[Zanimivost] four bad bear markets: update

Update že znane slike:

Four-bears-large

Pa še ena nova:
Mega-bear-quartet

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Mnenja] CR: Q1 GDP will be Ugly

Q1 GDP will be Ugly

by CalculatedRisk on 3/27/2009 04:43:00 PM

Earlier today the BEA released the February Personal Income and Outlays report. This report suggests Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) will probably be slightly positive in Q1 (caveat: this is before the March releases and revisions).

Since PCE is almost 70% of GDP, does this mean GDP will be OK in Q1?

Nope.

I expect Q1 2009 GDP to be very negative, and possibly worse than in Q4 2008. Right now I'm looking at something like a 6% to 8% decline (annualized) in real GDP (there is significant uncertainty, especially with inventory and trade).

The problem is the 30% of non-PCE GDP, especially private fixed investment. There will probably be a significant inventory correction too, and some decline in local and state government spending. But it is private fixed investment that will cliff dive. This includes residential investment, non-residential investment in structures, and investment in equipment and software.

A little story ...

Imagine ACME widget company with a steadily growing sales volume (say 5% per year). In the first half of 2008 their sales were running at 100 widgets per year, but in the 2nd half sales fell to a 95 widget per year rate. Not too bad.

ACME's customers are telling the company that they expect to only buy 95 widgets this year, and 95 in 2010. Not good news, but still not too bad for ACME.

But this is a disaster for companies that manufacturer widget making equipment. ACME was steadily buying new widget making equipment over the years, but now they have all the equipment they need for the next two years or longer.

ACME sales fell 5%. But the widget equipment manufacturer's sales could fall to zero, except for replacements and repairs.

And this is what we will see in Q1 2009. Real investment in equipment and software has declined for four straight quarters, including a 28.1% decline (annualized) in Q4. And I expect another huge decline in Q1.

For non-residential investment in structures, the long awaited slump is here. I expect declining investment over a number of quarters (many of these projects are large and take a number of quarters to complete, so the decline in investment could be spread out over a couple of years). And once again, residential investment has declined sharply in Q1 too.

When you add it up, this looks like a significant investment slump in Q1.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/03/q1-gdp-will-be-ugly.html

 

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost]

Če prav razumem: prikaz kako sektorji vodijo oz. zaostajajo za recesijo (začetek po uradni definiciji?, datum recoveryja razložen spodaj v fusnoti 1), za zadnje štiri recesije:

Visualizing Economic Decline and Recovery

By Paul Kedrosky · Thursday, March 26, 2009 · ShareThis

Good graphic from McKinsey comparing decline and recovery across the last four U.S. downturns, compared to the current one. McKinsey argues that the current downturn, far from being unprecedented, matches much of what we saw in the preceding one.

That is true, of course, but at a high level it is also a mathematical truism, so it's not particularly surprising. What's different is what matters, and that flows from the origins of the current downturn in credit markets, as opposed to being rooted in the normal business cycle.

[via McKinsey]

http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2009/03/visualizing_eco.html

========================================================================================== To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe. Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom. This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company. E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost] Newssift

Tegale še nisem dobro testiral, ampak se zdi, da je nekaj, kar sem že dolgo iskal. Filtriranje finančnih novic iz različnih virov po obdobjih (meni uporabno predvsem pri pisanju mesečnih/polletnih poročil). Drugače pa naj bi pametno urejal tudi po osebah, podjetjih, temah...

Outlook

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost] en ličen vpogled v stanje ameriške ekonomije

Outlook

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost] Roubini previdno optimističen glede Geithnerjevega plana

Narobe svet: Roubini previdno optimističen glede Geithnerjevega plana. Predvsem v delu, kjer subvencionirani nakupi s strani skladov pomagajo odkriti pravo ceno toxic assetov. Nacionalizacijo še vedno vidi kot komplementarno rešitev

“My take is generally positive, with a couple of caveats,” Mr. Roubini told DealBook about the new plan. He said he liked that the government was finally stepping up to clear the toxic assets off the bank’s balance sheet and that private capital would come in to make a market for it.

“Having five people bid on a toxic asset, rather than a clueless government, will ensure that the government doesn’t overpay,” Mr. Roubini said in a telephone interview. “People say, ‘the government is putting in 95 cents on the dollar, so why not put 100,’ to do it all by itself. It’s because private-sector participants have the incentive to get the best price.”

