The poor results in 2008 reflect continued turmoil in financial markets, particularly for credit instruments.

• Net current credit exposure increased 84% from the third quarter to a record $800 billion, and much of this is attributable to the sharp decline in interest rates in the fourth quarter.

• Derivative contracts remain concentrated in interest rate products, which com
derivative notional values. The notional value of credit derivative contracts decreased by 2% during the quarter to $15.9 trillion. Credit default swaps are 98% of total credit derivatives.

Source: The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), quarterly report.
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Condition of Banks Continues to Deteriorate (Chart)


Condition of Banks

The Report of Condition and Income for All Insured U.S. Commercial Banks continues to deteriorate and is worrisome.

This really calls into question if the new bank bailout plan is going to work. The newest proposal is similar, if not the same, as the plan that was put into effect in September. However, if conditions continue to deteriorate it is likely that banks will need to be seized by the Federal government much like what happened during the Savings and Loan crisis.

Right now the hope remains that banks can earn their way out of the problem. This explains, in part, why the Federal Reserve is keeping interest rates artificially low and is buying Treasury securities. This strategy worked for the banks in the 1992-1993 period. It is not well known but many banks were "technically" insolvent at the time.

It appears that bank failures, a bank panic, and bank nationalizations are all still real possibilities.

We will continue to watch this situation at All American Investor.

Sidenote: Federal regulators Friday seized control of the two largest wholesale credit unions — U.S. Central Federal Credit Union and Western Corporate Federal Credit Union — which together had $57 billion in assets. This went virtually unnoticed.
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email
Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist and twenty year Wall Street veteran. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. Content from All American Investor has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, Blog Critics, and a growing list of newspaper websites. Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.

Follow All American Investor on Twitter

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Quote: " Close some big banks"


Transcript: 'This Week' Economic Debate

  • STEPHANOPOULOS: The question, Senator Shelby, is, what is going to create that confidence? What is going to change the psychology of the markets right now? You want to...
  • SHELBY: I believe, if we can straighten out the banking system and get banks lending again and get confidence in our banking system -- the American people don't trust the banks. They know -- they're not investing in the banks. The banks aren't lending. And without lending, this -- this country's economy is based on credit, you know, credit to small business, medium-sized business, and that's not happening today.
  • We've got to do it, and we've got to do it right. TARP certainly didn't do it. I opposed that; a lot of people didn't. But -- but we can't go down that road again. And what I fear is, is Paulson II or TARP II or TARP III.
  • STEPHANOPOULOS: Well -- well, we've seen Secretary Geithner and the president say that now we're going to take a middle-ground approach. They've out the beginnings of their plan on the banks. You don't approve of that?
  • SHELBY: I don't think it'll work. I think that they've got to close some big banks. They don't want to do it. We're -- we're going down the same road Japan was going down.
  • STEPHANOPOULOS: So you're in the same place -- I had Senator Lindsey Graham on the problem a couple of weeks ago. He said we're going to have to close, nationalize some of the big banks.
  • SHELBY: I don't want to nationalize them. I think we need to close them...
  • STEPHANOPOULOS: So when you say "close," what do you mean by them?
  • SHELBY: Close -- close them down, get them out of business. If they're dead, they ought to be buried. We bury the small banks; we've got to bury some big ones and send a strong message to the market. And I believe that people will start investing in banks. People aren't...
  • STEPHANOPOULOS: So you're talking Citigroup?
  • SHELBY: Well, whatever. Citi's always been a problem child.


Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email


Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist, blogger, and Caregiver. In addition to being an experienced writer he taught at the University of Georgia , was an Asociate Director and Limited Partner at Bear Stearns, was CEO of IP Group, and is a mentor. Bob currently resides in Delray Beach, FL where he cares for his mother, Dorothy, who suffers from Alzheimer's disease. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. His content has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, BlogCritics, and a growing list of newspaper websites (15). Bob is actively seeking syndication and writing assignments.




