Who Needs Al Queda? We've Done It to Ourselves!

by AngryWatchdog Monday, September 22, 2008

The groups described below have inflicted a greater financial damage on our nation than Al Queda could ever have hoped to. 

The sheer unchecked greed of Wall Street and the failure of government to recognize and halt excessive credit availability have taken America to the financial edge.  Last week (beginning Sept. 15th, 2008) we as a nation experienced the unraveling of our financial system at the hands of those who remain unable to control their greed.  We all know how we got here, as those more qualified and smarter than I have written (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26837854/page/2/ for a good quick summary).  The people responsible: 

  • High Risk Homebuyers:

Homebuyers who thought that they would get a free ride into home ownership and refused to educate themselves about their true financial situation are at the source of the meltdown. I am not sure that I understand how a person who is making one of the most significant financial decision of their lives does not plan for a relatively likely scenario of real estate price declines.  I place the most blame with this group because without them, the rest in this list would have had nothing to do. 

  • Government: 

Policies approved by both parties that allow Freddie and Fannie to leverage themselves to unimaginable levels.  Interest rates that were kept at ridiculously low levels invited imbalances in the market. A lack of leadership in government to confront excesses credit availability due to excessive leverage, complex derivative products, Hedge Funds etc.  Our representatives act in their own interest and not in the interest of our nation (I am talking about all representatives from all parties). 

  • SEC: 

Lack of oversight of investment banks who have also been allowed to leverage up to 40X+ assets. What are these people thinking?  This is nothing short of negligence.  One tiny hiccup in the market and the whole house of cards will come down.  You don’t need sophisticated models to figure this out, you just need a napkin and a pen. 

  • Mortgage Lenders: 

Nothing short of greed here!  Putting people in mortgages that they obviously cannot afford.  There are many mortgage lenders that need to be held legally accountable. 

  • Real Estate Appraisers: 

Most Real Estate Appraisers do their job and allow the market to dictate the price.  I cannot find fault in that.  However, there appears to be significant number of appraisers who purposefully over estimated their appraisals and for those, there needs to be legal accountability. 

  • Rating Agencies:

I am not exactly sure what this group does but I can assure you it is not their job.  These people took for example 100 sub prime mortgages, sliced them into groups and said that up to 80% were of the highest quality and investment grade.  You would have to be a moron to think that 100 sub prime mortgages are not correlated.  “Oh” they said “but the historical default rates on these prove that 80% is reasonable.”  If that is your answer then you should be fired.  If you look at default rates while real estate is rising, then invest away but to evaluate the true risk, try looking at a period of declining real estate and better yet when a real estate bubble has bust then the 80% should be more like 20%.  These rating agencies were plain wrong and they need to be held financially accountable.

  •   Wall Street:

A collection of our brightest minds!  These people are definitely smart, no question about that.  So how could they let something like this happen?  Simple!  They are so focused on making money for themselves that they did not take the time to ask the question, What if.  It is the first question of risk analysis and these people didn’t ask it.  A first year at Wharton would have answered the question correctly but would anything have changed if Wall Street had asked the question.  Probably not.  When you pay someone 5 times their base pay in bonus based on current year’s performance, there is incredible incentive to “swing for the fences.”  If you hit the home run, you make a fortune.  If you miss, you leave and join another firm to try again.  

  • Banks and Financial Institutions: 

Unfortunately for this group and for us, they were the last ones holding the bag in this giant pyramid scheme.  They were led to the CDO investments and jumped in without fully understanding the underlying instruments and their correlations.  A rule of thumb for investing, if you do not understand the instrument and how different market scenarios will affect your investment, don’t invest.  Because of their lack of understanding, we face a potential run on the bank.  Last week depositors feared a meltdown in the money market mutual fund area.  The run began but was swiftly stopped when government stepped in and backed the industry with a guarantee.  Banks got extremely nervous about a potential run on their deposits given their $100,000 cap of FDIC insurance per depositor vs no cap placed on money market mutual fund deposits.  The government quickly retraced and said only money market funds deposits prior to last week were guaranteed.   

Am I angry?  HELL YES!.  A lot of these people made a lot of money over the last 8 years and now we, the taxpayers are being asked to pay a hefty price to bail them out.  Will we pay? Yes because they have put us in a hole that can get a heck of a lot deeper if we don’t. But don’t think this is over.  There is a lot more pain to come due to the fixes we are putting in place today.

