LyrArc Article Gist
A former bond salesman at Goldman Sachs, who became managing director at Lehman Brothers and at Credit Suisse Boston, writes a book- The Investment Answer. He has only a few months to live after getting brain cancer, and decides he is going to make the best use of this time by writing this book. He points to the futility of active money management. And he is one of the few top money managers to take back a lot of what he learned during his career. At one time he says he did believe in the idea that our word was our bond, and good ethics was good business, but that was before this was transformed by liar loans.

LyrArc Article Gist
Investors compare Goldman Sachs which has retained its trading commodities business with Morgan Stanley which has shifted focus to wealth management and other less risky business. Morgan Stanley's share price has increased more than Goldman Sachs since the 2008 financial crisis, showing the different approaches taken by financial institutions that were battered during the financial crisis of 2008. Morgan Stanley had a change in management after the crisis, Goldman is still being run by CEO Blankfein, showing a key difference between the two banks. Morgan Stanley was battered during the crisis as its share price plunged on rumors in a way and extent that Goldman was not. Goldman was relatively better managed and avoided the frequent egregious errors made by other banks such as Deutsche Bank, UBS, Citigroup, taking fewer risks, leading upto the financial crisis of 2008, though it faced increased public scrutiny in the Abacus case for mortgage securities. It also helped with regulators that Goldman has a tradition of public service with executives working in government- Treasury Secretary Rubin worked in fixed income trading at Goldman, Treasury Secretary Paulson was former CEO at Goldman with strong China connections, and Gary Gensler at the CFTC. Now Goldman gets a larger share of its revenue from trading than competitors and was affected by the sharp commodities price swings in the 4th quarter of 2014. Revenue from fixed income, currencies and commodities trading declined by 29% in 2014 to $1.22 billion. Since the low reached in share price during the 2008 financial crisis, Goldman is up 267%, Morgan Stanley is up 291%. Even as tighter regulation is squeezing returns and banks are required to set aside more capital as buffer for riskier assets, Goldman continues to maintain its focus on commmodities business and trading. Mr. Blankfein and another senior executive Cohen, both got their start in commodities trading which generated about 8.2% of revenues in 2006 when Blankfein became the new CEO. Blankfein and president Gary Cohn worked at J.Aron & Co., a coffee importer, when it was acquired in 1981 and the location moved to Goldman's former headquarters in New York. The commodities business took off with China's surge in demand for metals and other commodities. Goldman's traders buy and sell aluminium, crude oil, natural gas, soyabeans, sugar, and derivatives. Goldman's revenue of $34.53 billion in 2014 has declined from $45.17 billion in 2009, and Goldman has reduced its balance sheet by a quarter. Net income increased in 2014 by 5% to $8.1 billion. But other than these changes Goldman unlike Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, Barclays, has not let its commodities trading business shrink. Goldman's commodities division is headed by Gregory Agran and co-chief Guy Saidenberg in London. Goldman says CEO Blankfein, "remains unabashedly an investment bank," and is waiting for economic conditions to improve....

LyrArc Article Gist
One big concern says Nancy Keates of the WSJ about the National Association of Realtors, is that the organization collects and puts out objective data about home sales, and at the same time provides a commentary on the statistics. It also has a mission to advance the interests of its members. There are 2.6 million licensed real estate agents, and NAR represents about 1.3 million of these real estate agents. Would the real estate agents and the NAR tolerate an economist who raised concerns about the boom in lending? David Lereah, is former chief economist for the NAR ,and worked there from 2000 to April 2007. He remained upbeat throughout these years, even when the market was headed downwards. And the way he sees it he was doing for 7 years everything the NAR wanted him to do, and he was pressured to issue these upbeat reports. Critics called him "Baghdad Dave", after a Iraqi information minister for his false upbeat reports even when the war on the Iraqi side was lost. And a Credit Suisse analyst called him Liar-eah for some of these upbeat assesments, when things were clearly going wrong. The way Nancy Keates sees it this economist was eager to profit himself in the boom years. He was an economics Professor at Rutgers, at the University of Virginia, and later an economist and regulator at the Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation. He himself bought condos 2 in Washington in 2003 and 2004, and one each in Tampa, Richmond, Va. and Alexandria, Va. and Naples, Florida. Owning by 2006 six condos worth between $150,000 and $400,000 a condo. He had an expensive lifestyle says his wife, with a big house worth $780,000, a country club, sports fishing boat. So in some ways suggests this reporter, he was caught up in the boom himself with his investments and the demands of a expensive lifestyle, with little room left for independent opinion and analysis. This is a striking example of things gone wrong, with all the meticulousness and comprehensiveness with which data is collected having its value destroyed by the lack of strict objectivity in the analysis. And the intrusion of strong personal interest bias in one direction making the destruction of objectivity complete. Looking at the economists at companies and associations, there is a subtle bias in operation that needs to be discounted by CEO's and association heads, a bias for giving the CEO's better and optimistic assessments on a consistent basis. An example is the way a large number of economists see the recovery taking place in 2009. Another related example is the sales forecasts for the Detroit auto companies that continued to assume sales in the 16-17 million a year rate into the latter half of 2008, even after the Bear Stearns collapse in March and the increasing foreclosures suggested something was amiss. All with horrendous consequences for the companies or industries involved, and the US and global economies....