Friday, February 27, 2009

Roubini The Case For and Against Bank Nationalization


These paragraphs were extracted from Nouriel Roubini's GlobalEconoMonitor. The article contains a discussion of insolvency and the Pros and Cons of nationalization. Must reading for the well informed.
As an example, consider the poster child for the “freebie” programs, the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, started in late November of 2008. For a cost of 0.75%, it allows banks to issue bonds backed by the government, i.e., essentially risk free. The banks have accessed this market 97 times for $190 billion!

The biggest pig at the trough - Bank of America 11 times for $35.5 billion. But close behind, JP Morgan at $30 billion, GE Capital $27 billion, Citigroup $24 billion, Morgan Stanley $19 billion, Goldman Sachs $19 billion and Wells Fargo $6 billion. A not so surprising correlation with their respective writedowns (including merged entities), Bank of America $96 billion, JP Morgan $75 billion, Citigroup $88 billion, Morgan Stanley $22 billion, Goldman Sachs $7 billion and Wells Fargo $115 billion.

In terms of helping us move forward out of the financial crisis, this program has many problems. It charges the same amount for each institution, so it hardly separates the solvent from the insolvent institutions. It charges a fee which is grossly below what these institutions could issue in the marketplace given their current balance sheets, distorting the system. Wasn’t this the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac problem? And it makes it less likely to cleanse the system of the toxic assets because these institutions can continue their way out-of-the-money option and hope that the prices of the toxic assets increase. In effect, the access to this capital allows them to continue to make the original bet.

Follow EF Hutton on Twitter
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email


Bob DeMarco is a citizen journalist, blogger, and Caregiver. In addition to being an experienced writer he taught at the University of Georgia , managed on Wall Street at Bear Stearns, was CEO of IP Group, and is a mentor. Bob currently resides in Delray Beach, FL where he cares for his mother, Dorothy, who suffers from Alzheimer's disease. Bob has written more than 500 articles with more than 11,000 links to his work on the Internet. His content has been syndicated on Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Pluck, BlogCritics, and a growing list of newspaper websites (15). Bob is actively seeking writing assignments and syndication.


More from All American Investor




Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Test of Banks Could lead to a Bottom in the Stock Market


This is one of the better articles I have read on the stress test--Stress Test for Banks Exposes Rift on Wall St. It has me thinking about the long term direction of the stock market.

I think if you read this article carefully you might conclude that much of what is being written about banks is getting discounted in the stock market. I am not saying everything is beautiful. Quite the contrary, we are teetering on the brink of disaster. But, I find myself asking myself constantly--has the market discounted the news. It is always hard when things look bleak to see the light at the end of the tunnel. However, the market always discounts the future long before the future gets here. The market always bottoms when things look bleakest to the herd. The herd tends to focus on the recent past, rarely looking forward into the future.

I am reminding myself that back in 1990-91 Ross Perot was shorting Citibank stock. If you had bought the stock back then you could have made more than 30 times your money by 2006.

At the time of the 1991 recession there were many that felt the banks were going to go broke. Remember, we were just coming through the S and L Crisis and the failure of some major banks in the southwest. The stock market had crashed in 1987 and we were entering a recession. The time really looked bleak. Most investors had thrown in the towel and were focusing on the past.

If you are old enough, you might remember that from 1966 to 1982 the market traded in a broad trading range that was capped by Dow 1060. Up and down, up and down, The Dow did crash down to the 550 area in 1973, and the 750 area in 1980.

Most of you are too young to remember that the S an P 500 traded around 102 in 1973 and again in 1982 (you read that right 102). It turned out that August, 1982 was the bottom of a long term consolidation and the beginning of the bull market. The Dow crashed through the ceiling and the market soared.

I am starting to believe we are nearing a major low in the market. So put me down the way I have been for some time--long term bullish, short term bearish. Not quite ready to the jump all the way into the pool. It is a good time to stick your foot in the water and check the temperature.

These hot flash day rallies in this stock market downturn are not making me feel like I am missing out on anything. I do find it amusing that every time we have a nice up day the talking heads on television get all excited and start talking bull market.

The market rarely goes up or down in a straight line. The rallies right now are for suckers who think every tiny piece of news is what is going to make the market go up or down long term. Each piece of news is like a piece of the puzzle. It is not the puzzle.