It wasn’t all positive: Mr. Roubini said he did not like that banks have the option not to sell an asset after the auction concluded, as this would create confusion and frustration on the part of the buyers. He also said he believed the government should use its leverage over the banks to force them to participate, whether they wanted to or not.

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost] najboljši stavek o tveganju v dolgem času

“There’s no such thing as a risk that you get paid for taking. The whole point about risk is that you don’t know if you’re going to be paid for it or not,” says Robert Jaeger at BNY Mellon Asset Management.

Drugače pa je zanimivo še tole, od enega tipa, ki ga precej navajam v svoji magistrski (moj masterpiece, 3 years in the making):

Still, the search is on for a new theory to replace efficient markets. Perhaps most prominently, Andrew Lo, head of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Financial Innovation Laboratory, has merged behavioural and efficient markets theory using Darwinian biology.

In his “adaptive markets hypothesis”, markets behave efficiently during periods of calm. “Periods of extraordinary prosperity have behavioural effects – it gives us a false sense of security and therefore there is too much risk-taking. Eventually that kind of risk-taking is unsustainable and you get a burst of the bubble.”

S temle se zelo zelo strinjam...

Once bubbles burst, Mr Lo’s theory predicts, a period of “punctuated equilibrium” will ensue, in which long-engrained behaviours no longer work. “We just had a meteorite hit us in financial markets. There will be destruction of species that have lasted a very long time. Out of the chaos will emerge new species.”

Most clearly, the lightly regulated hedge fund industry – described by Mr Lo as the Galapagos of financial services – is suffering a shake-out. The sector as a whole suffered an average loss of 18.3 per cent last year, only its second losing year since 1990, according to Hedge Fund Research of Chicago. This prompted investors to pull $155bn (€115bn, £105bn) out of the funds. But the worst performing 10 per cent lost an average of 62 per cent, while the top decile gained 40 per cent. The Darwinian process is well advanced: 1,471 hedge funds were liquidated last year, while only 659 new ones were launched, the lowest figure since 2000.

Tole smo v bistvu mi...

The traditional mutual fund, in which managers run a portfolio of about 100 stocks and attempt to beat a benchmark index, may be another casualty. Last year, most equity mutual funds failed to beat their benchmark indices, even though their managers had the freedom to move into cash and to pick stocks. Mr Malkiel points out that of the 14 funds that had beaten the market in the nine years to 2008, only one did so last year. Both efficient-markets and behavioural economists say it is better just to match the index, with a tracking fund, and avoid the fees incurred in unsuccessful attempts to beat the market.

Index funds have caught on over the last two decades and, recently, their growth has been driven by exchange-traded funds – index funds that can be bought and sold directly on an exchange. Mutual funds saw global net sales of $112bn last year but ETFs pulled in a net $268bn, according to Strategic Insight, a New York consultancy. Barclays Global Investors reckons there are plans to launch another 679 ETFs around the world.

Index funds could become building blocks for new retirement savings products that may look much like the pensions that were the norm until confidence in equity investing took over. As it may be politically infeasible to continue to expect savers to bear all the investment risk, some benefits may have to be guaranteed.

Mr Lo suggests that all these developments are consistent with a new world in which investments will largely be controlled by “herbivores” – funds that passively aim to match benchmark indices for a range of asset classes that goes beyond equities. This leaves room for a smaller group of “carnivores” to try to beat the market by exploiting inefficiencies and anomalies.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/680b46b0-18a7-11de-bec8-0000779fd2ac.html

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Zanimivost] U.S. Total Credit Market Debt by Sector: 1929-2008

Zanimiv graf:

U.S. Total Credit Market Debt by Sector: 1929-2008

By Paul Kedrosky · Tuesday, March 24, 2009 · ShareThis

Nice chart from Morgan Stanley breaking down total U.S. credit market debt as a percentage of GDP since 1929. The differences in the debt’s composition from the 1930s to today are striking, with households, not corporates, being the credit problem children today

Drugače pa je to iz že včeraj omenjene prezentacije o internetu, mobilnosti ipd., ki pa vsebuje tudi veliko zanimivega na temo celotnega gospodarstva. Prilagam (140 strani).

lpd
========================================================================================== To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe. Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom. This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company. E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

Click here to download:
TECHTRENDS032009FINAL.pdf (4.53 MB)
(download)

[Zanimivost] $3 trillion spent... $9 to go

Outlook

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.