LyrArc Article Gist
In Europe, France, Spain, Germany and other countries are giving cash subsidies to customers to buy cars when they turn in older cars. These refunds range from 1000 to 2500 euros, and reward the purchase of smaller more fuel efficient vehicles. It has boosted sales in Europe where sales are running at an annual rate of more than 13 million because of the subsidies, according to Credit Suisse analyst, which is well above the 11 million level of last year. The average American car says the analyst has been on the road for 9 years similar to that in Germany, so it makes sense for the USA. He says it could increase sales in the USA to 12 million cars, down from the 16 million sold in 2007 or the 13.4 million rate of 2008, but far higher than the 9.5 million rate in the first few months of 2009. In Europe small cars are dominant and it plays to the markets of large carmakers like Peugeot, VW, FIat, and Renault. But in the US Japanese carmakers are dominant in the small car market. Detroit carmakers make too many large cars and pickup trucks so the impact would be less. But the program could be fashioned in the US on a drop down in size and increase in fuel efficency, so that the clear direction is towards smaller cars. Turning in a pickup truck for a family car like a Malibu or a LaCrosse might promote fuel efficiency, and move things in the right direction. Its useful to note that even in Germany more expensive cars or brands have barely benefitted German car sales jumped 21.5% in February, but mass market manufacturers recorded a 37% surge, while sales of premium cars fell 19%. In Italy which started its program Feb. 6, buyers receive 1500 euros for trading in acar at least 10 years old. Fiat Punto sales have shown a strong increase. Fiat's facory in Melfi, southern Italy, is now running at full capacity after running on areduced scale from October 2008 to February 2009. It makes the Punto. In France 30-40% of car sales are coming from the scrapping deal, according to French Auto Manufacturers Association. Overall sales are running at about 6% below last year's rate, but in the absence of the scrapping deal sales might be off 10-15%. One concern for the French is that sales not drop off after the scrapping deal stops.France saw this happen in 1997and 1998 after ascrapping deal in 1994-1996. However considering that the cost to the German government for scrapping deal was $2 billion, the solution to this would be continue this program till the economy recovers and car sales are strong. Considering the benefits for an important industry and the societal benefit in lower pollution, it would be worth the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times editorial page on the day following the passage of the second bailout or rescue plan of $700 billion in the Senate after it was voted down in the House of Representatives. It points out that the bailout bill does little to prevent a wave of foreclosures which the NYT estimates at six million people expected to default in the rest of this year and 2009. It faults lenders unwillingness to reduce the loan balances amount. At a Congressional hearing for the Hope for Homeowners program in which the governmet wold insure upto $300 bilonin new affordable loans for troubled borrowers if the lenders voluntarily refinance delinquent mortgages by reducing loan balances to 90% of the homes' current market value, lending banks were lukewarm about taking these losses in exchange for bigger losses in foreclosures. These lenders include Wels Fargo, Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. The FDIC's Sheila Barr has also advocated reducing loan balances in her proposal for tackling the housing crisis presented after the Bear Stearns crisis. She is taking this approach to banks that like IndyMac were taken over by FDIC. But the numbers are not large letters were sent to 28,000 delinquent borrowers of IndyMac recently to reduce loan balances. This is a serious problem and either Congress and Treasury are leaving this problem to the next administration taking office 3 months from now as there is no real consensus on this issue even today or they are missing the impact this has in dropping home price values even further in neigborhoods across the nation as foreclosures drive prices down even further compounding the problem. For the financial institutions it would appear that they are letting this drag out because their capital is at frighteningly low levels and taking losses at one time is harder than taking the foreclosure losses dragged out over 1-3 years and they are also looking for a way in which they can let the government bear the burden of losses as the crisis intensifies which can make sense from the point of view of each institution. According to a report in the Wall Street Journal on September 29, 2008, Sheila Barr told Congress this month that in recent years troubled loan portfolios have yielded about 32% of book value, compared with more than 87% for loans in which the borrower is current. These are strong statistics in favor of lenders taking an informed decision to lower loan balances voluntarily with some government help along the way but the fact that this is not happening leads one to think that something is falling between the cracks, initial lender reluctance to take losses through voluntary balance reduction at the time of Bear Stearns crisis given taxpayer reluctance and lack of government initiative to help lenders in doing this, sort of what Martin Feldstein suggested in a series of articles during the time before and after the Bear Steans crisis. And then as the credit crisis worsened with collapse of Lehman, WaMu, Freddie, Fannie and Wachovia in September 2008 fear gripping the markets and LIBOR interbank lending rate at close to 8%, banks gripped by the fear prevailing in the market, frozen practically about any steps other than preserving their hammered capital, and reluctant to take losses which would further impair their capital. Also in the WSJ Sept 8, on help for homeowners, Deutsche Bank estimates 40% of homeowners or about 20 million households will owe more than their home is worth by the time the housing market stabilizes. This will lead to some homeowners making the rational decision as Martin Feldstein argued to walk away from their homes, leading to more foreclosure losses for th banks. This article Rescue Includes Steps to Help Borrowers Keep Homes by Ruth Simon also has some information that confirms the NYT editorial. An analysis it says of 144 mortgage modifications by the Massachusetts Attorney General's office found that none reduced mortgage balances and onoly a handful reduced monthly payments. Even with interest rate reductions, the study showed borrrowers wound up paying more because of missed paymmets penalties and fees. Another study by Credit Suisse mentioned in the same article points out that the percentage of borrowers who were behind 6 months after loan modifications dropped to 17% when lenders reduced the loan balances and 13% when mortgage companies froze the interest rate of adjustable rate mortgages. A bigger problem is the effect on consumption, if 40% of homeowners end up owing more to the bank than their home is worth as Deutsche Bank estimates, combined with higher unemployment and higher parttime employment, by the time things stabilize. And this is the big looming problem for a new administration in January even if the bailout plan passes Congress this week after revisions and eases the crisis in the credit markets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
UBS interim CEO Ermotti's career in investment banking and efforts to move UBS away from investment banking.