These hot interpretations of every little blip on the news screen makes the market go up and down like a yo-yo. But, it is the long term trend of the market that is most important; and, the big picture fundamentals set the stage for the big big moves. You make the big bucks by spotting the long term trends and being patient once they get underway.

I'll leave with two things. First, read the article about stress testing banks--to me this is a good thing and might be an event that could put in the bottom for the stock market. I am thinking we could be in for a 20-30 percent rally soon. Second, the major trend of the stock market is still down--so it is very risky to have the boat loaded. Foot in the water--good, water up to your neck--not good. Chicken on hill, maybe.
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email


Stress Test for Banks Exposes Rift on Wall St

The New York Times
By ERIC DASH

Big banks keep insisting that they have all the capital they need — a claim that might strike many people as absurd at a time the government is spending billions of taxpayer dollars to prop up the financial industry.

So here is a surprise: By some common measures, the banks do have enough capital.

The problem is, it is not the kind of capital investors think the banks need.

For years, the question of what constitutes a bank’s capital, and how to measure it, was largely academic. But the issue is coming to the fore as federal regulators start administering a tough new “stress test” to 20 large banks on Wednesday to determine how the banks would withstand a severe economic downturn.

Investors in the stock market and the banks are increasingly at odds over how to assess the health of financial institutions. Where regulators side could determine the fate of many lenders, particularly big banks like Citigroup and Bank of America, whose share prices have plummeted this year on fears the government will increase its ownership of them.

Until the financial system deteriorated last fall, investors focused on what is known as Tier 1 capital, which consists of common stock, preferred stock and hybrid debt-equity instruments.

Now, however, they are focusing on what is called tangible equity capital, which includes only common stock, saying it is a better way to measure the risk in bank shares.

The difference might sound like something only an accountant would worry about, but it lies at the heart of two questions confounding both Washington and Wall Street: Are the nation’s banks sound? And are bank shares a good barometer for the health of the financial system?

Sheila C. Bair, the head of the Federal Insurance Deposit Corporation, said on Tuesday that the nation’s banking industry was safe. “All these large banks exceed regulatory standards for being well capitalized, so for right now, they’re fine,” Ms. Bair said on CBS television’s “The Early Show.”

“I think the big issue is how much of an additional buffer they have to withstand more adverse economic situations and that’s something we’re going to try to figure out with a stress test.”

But Citigroup, which maintains that it is well capitalized by its regulators’ standards, was nonetheless locked in negotiations with the government on Tuesday over a third rescue. Under the plan, the government is expected to raise its stake in Citigroup to 30 to 40 percent, from about 8 percent now. The deal, which was moving toward completion and could be announced as early as Wednesday, would bolster the level of common stock that investors are focused on.

At Bank of America, Kenneth D. Lewis, the chief executive, assured the bank’s employees on Monday that Bank of America has enough capital, including common stock. “I have said repeatedly that our company does not need further assistance today and I don’t believe we’ll need any more in the future,” Mr. Lewis wrote in a memorandum.

Like regulators, investors are struggling to determine how much additional capital banks might require if the recession deepens and unemployment rises, developments that would almost certainly lead to new, heavy losses at banks.

Institutions that fail the stress test will be required to raise new capital, probably through more money from the government.

Beaten-down financial shares rallied on Tuesday after Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, seemed to rebuff suggestions that banks might be nationalized outright. Even so, Mr. Bernanke offered a sober assessment of the economy to Congress on Tuesday.

Details of the bank stress test are scant, but federal regulators are expected to examine the ability of banks to cope with a situation in which unemployment rose to 10 to 12 percent and home prices declined by an additional 20 percent, according to Treasury Department and Federal Reserve officials. While officials say they don’t expect such a severe downturn, some economists aren’t ruling one out.

In recent weeks, federal regulators were planning to continue to demand that banks maintain Tier 1 capital equivalent of at least 6 percent of total assets adjusted for risk. Regulators also want at least half of it in common stock, but have given banks some leeway.

On Monday, the federal banking regulators issued a statement saying that if the stress test indicated an “additional capital buffer” was necessary for some institutions, it “did not imply a new capital standard and is not expected to be maintained.”

