The Comments |
And what happens when they can't cover the debt? Is that what all this chaos is about?
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Yes and no. (depending on who's side you're on, I think). There's a good article about it here, but I've selected the good bits for you:
(edited) in a way........short-sellers are........being persecuted, used as a scapegoat for a crisis the causes of which had nothing to do with them, and this proposed short-selling ban could have some rather nasty, unintended consequences.
Short-selling is betting that the price of a stock or commodity will go down. The process is: you borrow the shares, you sell them, but at some stage you must buy them back and return them to the lender.
It is an extremely risky business. Say a stock is trading at a pound. The furthest it can go down to is zero, and the most you can lose by buying it is your original stake. But it could go up to any figure, potentially. There is no absolute limit. If you are short and a stock rises your losses are limitless. Get a trade wrong and it can bankrupt you
A short-seller has had the intelligence in this market to analyse balance sheets, and recognise either insolvency, a weak sector or incompetent management. He's then had the bravery to act on his convictions, take the huge risk and go short. What's more he will pay tax on any money he earns from his actions. Will he be bailed out if he gets it wrong?
If a short-seller does get it wrong, he meets with very little sympathy. The act of short-selling is somehow considered immoral. But blaming short-sellers for this mess is akin to blaming bookies taking bets back home for the sinking of the Titanic.
These institutions (such as HBOS?? - Roberto) have collapsed because they are insolvent. Not because of short-sellers. They borrowed lots of money and invested it badly. Now they have no money left. Why should they be bailed out? It is just throwing good money after bad.
And to answer your question, Max, the article concludes with this:
1) Short sellers are mostly hedge funds and other highly leveraged speculators, betting using borrowed money.
2) They went short because they anticipated bank failures and they were making huge profits because they were right.
3) Central banks and governments step in and change the rules.
4) Regardless of fundamentals the shorts have to cover, sending shares of insolvent banks higher.
5) The general public believes the market has turned and buys those banks, sending shares even higher and hedgies' losses spiralling.
6) The huge losses the hedgies are taking make them default on their leveraged loans.
7) But think about it, who lent them the money? The same banks they were shorting!
8) More bank collapses follow. Investors get scared and dump their positions. No shorts left means no more short covering rallies and the ensuing crash is all the greater.
Food for thought!
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|
Roberto,
Hi.
It sounds EXACTLY like Yes Prime Minister when Sir Desmond - Director of Biclay's Bonk - says "well, the chaps invest, sometimes things can go wrong - you know - horse falls at the first fence, that sort of thing".
So, if I were a short seller, I would borrow money from you to bet that the value of, say, your car would go down, and then when you sold it to me, I would buy it with your money and you would pay me for the service.
How is that providing you with a service? Sounds like a total rip-off to me.
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Have a look at this:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080926/tts-us-finance-banking-jpmorganchase-3c8ed92.html
Also......
AFP - 34 minutes ago
LONDON (AFP) - Europe's leading stock markets sank Friday in early trade, hit by growing doubts about the progress of a 700-billion-dollar bailout package for the US financial sector.
Shortly after the open, London's FTSE 100 index of leading shares was down 1.71 percent at 5,107.96 points, accelerating initial losses.
Frankfurt's DAX 30 lost 1.46 percent to 6,083.76 points and in Paris the CAC 40 shed 1.71 percent to 4,154.56 points.
The DJ Euro Stoxx 50 index of leading eurozone shares was down 1.76 percent at 3,150.53 points.
Political wrangling has blocked a deal on a mammoth US bailout for the stricken US financial system while the collapse overnight of the second largest US savings and loan institution, Washington Mutual, also piled pressure on markets.
Do they mean $700,000,000,000??? and it isn't working????
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Roberto and all - happened to see this in last weeks Daily Mail (us country hicks don't get news 'til it's history but hey).
I think it explains the whole disaster quite well........
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Bradford & Bingley looking like they're going to be the next casualty. Possibility that Spain's Santander will step in. (They already have Abbey and Alliance & Leicester). Pretty soon there'll be limited choice in the UK: Lloyds TSB HBOS, or Santander!
Belgium's Fortis likely to be continental Europe's first casualty. RBS have some links with them, so more possible repurcussions in the UK.
Another big US bank in trouble this weekend too (Wachovia)
Strange times indeed.
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|
Roberto,
What does that photo (posted 26th) remind you of? Goodfellas? The Godfather?
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
B&B look as though they will be nationalised tomorrow if the Beeb have it right. Incidentally, my Wife who works for Barclays says that Barclays have bought the JP Morgan loan book (they got some of the details on Monday just gone) as it is the Manchester call centre involved in collecting the arrears.
Mark
0
Like
|
First Icelandic bank in trouble, been nationalised today. Seems nowhere is immune.