My next post will discuss the potential impact of the Government bailout.  Future entries beyond that will attempt to provide investment strategies to protect yourself.

I welcome comments and questions so don’t be shy.  Please post comments to my blog so that I can read and respond to them.

Comments

Capitalist

Posted on 9/24/2008 9:10:27 AM

Shouldn't people be allowed to make bad decisions and go bankrupt? It's not like Lehman or Bear employees didn't pay a price when their companies became overextended.

ReginaS

Posted on 9/27/2008 7:49:21 AM

I think that banks should go back and do what they are suppose to do: lend money for people that can afford to pay back. Banks won't give credit card to people with bad credit but lend money for anybody to buy their "dream". People on welfare was getting mortages with a very high rate but they don't care, they have a HOUSE. They became very easy target to the banks. I don't feel sorry for this people because not always a dream is the right thing to follow, in this case, homeowner dreams became a worse nightmare. Now, they probably don't even have a place to sleep and lost their hard earning money to use at down and other expenses. This bail out is wrong but there is no other way to get out of this mess. I am looking forward to read more of your comments.

iconcmo

Posted on 10/6/2008 11:53:15 PM

I read your post and found it right on about the people that got us into this mess. I was looking for the follow up post about investments that are more sound in this turbulent time that we are facing. I am a very small time investor and just starting to learn the ropes in stocks. With that said I have been looking at these stocks that are just falling from companies like Intel, AMD, Circuit City, Best Buy, yhoo, ebay, google, etc and wondering if these would be okay to get into with a pay off down the road when they rise again. Most of what I have read about stocks is that you wait until things like this happen where they just collapse than pick up a few key companies (notice I did not say stocks) that have a strong history so that when the market comes back you can sell them off or wait for a split and than sell them off after a rise. I know it may be a few years till that happens and I am not looking to get a payday to retire on tomorrow but would that type of strategy work? Believe me if I could make enough to retire quickly I would not be opposed to that either but I am limited in what I can do for the moment. Smile What are your thoughts or maybe resources that you would recommend?

AngryWatchdog

Posted on 10/7/2008 5:52:09 PM

iconcmo, this is obviously a very tough market in which to get your feet wet. I am currently sitting on cash and waiting patiently for the opportunities to evolve over the next 6 months to 1 year. These opportunities will present themselves but as a conservative investor, I want to wait until the risk has diminished in the market before I jump in. The following may sound ridiculous but it works. Create a list of 10 to 20 very simple investment rules and follow them religiously. Books on day trading will give you a great start on these rules. They sound simple but prove very difficult to follow as you become emotionally involved in the market. Having the list and referring to it before making a trade will keep you disciplined. The market runs on greed and fear and your advantage over the market is to remove these two emotions when you trade. Some of my rules are:

1. Don't fight the market. (If the market is going down don't try to stand in its way).
2. Don’t try to catch a falling knife: (This is what is happening right now in the market so do not be a buyer yet).
3. If you get in a trade that does something different than what you expected, get out. (If this happens, you did not fully understand what was driving the stock price and you need to take a time out and re-evaluate or move to a different stock.
4. When you enter a trade, put in your sell order and your stop loss. (By putting in your sell order, you will be reminded of your expectations for the trade when you entered it. This will help you evaluate when to get out of the trade.
5. Buy and Hold is for suckers. (A rule that is definitely not preached by money managers but has saved me more money than any other rule.)

As far as your company picks, all good companies, but this is a very dangerous time for them. All of them will get killed in a recession and a recession is here. If you are committed to these companies, I like Google and Intel. They are market leaders in their segments and may pick up market share in a recession due to their cash positions. I would stay away from the retailers for now. In terms of when to buy Google and Intel, wait. The stock market usually leads main street by 6 months. That means you want to buy these two 6 months before the end of a recession. How do you know when this is? There is no one answer to this question and any answer I give will run counter to what every money manager will advise you to do. I do believe you can time the markets and I will be following this market closely to try and pick the best time to buy. The forces that are causing the market to go down will drop away one by one until there is one or two powerful forces that keep pushing down on the market. As soon as these last two forces show signs of dissipating, that will be the trigger to enter your trades. Right now I believe we will not see the lows in the market during 2008. As such, I would not be a buyer of any stock right now.