But stock investors are homing in on tangible common equity. Whereas Tier 1 capital gives regulators comfort because it captures a bank’s ability to weather a financial storm, stock investors, who suffer the first losses, are worried about their own exposure. Tangible common equity, or T.C.E., they argue, is the best measure for them.

Until last fall, there was little difference between the two measures. But when the government made big investments of preferred stock to shore up banks, common shareholders became more vulnerable.

John McDonald, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company, compared the move to an army reinforcing its troops from the back. “Any reinforcements improve the chances of winning the battle,” he said. But if you are a stockholder, “you are still the guy taking the first hit on the front line.”

Regulators worry that banks’ depositors and trading partners might interpret more bad news for banks — including a continued decline in share prices — as a sign confidence is flagging. As a result, regulators, too, are focusing more on tangible equity.

“If our banking system looks frail and hobbled, we care since there could be a loss of confidence” Mr. McDonald said. “But the stock price may very well not be a reflection of the broader risk.”

Louise Story contributed reporting.

More from All American Investor



Monday, February 23, 2009

Stress Test for Banks the Best Medicine


There are growing doubts about banks and there can be little doubt we are on the edge of a "run on banks". Bank of America and Citigroup are at the top of the lists. I have to admit, I have an account at both banks--yikes.

As doubt and angst grows , the Obama administration is announcing that a review of 20 major banks is forthcoming. This review of banks is often known as a stress test. Stress testing has a lot of people worried. They reason that stress testing will likely scare the heck out of investors. If Nouriel Roubini is right this will leave no choice but to nationalize. Roubini, who coined the term Zombie bank, has been saying for sometime that the banks are broke. I don't think there is much doubt that if all assets were marked to the market this would prove to be true.

One problem with pricing toxic assets and distressed assets in banks is that no one knows the real price. The system is basically frozen with little trading taking place. Sooner or later, something has to to give.

Toxic assets, nationalization, Zombie bank, these are all terms that are hanging over banks like a tornado cloud just waiting to touch down.

What do I think? Let's get it all out in the open. Obama is taking heat from the likes of Bill Clinton for being too pessimistic. I think the American public is very pessimistic. Markets don't go up when investors are uncertain or pessimistic. The only way out of this trap is to bring it all up on to the table and let us take a look at this ugly situation.

My guess is that once the true extent of the problem is known it will be quickly discounted in the stock market. Once that occurs we can go about solving that problems instead of letting the problems hang out their like an impending guillotine over our heads.

The market is going down until it fully discounts the economic problems we are facing. For me, the sooner it happens the better. I am starting to feel very bullish long term on stocks (still very bearish short term). But, I learned a long time ago that you make a lot better returns in the stock market when times are certain, rather than uncertain. Who wants to stand in front of a roaring freight train--not me.

I get the feeling that President Obama is going to let it all hang out. I bet he will receive lots of criticism from people suffering from Rick Santelli syndrome--better know as the "ignorance is bliss syndrome". Many are going to attack President Obama for telling too much. Well I think he said he intends to make things transparent. It is time for us to get our heads out of the sand and get back to doing the kinds of things that made America great. Get out the spoon--we all need a great big dose of Castor oil.
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email

U.S. bank stress tests to show capital needs: source

By David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Financial regulators will soon launch a series of "stress tests" to determine which of the largest U.S. banks should get bigger capital cushions in case of a deeper recession, a person familiar with Obama administration plans said on Saturday.

The person, speaking on condition of anonymity, said if institutions were found to need additional capital, financial authorities would provide them with an "extra cushion of support."

Banks are expected to receive additional information about the tests in the coming week from regulators.

The largest U.S. banks are "well capitalized" for current conditions, the source said, but the Obama administration wants to ensure they can withstand a more severe economic climate and play an important role in helping restart the flow of credit.

Initial plans for the stress tests were announced on February 10 as part of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's bank stabilization plan, but the source on Saturday for the first time linked the tests to additional government support for large banks. That person did not specify what form any extra capital cushion may take.

Little is known about the form of the stress tests, but the person described them as "consistent, forward looking and conservative."

The Obama administration tried on Friday to ease market fears the government was poised to nationalize some large banks that are struggling with losses and a lack of confidence, notably Citigroup and Bank of America.