[Mnenja] The “Geithner Put”

Malo bailout aritmetike (plan je stalno en in isti, le da tokrat malo bolj finančno zamotan):

The “Geithner Put”, part 1

The details of the “Geithner Put” have been released.  It has two parts:  One to deal specifically with bad loans, the other to deal with other legacy assets (securitized yadda yadda).  In this post I will discuss the first part, dubbed the “Legacy Loans Program”.

The Treasury helpfully provides an example, which I reproduce here:

Step 1: If a bank has a pool of residential mortgages with $100 face value that it is seeking to divest, the bank would approach the FDIC.

Step 2: The FDIC would determine, according to the above process, that they would be willing to leverage the pool at a 6-to-1 debt-to-equity ratio.

Step 3: The pool would then be auctioned by the FDIC, with several private sector bidders submitting bids. The highest bid from the private sector – in this example, $84 – would be the winner and would form a Public-Private Investment Fund to purchase the pool of mortgages.

Step 4: Of this $84 purchase price, the FDIC would provide guarantees for $72 of financing, leaving $12 of equity.

Step 5: The Treasury would then provide 50% of the equity funding required on a side-by-side basis with the investor. In this example, Treasury would invest approximately $6, with the private investor contributing $6.

Step 6: The private investor would then manage the servicing of the asset pool and the timing of its disposition on an ongoing basis – using asset managers approved and subject to oversight by the FDIC.

Let’s flesh this out by repeating it 100 times.  So say a bank has 100 of these $100 loan pools.  And just by way of example, suppose half of them are actually worth $100 and half of them are actually worth zero, and nobody knows which are which.  (These numbers are made up but the principle is sound.  Nobody knows what the assets are really worth because it depends on future events, like who actually defaults on their mortgages.)

Thus, on average the pools are worth $50 each and the true value of all 100 pools is $5000.

The FDIC provides 6:1 leverage to purchase each pool, and some investor (e.g., a private equity firm) takes them up on it, bidding $84 apiece.  Between the FDIC leverage and the Treasury matching funds, the private equity firm thus offers $8400 for all 100 pools but only puts in $600 of its own money.

Half of the pools wind up worthless, so the investor loses $300 total on those.  But the other half wind up worth $100 each for a $16 profit.  $16 times 50 pools equals $800 total profit which is split 1:1 with the Treasury.  So the investor gains $400 on these winning pools.  A $400 gain plus a $300 loss equals a $100 net gain, so the investor risked $600 to make $100, a tidy 16.7% return.

The bank unloaded assets worth $5000 for $8400.  So the private investor gained $100, the Treasury gained $100, and the bank gained $3400.  Somebody must therefore have lost $3600…

…and that would be the FDIC, who was so foolish as to offer 6:1 leverage to purchase assets with a 50% chance of being worthless.   But no worries.  As long as the FDIC has more expertise in valuing toxic assets than the entire private equity and banking worlds combined, there is no way they could be taken to the cleaners like this.  What could possibly go wrong?

https://self-evident.org/?p=502

Še malo drugače, Krugman:

Let me offer a numerical example. Suppose that there’s an asset with an uncertain value: there’s an equal chance that it will be worth either 150 or 50. So the expected value is 100.

But suppose that I can buy this asset with a nonrecourse loan equal to 85 percent of the purchase price. How much would I be willing to pay for the asset?

The answer is, slightly over 130. Why? All I have to put up is 15 percent of the price — 19.5, if the asset costs 130. That’s the most I can lose. On the other hand, if the asset turns out to be worth 150, I gain 20. So it’s a good deal for me.

Notice that the government equity stake doesn’t matter — the calculation is the same whether private investors put up all or only part of the equity. It’s the loan that provides the subsidy.

And in this example it’s a large subsidy — 30 percent.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/geithner-plan-arithmetic/

 

==========================================================================================

To elektronsko sporocilo in vse morebitne priloge so poslovna skrivnost in namenjene izkljucno naslovniku. Ce ste sporocilo prejeli pomotoma, Vas prosimo, da obvestite posiljatelja, sporocilo pa takoj unicite. Kakrsnokoli razkritje, distribucija ali kopiranje vsebine sporocila je izrecno prepovedano. Ni nujno, da to sporocilo odraza uradno stalisce druzbe.

Elektronsko sporocilo je pregledano z antivirusnim programom.

 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. This e-mail may not necessarily reflect the official viewpoint of the company.

E-mail message is scanned by Anti-Virus Software.