Joke of the Day, from Jay Leno: Joe Biden went to Dick Cheney and asked him what it is like to be number two. Cheney said, “Don’t ask me, ask George Bush.”
Quote of Dubya: “More harm is caused by too much regulation than by too little.” How would he know? There has been NO regulation during his tenure…of anything! TB
…on Friday morning, TB wrote the following:
Yesterday’ rally had most of the elements of a capitulation trade but not all:
1. We put in new cycle lows on most indices, but NOT Dow 30, Transports or Energy!
2. Rather than plunge at the opening, inexplicably we rallied 160 points at the open, then plunged, and rebounded…not a classic capitulation trade.
3. Volume was 1.97B shares, highest since 10/16, but nowhere near the 2.9B or more that would be required for a true capitulation trade; also included 350M in the final 2 minutes!
4. Advance/Declines were under 3:1, contrast to -12:1 on NYSE Wednesday, -7:1 on Nasdaq and -4:1 on AMEX; Breadth was good but again compare: NYSE 14x vs -26x; Nasdaq 8x vs -23x; AMEX 3.4x vs -12x….get the picture?
5. The movers yesterday were…almost without exception…the very same stocks that suffered the most on Wednesday…look at the stock summary and see the relative changes, it is eerie…and makes the rally meaningless.
6. Despite the global follow-thru overnight, ex-India, Globex futures are WEAK! That portends a weak opening…and since it is Friday, profit taking (sic)
So despite all those guru’s saying that the low’s had held (which they still have but do you want to risk your money to prove those are the lows?), the market did as it has in every key reversal (lower low, high high than prior day and close above the prior day’s high) thus far in the selloff…failed to sustain even three days of rally…this time not even one!
A capitulation is the most powerful of technical indicators, a key reversal is the second most powerful as it is tantamount to a capitulation, so when we get an in your face selloff like Friday we have total proof that the deleveraging is far from being over.
The picture of the dying bull above…some say he is already dead was used in an article titled “The End”, by Michael Lewis on Portfolio.com. A friend sent it and TB finally had time to read it slowly and in depth on Saturday…it is shocking and without a doubt the best description of the crisis TB has seen (it is punctuated with strong, tough, street slang so if you aren’t up to profanity be advised). The article is nine pages making it almost a sequel to Liars Poker…only it is far more meaningful. If you wish to read it TB will forward it to you in word format with the above caveats.
If you are a ‘free market capitalist’ you will be ashamed at what the street has done in its constant search for more wealth…while the risk was born by the shareholders. The good thing is there are heroes in this story such as Meredith Whitney who, like Fortune’s Bethany MacLean had the nerve to speak out. Both were ridiculed at first but in the end both were right…more right than even they imagined! If you thought Wall Street was filled with a bunch of bright guys…think again…they were idiots…greedy idiots.
On a similar vein, TB’s friend, Mark Gilbert, a Bloomberg reporter in London wrote the following piece which in a humorous format shows how widespread the complicity was.
Here is the piece that was on Bloomberg for non-Bloomberg subscribers and is available there at NI Gilbert if you care…also look at his other articles…they are all good.
Credit-Crunch Villains Pass the Buck, Party On: Mark Gilbert
2008-11-13 00:01:00.2 GMT
Commentary by Mark Gilbert
Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) — The great and the good of capitalism
and free markets held a requiem dinner for the global financial
system at a secret hideaway this week. As the waiter decanted a
fresh bottle of 1985 Chateau Margaux, the blame game began.
“I blame the central banks,” growled the bond trader,
stabbing the air with a forkful of raw steak. “If Alan Greenspan
hadn’t kept interest rates so low at the start of this decade, we
wouldn’t be in this mess. Talk about refilling the punch bowl
when the party guests are already as drunk as skunks!”
“We told you we were not in the business of identifying
bubbles, let alone trying to puncture them,” replied the central
banker, nibbling at a lettuce leaf. “We warned you that credit
spreads, emerging-market yields and volatility in stocks and
bonds were all too low, and that you were under-pricing risk.”
The central banker took a sip from his refilled wine glass.
“Can you imagine the outcry if we had tried to halt the
explosion in home ownership? I think you’ll find that the true
villains are the mortgage lenders; if they hadn’t trashed their
standards with self-certified and liar loans, the crisis in the
housing market would have remained self-contained.”