Bank shares fell sharply, with Citigroup plunging 22 percent to below the $2 fee of a typical automated teller machine, or ATM, and Bank of America trading around the $4 level.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said on Friday, "This administration continues to strongly believe that a privately held banking system is the correct way to go."

That was quickly echoed by a statement from the U.S. Treasury.

INVESTORS LOSE CONFIDENCE

Citigroup and Bank of America have each received $45 billion in government capital in recent months and guarantees against losses on portfolios of illiquid mortgage assets -- aid that now exceeds their market value.

With investors losing confidence in the sector as recessionary losses on real estate and commercial loans mount, analysts say the government may have to do more to prop up the largest banks.

But rather than opting for a sweeping takeover, the government may act more incrementally, demanding a little more control every time Bank of America or Citigroup seeks more capital, analysts said.

Major interventions in financial institutions, such as Bear Stearns 11 months ago, American International Group in September and a second-round investment in Citigroup, occurred just after major drops in share prices made it clear they could not raise private capital.

The government "will try to do everything they can before they nationalize banks, but they may ultimately do it," said Lee Delaporte, director of research at Dreman Value Management, which has $10 billion under management.

"The bank stocks are telling you nationalization is going to happen," Delaporte added.

Thus far, the Treasury has put up about $235 billion for banks largely by purchasing only preferred shares to avoid diluting common shareholders. Under Geithner's revamp, those injections could come in the form of shares that could be converted to common equity if necessary.

The lack of detail in Geithner's bank plan, particularly about a $500 billion to $1 trillion public-private fund to soak up toxic assets, has fueled investor concerns that bank takeovers could become an option. Geithner did not specify how much money would be earmarked for bank capital injections under the plan, which mapped out how the second $350 billion of the $700 billion bailout fund would be spent.

Geithner has devoted $50 billion to modify troubled mortgages and $100 billion to support a $1 trillion Federal Reserve asset-backed securities lending facility aimed at unblocking frozen consumer credit markets.

Lawmakers have pressed Geithner on whether and when he will return to seek more funding to shore up the banking system. Geithner told Congress on February 11 that as the "design elements" of his plan were fleshed out, he would have a better handle on the ultimate risks and costs for the program.

(Additional reporting by Dan Wilchins in New York; Editing by Peter Cooney)



Bailout Nation: U.S. May Draw Citi Into Tighter Embrace


Bank nationalization is hanging over the market. But as far as taxpayers go the last thing we want is common stock. The reverse should be happening: common stock holders and existing debt holders should be getting crammed down in any reorganization that includes bailout funds, that is, taxpayer dollars.
Fears that Citigroup would succumb to the fate of American International Group and be outright nationalized sent its stock into a tailspin last week, ending Friday at a paltry $1.95. That gives Citi a market capitalization of just over $10 billion. One year ago, it had a market value of over $137 billion, and even that was considerably less than in Citi's glory days.

Though the deal believed to be under discussion would incur no additional costs to taxpayers, it would hammer common stockholders. News reports Sunday evening had the bank, either voluntarily or at the behest of the government, converting preferred shares held by the government into common shares, which would dilute existing stockholders. The government could end up holding 40% of the company's equity.

Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email

U.S. May Draw Citi Into Tighter Embrace

For the third time in four months, Citigroup is looking for government help to shore up its capital.

The question is whether more government involvement above and beyond the $45 billion the bank has already taken in two installments in October and November, not to mention the guarantee against losses on $300 billion of assets, would do anything to restore confidence.

Fears that Citigroup would succumb to the fate of American International Group and be outright nationalized sent its stock into a tailspin last week, ending Friday at a paltry $1.95. That gives Citi a market capitalization of just over $10 billion. One year ago, it had a market value of over $137 billion, and even that was considerably less than in Citi's glory days.

Though the deal believed to be under discussion would incur no additional costs to taxpayers, it would hammer common stockholders. News reports Sunday evening had the bank, either voluntarily or at the behest of the government, converting preferred shares held by the government into common shares, which would dilute existing stockholders. The government could end up holding 40% of the company's equity.