Watch the market every day and try to understand why it is behaving the way it is behaving that day. After a few months of this, you will be able to identify the forces that are influencing market moves (employment, VIX, interest rates etc…).



The first thing I should warn you about my investment style is that I do not always follow the standard approach preached by financial advisors.

dave

Posted on 11/18/2008 7:25:25 AM


I think the mess was caused by lack of regulation and lack of transparency.

Regulation because it appears the street was able to become Rumplestillskin. They received the blessing to turn straw into gold. They received permission to sell junk as AAA.

Transparency because as unregulated instruments no one knew what they really had. So when the music stopped the banks did the predictable thing. They took a hard look at what they held and what others held and found they could not value it. Eventually the markets stopped functioning because everyone came to the same conclusion, they would not risk any money on something they could not value and something they would have to mark down tomorrow even though in the long run they will make money.

We are 1 1/2 years into this and the gov't is handing cash to banks with no instructions/penalties attached.

I am beginning to think Paulson is an idiot. He believes that pushing money into various markets will magically make everything work when the real issue is non performing mortgages and jobs.

The easy thing to do is create jobs. Govt created job programs are inefficient and wasteful but is it worse than handing a trillion dollars to bankers who brought forth a world wide recession that created bankrupt countries? We have companies like AIG who keep crying that they need more money every other week and then hold a party with my money to celebrate the stupidity of the govt who gives it to them.

The big elephant in the room is the bad mortgages. This was created by a lack of ownership and a complete disregard for any risk management.

A long time ago in a place far, far away you would go to a banker and spend many weeks begging for a loan. Many times you would get rejected because they owned the paper. Now the paper is traded like chips at a poker game. No one has ownership. If they make the loan and you fail to make your payment 3 months later they are long gone. Your paper has been sold to someone else and sliced and diced 100 times with a hundred other slips of paper and the process is repeated.

No one is called to task for making the bad decision to give a loan to someone who cannot afford it. On the contrary homeowners were encouraged to take out more equity because the price of the property has gone up. Just like tulips hundreds of years ago in the Netherlands. And just like then the music stopped.

JPBenatar

Posted on 11/24/2008 8:55:37 PM

Very interesting question you raise Dave, regarding transparency and regulation.

I suspect that most of the regulators and bankers knew that what they were doing was wrong but their greed and their desire for reelection caused them to look the other way. As I mention, a monkey could have figured out that 100 high risk mortgages would all go bad if the economy went bad, no matter how you sliced them up. I went to Wharton and studied finance and concept of correlation is one of the first things you are taught in risk management.

This is not about 1 company gone bad (Enron) but rather about thousands of companies and millions of people whose greed became their driving force. If the "Me" generation is to live as part of a cohesive and interdependent global society, it is now more obvious than ever that regulations will be needed to control the individual's greed. I believe firmly in free markets but I also know what we have all now witnessed that human's will act in their own interest to the detriment of society unless their are laws to prevent them from doing so. Finding the balance of control vs free markets and freedom in general is the fine line a leave for the politicians (God help us).

dave

Posted on 12/14/2008 2:42:59 PM


JP,

The balance between regulation vs. market is the key here, which of course is a fluid tension. Sometimes you need more and sometimes less.

One of the areas crying out for some sort of oversight are hedge funds, Private equity and the like as well as the dark pools private networks. Personally I would be ok with minimal regulation/reporting of hedge funds if they were limited to the rich 'sophisticated investor'. Unfortunately pension funds and the like which have a public face have been pulled into this world which cries out for either a ban on those types of investments from public pools of money or regulation of said vehicles.

The dark pools are another matter. Since they have the ability to move the market they should be part of said market. The argument that you are a large investor and do not want people cherry picking your moves is just too bad.

Dave

JPBenatar

Posted on 12/16/2008 1:19:55 PM

I agree with most of what you say Dave. However, hedge funds need to increase their disclosure. Even if access is limited to sophisticated investors, with the leverage that they had access to and one day may have again, they can exert market threatening muscle. If you notice, the stocks that have tumbled 70% while the market has tumbled only 40% are those stocks owned by the hedge funds.

This tells me that hedge funds were simply buying stocks from each other, driving up the price and earning their 2% 20%. When the funds had to sell to meet redemption requests, the last funds holding these stocks had to sell. Talk about ponzi schemes.

Add comment

(Login or Register to post a comment)

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.3.1.0
Theme by Mads Kristensen