“That’s not fair,” said the mortgage originator. “We
weren’t on a level playing field. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were
using their implicit government guarantee to distort competition
in home loans. We were forced to take on more subprime borrowers
just to stay in the game; if it hadn’t been for all those clever
derivatives products, we would never have been able to recycle
all that toxic waste and keep the pyramid scheme afloat.”
Above Board
“Ah, the derivatives bogeyman,” chuckled the structured-
finance specialist. “Listen, derivatives don’t kill markets.
Markets kill markets. Everything we did was designed to promote
efficiency by allowing investors to disaggregate their risks. I
can show you the bills from my lawyers to prove that every
product we invented was legitimate.”
“All we did was offer advice on the best method of
structuring securitization transactions,” the capital-markets
lawyer said. “There would never have been a market for the
racier collateralized-debt obligations if the rating companies
had done proper due diligence, instead of slapping AAA ratings on
anything and everything that offered to pay them a fee.”
“You can hardly expect the finest minds in finance to come
and work for us when they can earn gazillion-dollar bonuses doing
the same work for an investment bank,” said the credit-rating
assessor. “We relied on the computer models that the banks
helped us build, and those models turned out to be, shall we say,
less than perfect. Besides, everything was fine until the money-
markets froze. The problem wasn’t over-optimistic ratings, it was
an over-reliance on wholesale markets to fund leverage.”
On the Hook
The waiter cleared away the dinner plates. The diners all
declined dessert — “Humble pie? No, thanks.” — agreeing
instead that a couple of bottles of 1982 Chateau d’Yquem would
round off the evening nicely.
“I’d never even heard of Structured Investment Vehicles
until they started to blow up,” said the central banker. “We
believed the banks when they said their business model was based
on originate-to-distribute; how were we to know that once the
music stopped, they were still on the hook for trillions of
dollars of liabilities they’d slipped off the balance sheets?”
“Look, domestic savings rates just weren’t high enough to
provide the kind of leverage we needed to juice our returns to
match those of our peers,” said the commercial banker. “We had
to rely on money-market funds, rather than our deposit base. And
the money markets wouldn’t have frozen if it hadn’t been for
those ridiculous mark-to-market rules forcing all of us to
prematurely disclose that we owned huge piles of securities that
were rotting, before prices had any chance to recover.”
Capital Inadequacy
“We gave you plenty of leeway to play fast and loose with
the truth so that you could stay solvent,” said the regulator.
“Besides, you were just doing your job of maximizing returns to
shareholders. If those greedy investors hadn’t forced you to take
on more risk, our rules on capital would have been more than
adequate to keep the banking system solvent.”
“How on Earth was I supposed to fund the retirements of
thousands of ex-employees when returns were collapsing
simultaneously in every market?” asked the pension-fund manager.
“Of course we wanted the banks to work their capital harder. We
were in the same boat, trying to move money into new arenas to
make a buck or three. We bought derivatives, commodities, we even
held our noses and gave money to the hedge funds. That didn’t
turn out to be such a good idea.”
“Hey, we warned you there would be times like this,” said
the hedge-fund manager. “If you want years when we deliver 50
percent, 60 percent returns, you have to expect periods when we
will lose 20 or 25 percent of your money. You won’t see us lining
up with our begging bowls at the government bailout window.”
The waiter coughed, proffering a slim leather folder
containing the reckoning for the evening’s entertainment.
“You are a taxpayer, I take it?” asked the investment
banker. The waiter nodded. “In which case, we were rather hoping
you would foot the bill.”
(Mark Gilbert is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions
expressed are his own.)
So when Dubya spoke on free market capitalism before the Manhattan Institute Thursday and said that it is too much regulation of the financial markets not too little that is to be feared most it was most disingenious. Not only was it a total failure to regulate as Mark Gilbert’s piece illustrates, but the pain will be felt most by the very countries that were the last to benefit: emerging markets. Furthermore, this time around…unlike in the Asian Crisis, those countries did everything right…they built up their infrastructure, etc.
It is also not surprising that the first communiqué from the G-20 meeting was a statement of unity on stabilizing the financial markets and the global economy. But think about what that means. In this country we don’t even have agreement between Hank Paulson and Congress on what it means…now take 20 countries with diverse interests and each of them has the same goal but their internal characteristics imply perhaps as twenty different solutions.
Take the U.S. and China…how can implementation of a means to stability be the same when one is the largest user of capital while the other is the largest provider of capital. Do Germany and France benefit from any action the same as the U.K. would? What about Iceland? Ireland? Latin America? Canada? …the point is it is a lot more complex than promises of unity.
