Category Archives: Risk and risk management

Should We Believe Jamie Dimon’s Crocodile Tears Over How Much Mortgages Have Cost Banks?

Jamie Dimon told the press on Friday that the mortgage crisis has been costly (but not TOO costly) for JP Morgan. From MarketWatch (hat tip Lisa Epstein):

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said Friday that the foreclosure process is a “mess” that’s cost the financial-services giant a lot of money.

Dimon also said litigation over troubled mortgage securities is “going to be a long, ugly mess,” but won’t be “life-threatening” for J.P. Morgan….

SIGTARP on Citi Rescue: Ignoring a Bomb That Has Yet to Be Defused

On the one hand, I must confess to a “I love the smell of napalm in the morning” response to reading the SIGTARP report on the extraordinary assistance extended to Citigroup, starting in November 2009. The well-documented, blow by blow account, taken from the perspective of regulators, dovetails neatly with the reports here and on other blogs during those fear-filled, gripping times. (As an aside, frustratingly, the media is treating some factoids in the account, such Citi’s reliance on over $500 billion of uninsured foreign deposits out of a $2 trillion balance sheet, as news, when it was noted repeatedly in the blogosphere, particularly here).

But on the other hand, the SIGTARP report is annoying, in that it fails to connect some critical dots, diminishes the importance of its key finding, and is far too complimentary to the officialdom.

Should We Buy Geithner’s Resistance to Naming “Systemically Important” Firms?

According to the Financial Times, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is trying to duck the assignment given the Financial Stability Oversight Council under the Dodd Frank legislation, namely, that of identifying “systemically important” financial institutions:

Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, has questioned the feasibility of identifying financial institutions as “systemically important” in advance of a crisis, just as the regulatory council he chairs is supposed to start doing precisely that…

JP Morgan Markets Its Latest Doomsday Machine (or Why Repo May Blow Up the Financial System Again)

By Richard Smith

Readers of ECONned will be very familiar with the name of Gary Gorton, author of ‘Slapped in The Face by the Invisible Hand’, which explores the relation of the so-called shadow banking system to the financial crisis. His work is pretty fundamental to understanding some of the mechanisms which made the crisis so acute. Now he’s done an interview, which I would like to have a growl at.

It also happens that JP Morgan, originators of those not unmixed blessings, Value-At-Risk and Credit Default Swaps, are also thinking hard about how to get rehypothecation going in the grand style. They know a volume business with a cheap government backstop when they see one; they are on a marketing push, and presumably they have the systems and processes that go with it. That would be a Doomsday Machine…

Why are Irish Political Leaders so Keen to Collude with the Bank Regulator in Covering Up Blatant Regulatory Breaches at Unicredit Ireland?

By Richard Smith Dublin, by way of the proudly-named International Financial Services Centre, a sparkling new development in the old docks, is “home to more than half of the world’s top 50 financial institutions”. But as the Irish financial crisis wears on, this glitter invites unpleasing comparisons: it simply looks meretricious. What Dublin and, let’s […]

The Wall of Worry for 2011 is a Big One, as usual

By Richard Smith These are things I’m keeping an eye on, or trying to find out more about. That isn’t a prediction that any of them will blow up, nor that nothing else will, just a round-up of the bees in my bonnet. If you’ve been following Naked Capitalism you are up to speed on […]

“Summer” Rerun: Welcome Willem Buiter and Mohamed El-Erian to the Banana Republic Club!

The time has come to announce the formation of the Banana Republic Club. Membership is open, with the sole requirement being that nominees correctly discern behaviors in advanced economies that resemble those of corrupt developing countries, which for sake of convenience are referred to as banana republics. Members are eligible to receive a Carmen Miranda hat, although they are not required to wear it.

Brad DeLong has his Ancient and Hermetic Order of the Shrill. Why should he have all the fun?

