Daily Kos

Banking crisis set to explode in January?

Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 07:26:55 AM PDT

I read an interesting news story in today's Observer newspaper (the Sunday paper published by the same folks who do the Guardian here in the UK. It suggests that the banking crisis is about to get worse, with major banks being put in a position of either having to dun shareholders to invest additional real money or sell themselves out to Asian/Middle Eastern interests or fold.  I will excerpt a short bit below.

Banks may be forced to seek huge injections of fresh capital as the credit crunch shows no sign of abating, experts warned last night.

Analysts are talking about the possibility of rights issues, which would involve banks asking shareholders to subscribe to new equity in order to provide cash to bolster balance sheets that have been crippled by the US sub-prime debacle.

Rumours were circulating in New York and London on Friday that western banks face intense pain in the new year, with bad-debt provisions set to soar from $59bn to more than $250bn. 'That would knock the banks' balance sheets for six,' said one analyst.

Several brokers fear Merrill Lynch, in particular, could be hit further in 2008. Last week, it emerged that Merrill was seeking a $5bn investment from Temasek, an arm of the Singaporean state. Citigroup has already secured cash from Abu Dhabi, the Gulf state.

Gerard Lyons, chief economist and head of global research at Standard Chartered, said: 'Next year, we shall find out whether the crisis moves from being a liquidity squeeze to one about funding, with questions raised about whether banks are adequately capitalised.'

Rights issues or other capital injections are clearly on the agenda, he said.

In the City, a senior analyst said if funding became a problem, 'banks would have to sell assets, seek investors, such as cash-rich Asian or Middle Eastern sovereign funds, or launch rights issues'.

So that would be an increase in bad debt of about 400 percent, from a situation already acknowledged to be a major crisis.
Curious, I thought I would see whether insiders are talking about what this might mean openly on the Web. I should quickly note that I'm not an insider myself, just a working stiff who knows her meager pension (and her retired mother's ability to pay bills) is wrapped up with what happens in the financial markets, even though I don't invest directly myself, don't own property, and have so little in the bank that it is all protected under UK law.
The answer is, yes they are. Many posts I saw point the finger at companies like Bear Stearns, whose huge quarterly loss (its first) threatens the stability of various banks that have their own finances wrapped up in Bear Stearns hedge funds or similar. So it's not just about subprime loans, although the repackaging of those was one of the ways banks created vast amounts of precarious funny money with which to pursue additional investments.
What it appears to mean to people like me is that borrowing money is about to get very difficult, and not just for those with poor credit; It won't just be about mortgage loans, but also business loans, car loans and credit cards. Those of us carrying unsecured debt (i.e., credit cards and some kinds of personal loans) may find that our repayment terms are revised to benefit the banks--usually there is fine print in your agreement that allows the bank to do this as long as they inform you first--as that's another way they can shore up their sagging capital reserves.
I am personally hoping for a housing price crash in the UK as it's the only way I could ever afford to buy here, but recognise that the coming recession (depression?) will not really be good for anyone except corporate scavengers...

Tags: banks, banking, credit crunch, UK, recession (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 15 comments

  •  My Guess (10+ / 0-)

    Recession is likely.

    Global implosion?  Less likely.

    But ...

    My own bank has been doing a bunch of things that make me think that they are getting the house in order in case they encounter additional solvency problems down the road.  They've already had to ask sovereign funds to step in and help re-capitalize the institution.

    One of these is to limit the amount of money that can be transferred electronically out of my accounts to a second bank during any 30-day period to $10,000.  And a daily limit of $2,000.

    Makes you wonder.

    "Truck Stop Women," a New Film By Phil Gramm and John McCain.

    by bink on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 07:33:32 AM PDT

    •  I was told on Thrusday to expect it to get much (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      worse next year.

      Housing would get much worse, the correction is only about half way done.  Banks would have to merge to survive.  And the American Worker will see unprecedented unemployment so the Corporations can still report earnings, so they too don't implode.  

      Of course they were only Fortune 100 CFO's Talking.  Not bankers, so take that for what it is worth.

      •  It's going to be very, very bad... (4+ / 0-)

        The European and US central banks are not letting the public or the press know which major banks are borrowing funds at fire-sale rates--just to maintain very, very short-term liquidity for only a FEW weeks--and they're just going to need more cash in Q1 '08. $600 billion in emergency liquidity outlays...just to get through the holiday season.