If you listened Friday to the grilling (well done or burnt to a crisp) of Kashkari (Cash and Carry to TB), by Congress you saw how much difference in interpretation there is of a simple term: Troubled Asset Relief Program. Congress wanted those assets that were killing the mortgage debtors protected while Kashkari and Company was doling out blocks of $25 billion to banks with no stipulation of how it was to be used. Furthermore, they say there are an additional 1,000 requests for capital from small and regional banks and it takes time to get the money to them…nobody has asked how long it takes the government to print $25 billion let alone $290 billion…then follow that up with another $60 billion now that Paulson said his focus was on the wrong area.
Paulson also went on to say that it was because Congress took too long to pass the legislation that his ‘plan’ did not work…but he also said it did work since it did stabilize the global financial system…never mind that both AIG and Freddie Mac were back at the trough on Friday and Citigroup by virtue of its stock falling below $10 on Friday (despite Victor Pandit and friends buying 1.3 million shares…which is not even $15 million…Pandit sold his hedge fund to Citi for $168 million…so why wouldn’t he be willing to toss a few sheckels back into the game?
While Kashkari was being served up…memo to files: do NOT appear before Congress wearing a PINK tie…perhaps he was merely showing his support for breast cancer research but whatever it didn’t work…so there he sat looking like Howie Mandel but without the goodlooking models and briefcases full of money…deal?…or no deal? NO DEAL!!!…where were we?…oh yes, while Kashkari was trying to make his point, Hank Paulson was being interviewed by Maria Barteromo…an impromptu simulcast. Paulson kept saying “when the facts change I react to the changes”, an obvious paraphrasing of John Maynard Keynes famous: “when the facts change, I change…what do you do, sir?” Not as eloquent and if Keynes could decipher just what Paulson’s plan was or is, TB would be amazed at his brilliance because no one else on the planet has a clue!
Then TB read Barron’s with a list of 10 ‘must’ things that Obama should do immediately. First was an additional $100 billion stimulus package proposal he should make now (to cause Christmas sales to pick up…huh?), and follow up with another $100 billion after he takes office…huh? He isn’t even President yet but this fact seems to have escaped the Barron’s/WSJ/Dow Jones group. Second was to ‘invest’ $25 billion into GM and Ford but let Chrysler go under. Third, was to HELP homeowners by allowing the Treasury to inject another $100 billion into banks to pay down loans…and the list goes on and on and is more mindless blather.
Ah, Chrysler…aka Cerberus which not only owns them but GMAC Financial. Cerberus is asking for ‘relief’ too…as well they should as this stellar group has cost their investors plenty thus far. Note things in private equity are not going well as when one invests he signs a commitment for X dollars which is only drawn down as needed. Now the funds are coming back for more money from investors who are in no mood to pony up.
Then there is retail…such a buy…after all, retail sales can only go up…you know, just like home prices. Yet, despite evidence to the contrary in both areas, we keep hearing buy recommendations in both areas…nevermind that both Mervyn’s and Circuit City just went belly-up and more will likely follow after the holidays…or that Sears is resorting to resurrecting ‘layaway plans’ which they abandoned twenty years ago.
Enough…the point is that those who caused the problems got rich (although their wealth is diminishing lately), are either gone or begging for bailouts while those who have not benefited for 10 years…the working class…along with their children and grandchildren get to foot the bill…so much for ‘trickle down’ theory!
TB has been pretty harsh on Arnold Schwarzenegger but he gained a lot of points Sunday on This Week. His answers were clear and made sense. Like the comments on the G-20 meeting above he sees that it will be up to the federal government to sort through the request…triage if you will…in order to allocate the resources meaningfully.
While, as TB has said in the past, the crisis couldn’t have come at a worst time, he is rethinking that statement. Yes, it could have…at the beginning of Dubya’s second term!
Apologies for the length of today’s column but that was due to inclusion of Mark Gilbert’s excellent column.
TB
Trader Bill thinks it is clear to anyone reading these missives that they are merely commentaries…as he sees it…and do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone other than his own. Information is gathered from sources he has found reliable, but no guarantees of accuracy are implied. These are merely observations of events in the marketplace offering in an attempt to offer a non-mainstream viewpoint. Hope you find it useful. Copyright TBD Capital LLC November 17, 2008.