LyrArc Article Gist
Swiss shareholder activist Ethos Foundation called for personnel changes at UBS. Dominique Biedermann, head of Ethos called for the replacement of Kaspar Villiger and Carsten Kengeter, who head UBS investment bank. Biedermann said UBS should leave investment banking and former Deuthche Bundesbank President, Axel Weber, should join UBS as chairman earlier than the planned 2013 date. He suggested Hugo Baenziger, current chief risk officer at Deutsche Bank, rather than interim CEO Sergio Ermotti, who is an investment banker, as the right person for the CEO position at UBS.

LyrArc Article Gist
Testifying at Southwark Crown Court in London, UBS trader Adoboli said: "I absolutely lost control. I was no longer in control of the decisions around the trades we were doing... My ability to think rationally and deeply was gone." The trades led to losses of $2.3 billion for UBS.

LyrArc Article Gist
Systemic risks from "too big to fail" and the pushback on capital reserve requirements that leave banks with lower reserves. Ewing describes the role of the president of the Swiss Central Bank, Mr Hildebrand, in setting rules for higher capital reserves for Swiss banks than that of other countries and the pushback from the banks resisting the new regulations. "He will never find another job in Switzerland," a Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag quoted one banker saying this about Mr. Hildebrand. Losses at Swiss bank UBS during the financial crisis and the $2 billion loss at a UBS trading desk in 2011 have created a new awareness of systemic risk at banks. During the financial crisis banks used an optimistic estimate of "risk weighted assets" which led to insufficient capital reserves in a crisis even as the banks were shown to be well capitalized. A sense that banks in Europe and the U.S. will continue to have insufficient capital reserves at 3-4% of assets under new rules and with the longer phase in times for the new Basel III regulations of reserves at 7% of assets to after 2016....