        Meanwhile, the banks are STILL hoarding cash...and credit's tighter than it's just about EVER been. This further compounds the problem.

        It's to the point where the Fed is about to invoke emergency powers, with the Board of Governors stepping in and FORCING the banks in trouble to release their funds.

        From the two articles that I link to in my comments, above:

        "Liquidity doesn't do anything in this situation," says Anna Schwartz, the doyenne of US monetarism and life-time student (with Milton Friedman) of the Great Depression.

        "It cannot deal with the underlying fear that lots of firms are going bankrupt. The banks and the hedge funds have not fully acknowledged who is in trouble. That is the critical issue," she adds.

        The Federal Reserve is in all-out panic mode, according to respected columnist and tv personality, Barry Ritholtz. And, over the past few days, the Fed's actually making not-too-veiled statements supporting Ritholtz's comments from just a few days ago, as well.

        "New York's Federal Reserve chief Tim Geithner... (is) ...warning of an 'adverse self-reinforcing dynamic,'  banker-speak for a downward spiral. The Fed has broken decades of practice by inviting all US depositary banks to its lending window, bringing dodgy mortgage securities as collateral."

        The Federal Reserve is now planning for somewhat of a worst-case scenario to play out sometime in February or March, especially if interest rates don't decline rapidly enough, and if banks continue to hoard their cash (as they're doing now). Credit has virtually dried up, despite the respective government's efforts to lessen that pain.

        "Quietly, insiders are perusing an obscure paper by Fed staffers David Small and Jim Clouse. It explores what can be done under the Federal Reserve Act when all else fails.

        "Section 13 (3) [of that document] allows the Fed to take emergency action when banks become 'unwilling or very reluctant to provide credit'. A vote by five governors can - in 'exigent circumstances'--authorise the bank to lend money to anybody, and take upon itself the credit risk. This clause has not been evoked since the Slump."

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 08:41:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that is a stolen article (1+ / 1-)

          Recommended by:
          antirove
          Hidden by:
          bobswern

          that is a stolen article. You should attribute properly and limit the amount of quoted text.

          Most of your post comes from here. (which you also link, downthread).

          •  If you read it, I attribute to downthread links! (0+ / 0-)

            What's your point? You accuse me of plagiarizing, then you acknowledge I attribute properly. And, I reference the attribution HERE, as well!!!

            Here's my comment...

            "From the two articles that I link to in my comments, above:"

            And, for the record, the REST of the copy IS my own!

            This is a comment to a diary. And, I DO reference another comment for proper attribution!

            Furthermore, I just did a diary on this 72 hours ago!!! And, the British magazine, "The Business UK" ripped off MY DKos diary headline after it was published!

            Furthermore, "The Business UK" RIPPED OFF  this story from a piece in the Telegraph!!! Which I reference properly in my Diary from the 20th! (And, I'd imagine that if I linked to my diary, you'd then accuse me of DIARY PIMPING, right!)

            So, no, I didn't ripoff The Business UK. The Business UK ripped off the Telegraph quote, and then they ripped off my HEADLINE!

            So, if you're going to go around casting FALSE accusations against people in headlines of comments, only to contradict yourself in the copy of the comment, GET YOUR OWN DAMN FACTS STRAIGHT FIRST!

            Thank you very much!!!!

            You've got a lot of balls making accusations against people in comment headlines. At least I'm not calling you an ass or a jerk in my headline, am I? Nope, I'm doing it right here in my TEXT.

            YOU owe ME an apology.

            "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

            by bobswern on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 08:28:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  as I said (0+ / 0-)

              I said what I expected you to do.

              1. Attribute properly. The way to do that is use blockquote tags (so people can clearly see what is yours and what is quoted) and provide a working link to the original where you took it from.
              1. Limit the amount of quoted text. You copied more of the quoted article than I think is covered by the "fair use" doctrine.

              What's so complicated about that.

              And the TR is ratings abuse. You dislike what I say.

        •  so what now? this needs to get on the front (0+ / 0-)

          page and on the lips of the candidates

          •  No shit!!! It will...but it's like global warming (0+ / 0-)

            ...the effects take awhile to kick-in...and they're complex as far as reporting the story's concerned.

            "Luckily" (not really), the full effects of this economy story are only weeks or a few months off...global warming is taking longer than that to make it to the front of the mindless minds of the public, otherwise totally preoccupied with the likes of Reality TV and Fox News.