Citigroup wouldn't comment on the reports, except to reiterate a statement it made last week when the nationalization rumors were making the rounds. "Citi's capital base is very strong and our Tier 1 capital ratio as measured at the end of the fourth quarter was 11.9%, among the highest in the industry. We continue to focus and make progress on reducing the assets on our balance sheet, reducing expenses and streamlining our business for future profitable growth," a spokesman said.

Citi, reeling from $18 billion in losses for 2008 and massive exposure to the consumer loan market, is already in the process of splitting itself in two. It's taking more than $800 billion of unwanted assets and businesses, like mortgage lending and consumer finance, and segregating them in a new business unit with its own management, who will spend their time selling the assets or otherwise disposing of them.

It also sold a majority of its crown jewel, Smith Barney, to a joint venture with Morgan Stanley.

The rest of Citi, which is returning to its pre-1998 name Citicorp, will continue on and presumably perform better without those money-losing assets and noncritical businesses. The remaining businesses will include corporate and retail banking, private banking and wholesale services around the world.

Announcing the plan in January, CEO Vikram Pandit explained, "This new structure will provide a wide range of options going forward to continue strengthening our core franchise."

But Citi faces a stress test by the government, and the results might not be pretty. Like many other banks, Citi faces mounting consumer loan losses, which are only being exacerbated by rising unemployment.

The stress testing, which is mandatory for the 15 biggest U.S. banks with more than $100 billion of assets, begins in the coming weeks. The Treasury Department, which is running the program, wants to find out whether the banks would have the capital they needed to continue to lend and absorb more losses if the economy were to weaken more than expected. Some think this stress testing, which is part of the Treasury's new Financial Stability Plan, means the government is imposing stricter capital standards on banks.

The fear is that any testing scenario will create a situation where there are clear winners (banks that don't have to take additional capital from the government but will likely be forced to anyway in a "voluntary" program to give the plan legitimacy), and clear losers (banks that will get capital injections that come with all sorts of additional restrictions on executive compensation, among other things).

Banks that go through a stress test will get access to a Treasury-provided "capital buffer" (an additional preferred equity stake) to bridge the time until the bank can raise the capital on the private markets. Given the restrictions that will likely accompany additional government injections, most see banks favoring raising capital in the private markets, if at all possible.

Citi has a number of wealthy constituents backing it, including Saudi Arabia's Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, whose fund has taken a major hit in the last few months. Other investors include the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation and the Kuwait Investment Authority. Some executives at Citi get stock awards that vest if the stock improves by a multiple of three in the next four years. Pandit, along with some other senior executives, didn't participate in the awards.

More from All American Investor




Follow EF Hutton on Twitter

Friday, January 09, 2009

In the story, "Sarkozy, Merkel, Blair Call for New Capitalism," what group did Germany's chancellor cite as a failure?


Street Signs

Question: In the story, "Sarkozy, Merkel, Blair Call for New Capitalism," what group did Germany's chancellor cite as a failure?

Answer: International Monetary Fund
Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email

Follow EF Hutton on Twitter

Sarkozy, Merkel, Blair Call for New Capitalism



The head of Europe's biggest economy said Thursday that world leaders should be looking at the massive U.S. deficit and other economic imbalances, not just problems caused by financial markets, as they debate a new global order.

Speaking at a conference in Paris on the future of capitalism, German Chancellor Angela Merkel singled out the American budget deficit and China's current account surplus -- the difference between exports and imports -- as problems upsetting the global economy.

"We would be making an error if we were content to look solely at financial markets," she said. She deplored huge debts that governments are accumulating to spend their way out of the present crisis. But she said she recognized, for the moment, that "there is no other possibility."

A Congressional Budget Office report estimates that the U.S. federal budget deficit will hit an unparalleled $1.2 trillion for the 2009 budget year -- and that is before President-elect Barack Obama's sweeping stimulus package is calculated.

European governments have agreed to be flexible about budget rules that limit deficits to 3 percent of gross domestic product as recession bites.

Merkel said the International Monetary Fund has not managed to regulate global capitalism, and she called for the creation of an economy body at the United Nations, similar to the Security Council, to judge government policy.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, leading the two-day conference with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, blamed financial speculators for encouraging a system fueled on debt.