On the Gutting of Financial Services Reform

Bloomberg has a well done but disheartening account of the watering-down-to-meaninglessness of financial services industry reform, with the case example being Basel III. Basel III is the latest iteration of capital standards for banks, which is hoped to be implemented more or less true to form by various national bank regulators. Richard Smith has been ably covering the substance of this beat (see here and here for earlier posts) and the details are indeed more that a bit convoluted.

However, Basel III has been touted in the US as the fix for the shortcomings in bank reforms such as Dodd Frank. As Treasury argues, if banks have more than enough capital, you have a lot of room for error on other fronts. But Basel III preserves too many bad ideas of its predecessor, Basel II, such as risk-weightings for various types of assets that lend themselves to gaming; along with risk weighting, a preservation of the problematic role of unreformed rating agencies; allowing big banks to use their own idiosyncratic and often widely varying risk metrics; an obsession with the asset side of the balance sheet, and not enough to the way that liabilities can also blow out when asset prices are under stress.

The British Mess (III): Bank of England Tiptoes Around Sovereign Risk Worries

By Richard Smith The latest Bank of England Financial Stability Report is worth decoding. My last post on the UK sketched a scenario in which the very large 2011 funding programme for UK banks, discussed in the June BoE FSR (back issues all available here), could be quite problematic, in adverse markets. I hinted that […]

Another Day, Another Rating Agency Fail, This Time S&P

f you thought that the rating agencies had cleaned up their act in the wake of the crisis, think again. Our Richard Smith reported on a couple of black eyes by Moody’s, one a rather implausible 180 degree turn on its take on the US tax deal, the other a suspiciously flattering take on whether Countrywide had indeed transferred notes (retaining them, as an executive testified they did on a routine basis, would confirm our suspicions about widespread problems in the securitization industry.

Now we have a big blooper by S&P, this one in the form of mass rerating, based on an admitted faulty analysis. That is code for “big error in the model that everyone missed.”

Banks Desperate for Profits Seek Out Risky Credit Card Customers

anks, having trashed their once-sound model for the credit card business, are back trolling to find credit junkies, albeit of a somewhat safer type than the ones that blew up on them in the credit crisis.

Back in the 1980, the credit card industry, despite being more fragmented than now, had what looked a lot like oligopolistic pricing.

On MBIA’s Suit Against Morgan Stanley on a Second Lien Deal Gone Bad

n theory, I’m a wee bit late to the item at hand, a suit by failed mortgage bond insurer MBIA against Morgan Stanley on a second mortgage deal. But in practice, I’ve not seen any commentary on it and the suit has some interesting wrinkles.

Before we get to the details, however, a general issue: looking at this case is like deciding which of Cinderella’s bad sisters is less ugly. While mortgage bond originators and sponsors did not cover themselves in glory in the later years of the subprime business, MBIA is no prize. Of all the monolines, MBIA was the most dubious. In addition to the general, and now well known problem with the industry business model, that they were running at such high leverage levels that they could not take on any real risks, MBIA has its own special cause for concern, namely a less-than-arms-length reinsurance operation. And management has major ‘tude. I’ve never read investor reports that were as haughty and obviously truth-stretching as MBIA, and thus any claims it makes about the merits of pending litigation need to be taken with a fistful of salt.

Mirabile Dictu: The Treasury Flexes Some Muscle on the Volcker Rule?

As readers know, this blog has LOOONG been a critic of the Treasury Department’s stance towards big dealer banks, both in the Paulson era and from the very get-go of Geithner’s tenure. So on those all-too-rare occasions when Treasury seems willing to meddle in a real way with the “heads we win, tails you lose” arrangement the financial services industry has managed to devise with broader society, it’s important to applaud those efforts.

Admittedly, it is premature to declare victory, but the fact that Treasury is even taking a serious stance on the so-called Volcker rule is a surprise.

The plank in Schäuble’s eye

From the look of it, the Irish bailout is taking another chunk of another one of FT Alphaville stalwart Neil Hume’s weekends. From Peston European finance ministers are struggling to reach agreement on the interest rate to be paid by Ireland for the €85bn of rescue finance it is set to receive from the EU […]