            "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

            by bobswern on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 11:34:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Bushco + Greenspan = recession at the least. (8+ / 0-)

    We already are in the recession in the US, it's just being obfuscated by the Fed's policies in an attempt to move the problems, and subsequent blame for same, to the next administration.
    The Bush Recession will indeed be a terrible time for all of us.

    St. Ronnie was an asshole.

    by manwithnoname on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 07:35:38 AM PDT

  •  Home Ownership (8+ / 0-)

    I am personally hoping for a housing price crash in the UK as it's the only way I could ever afford to buy here

    Truthfully, I don't even think I'd want to buy if the prices did drop precipitously and I were the only American left with credit to get a Mortgage on a house.  Fact is, my state of Florida is heading towards bankruptcy, thanks in no small part to Jeb Bush's back-door thievery, and the property taxes have skyrocketed in recent years.  I fear that if I purchased an affordable house, they'd still charge so much in Property tax that it would be unaffordable, no matter how cheap the house was.

    •  Jeb had help (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      corvo, Jimdotz, Newzie

      The Republican Senate down here is about as corrupt and inept as they come, in my ten-month experience down here. And I thought that Virginia was bad! At least they had a Democratic governor come in and take charge.

      Even without Jeb(!) the Senate is a tool of old Florida landowning families and their developer cronies. Since I've been down here, they've tried to tackle property taxes and insurance and failed miserably at both.

      "I will fight for my country, but I will not lie for her. " -- Zora Neale Hurston

      by blueintheface on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 08:11:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  doesn't make a difference in the UK (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      LillithMc, Newzie

      as we have Council Tax rather than property tax. Everyone pays it, it's based on the value band of your house, and even though I rent, I pay this myself--not the owner whose property I rent.
      In some areas, Council Tax outstrips what people are paying weekly for rent! (I have a friend who rents a council house in London who pays almost twice as much in tax than rent).
      I didn't even have a pension til I was 40 and will have to keep working until they force me to stop. Even then, there are only 2 ways we can survive:

      1. Own a house free and clear

      or

      1. Rent from the Council or a Housing Association (rents based on income)

      Unfortunately, the UK government has forced cities to gradually privatise most council housing, and many of the housing associations are now "not-for-profit" (in name only) developers, rather than charities providing housing for low-income people as they once were. A few HAs are outright criminal, trading housing for favours and indulging in the rankest sort of property speculation and block-busting.
      Me, I would be happy to own the slum property I currently rent--and I hope it's the kind of neighbourhood where property values are likely to fall rapidly in any crash. They are currently around 10 times the cost of what they were 10 years ago, the level of crazed speculation is beyond belief--10-20 percent a MONTH at some points. Needless to say, salaries have gone up 2, 3 percent most years.
      I suppose there is an option 3, which is squatting. I'm not really kidding, my husband did it for a couple years when we were young. I just figure it's a lot harder to look over your shoulder and travel light when you're over 60.

      Political Compass says: -8.88, -8.67
      "We never sold out cos no one would buy."--J Neo Marvin

      by expatyank on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 12:52:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  2008 "...will make 1929 look like walk in park." (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    antirove, Snarcalita, LillithMc, Jimdotz

    In TODAY'S press...from Toronto and the U.K...since the MSM here is doing everything it can so US population doesn't panic and start a bank run...

    There's this...

    ["2008 could make 1929 look like a walk in the park." http://www.thebusiness.co.uk/...

    And, this... from Eric Margolis, a veteran American economic journalist, now writing in Toronto.

    And, perhaps the quote that sums it all up from one our leading economic historians in the United States.

    "Liquidity doesn't do anything in this situation," says Anna Schwartz, the doyenne of US monetarism and life-time student (with Milton Friedman) of the Great Depression.

    "It cannot deal with the underlying fear that lots of firms are going bankrupt. The banks and the hedge funds have not fully acknowledged who is in trouble. That is the critical issue," she adds.

    Other folks point out how severe this is MUCH better than anything I could say.

    "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

    by bobswern on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 08:22:14 AM PDT

  •  The ECB (0+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    is loaning banks money to cover their books; 500 billion dollars worth. As long as democracies are OK with that, it will continue.

    CBS, the new "Memory Hole". Ask McCain, "Where's Sattar?"!

    by Paul Goodman on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 10:10:05 AM PDT

Permalink | 15 comments