He called financial capitalism based on speculation "an immoral system" that has "perverted the logic of capitalism."

"It's a system where wealth goes to the wealthy, where work is devalued, where production is devalued, where entrepreneurial spirit is devalued," he said. But no more: "In capitalism of the 21st century, there is room for the state," he said.

Governments around the world have had to step in to rescue credit-starved banks and financial institutions from collapse. They are also pumping billions of euros into their economies to encourage growth.

Measures will be taken by global leaders meeting in London on April 2, Sarkozy promised, urging the U.S. to join the international consensus. Blair called for a new financial order based on "values other than the maximum short-term profit."

"The greatest entrepreneur I had the chance to meet was passionate about what he had created, not what he had accumulated," he said.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28557738/



Friday, December 26, 2008

In his article, Banks Sitting on $1 Trillion Cash, what abbreviation does Tony Crescenzi literally use?


CNBC Bonus Bucks Trivia
CNBC Million Dollar Portfolio Challenge

Street Signs

Question: In his article, Banks Sitting on $1 Trillion Cash, what abbreviation does Tony Crescenzi literally use?
Answer: ZIRP

Subscribe to EF Hutton via Email


Crescenzi: Banks Sitting on $1 Trillion Cash

I noted recently the massive increase in the amount of excess reserves held at Federal Reserve banks by the nation's banks, money that basically is just sitting there, earning practically nothing.

Excess reserves are monies held at the Fed in excess of the banking sector's reserve requirements. In the week ended December 17th, banks had $774 billion in excess reserves, gigantically more than the customary total of just a few billion dollars.

The money is the result of the Federal Reserve's massive liquidity injections. Another way to gauge excess reserves is to look at the cash balances of commercial banks, which can be found in the Federal Reserve's H.8 release, the Fed's weekly report on the assets and liabilities of commercial banks. In Friday's release, cash balances held by commercial banks topped $1 trillion for the first time, reflecting cash balances held at the Fed. Pre-Lehman, cash balances tended to hover around $300 billion, with an annual growth rate of less than 1% per year.

The Federal Reserve's curse on cash, hexed as it was last week with the Federal Reserve's Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP), will eventually pressure banks to use the cash, as net interest margins on loans are far more attractive than the return on cash. Of course, banks need to feel safe that default rates will be low enough to make the foray seem attractive. In due time.

(George Dowd, New Edge and Gary Kaminsky, former Neuberger Berman managing director discuss Crescenzi's note in the video).

More: Click for Latest Economic coverage ...

__________

Tony Crescenzi is the Chief Bond Market Strategist at Miller Tabak + Co., LLC where he advises many of the nation's top institutional investors on issues related to the bond market, the economy and other macro-related issues. Crescenzi makes regular appearances on financial television stations such as CNBC and Bloomberg, and is frequently quoted across the news media. He is also the author of the forthcoming book, "Investing from the Top Down," "The Strategic Bond Investor," and co-author of the 1200-page book "The Money Market." Crescenzi is a contributor to RealMoney.com."

URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28347439/

In the Two-Way Street blog post entitled, Banks, Beat Reporters and Not Being Cozy, which news service is mentioned?


CNBC Bonus Bucks Trivia
CNBC Million Dollar Portfolio Challenge

The Call
Question: In the Two-Way Street blog post entitled, Banks, Beat Reporters and Not Being Cozy, which news service is mentioned?
Answer: AP

Thursday, June 05, 2008

FDIC's Bair: Institutions of greater size May Fail


I found this over at Calculated Risk. The website is worth bookmarking. They come up with some good information and present it concisely.

From Reuters: Bigger U.S. bank failures may be coming - FDIC (hat tip Ed)

An increasing number of banks face high exposure to deteriorating conditions in commercial real estate and construction lending, [Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Chairman Sheila Bair] told a Senate Banking Committee hearing on the state of the banking industry.

"There is also the possibility that future failures could include institutions of greater size than we have seen in the recent past," Bair said. "Uncertainties in today's economic environment continue to pose significant challenges for the banking industry, households, and bank regulators."

Note: The largest bank to fail this year was ANB Financial with $2.1 billion in assets.

blog it