Did anyone else watch the voting in the House of Representatives tonight? Almost as exciting as the Singapore F1. No serious crashes in Singapore - just have to wait and see what the outcome of tonight's vote brings though.
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|
Can the capitalist/monetarist system I believe in really be crashing around our ears?
There was a fantastic article last week in the Mail by Peter Oborne in whose opinions I have a great deal of trust. Don't seem to be able to pull Daily Mail archives up on the internet though. Any ideas?
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Try searching the Mail Online. I did a quick search and came up with these stories by Mr. Oborne, but not sure if the one you're after is amongst them.
France & Germany joining the casualty list. How long before a Spanish bank joins the list?
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|
Financial Times praises Spanish Bank System
Tuesday, September 30, 2008 @ 9:04 PM
Not many banks have emerged from recent events with their reputations intact. Santander might be the exception that proves the rule.
A decade ago the bank was barely known outside Spain’s business community or Latin America. Now it is emerging as one of the more savvy survivors of Europe’s banking storm.
Not only is Santander snapping up cut-price assets (such as the juiciest parts of Bradford & Bingley) but it has also avoided the credit horrors that have triggered the humiliation of so many other mighty European names.
And while that sunny vista might yet change – after all, not even bankers seem truly to know what their banks hold these days – Santander’s run looks doubly remarkable given that Spain is in the aftermath of a property boom.
So what lies behind Santander’s seeming escape? In part, the persona of Emilio Botin, its chief executive, who has a reputation for being extraordinarily shrewd. However, another more interesting issue revolves around the way that Madrid runs its banks.
One key factor protecting Santander from some of the global woes is the tough approach that the Spanish central bank has taken towards regulating its banks in recent years.
Earlier this decade the central bank in essence decided it disliked the idea of banks keeping vast quantities of credit assets off their balance sheets. It also quietly demanded that banks hold higher levels of reserves than international accounting laws required.
Consequently, it furtively “gold plated” – or rewrote – European Union rules to discourage Spanish banks from creating entities such as structured investment vehicles (SIVs). And when banks such as Santander embarked on an acquisition spree in Mexico, the central bank reined them back.
When the central bank initially took this stance, it looked pretty odd. After all, in the early years of this decade institutions such as the Federal Reserve were convinced that banks could hold less capital than before because innovation had made them less exposed to credit risk.
However, Spain had experienced a searing domestic banking crisis two decades earlier and its central bank was consequently risk averse. It was also more willing to be maverick than, say, the Germans.
None of this guarantees that Spain will escape the credit crisis unscathed. A domestic property bust is always painful.
However, Madrid’s conservative stance has helped to cushion the blow of the storm. And that highlights some interesting lessons. First, it shows some of the wisest financiers are those who have experienced shocks.
Second, Spain’s story shows it pays for small countries to challenge the dominant global consensus from time to time.
But third, the Spanish tale shows the benefit of having central banks involved in regulation. In recent years other European banks have also become uneasy about trends in the global banking world; look at statements made by Jean Claude Trichet, ECB president, last year. Yet Mr Trichet could never turn this vague alarm into tangible controls since the ECB did not oversee the banks.
However, as the storm grows worse in Europe’s banking world it is becoming clearer that this state of affairs will need to be reviewed. And one place to start any debate might be with an examination of why some banks are going bust – but some, such as Santander, notably are not.
From The Financial Times Limited 2008
_______________________
Maria L. de Castro, JD, MA
Lawyer
Director www.costaluzlawyers.es
0
Like
|
Indeed, are not all banks "strong"....until they fail. Spanish banks have been sucking up funding from ECB till their ears pop allowing them to maintain the facade of good health. Now that tap is turned off. It will be interesting to see the "real" picture that'll gradually emerge here. Lack of transparency between and within the political class and the banks does not inspire confidence.
0
Like
|
|
|
And another thing.....
If all of the spineless, useless politicians in the west had banned all chinese produce twenty years ago, we wouldn't be in this mess now.
Why have they allowed the market to be flooded with goods that are retailing at below cost price for the materials from a country that has a terrible human rights record?
This is a deliberate act of sabotage with the express (and, it seems, successful) intention of undermining our economy to gain power over us. And our politicians have allowed it to happen.
WHY?
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Where has all the money gone? Someone somewhere must have it.
My OH has been prediciting the end of the world as we know it in 2012 for a long time now, we laughed at him, doesn't seem so funny now.
Oh b****r just when I thought retirement was round the corner.
Good luck everyone!
_______________________
Poppyseed
0
Like
|
The article about the Spanish Banks sickens me ,as thousands of people have been denied the execution of their Bank Guarantees by the banks refusing to honour them,even when in some cases they were ordered to by a judge!
0
Like
|
Doesn't stop Lehman's staff getting 1.4 BILLION in bonuses!!!
_______________________ Max Kite
Maximeters S.L.U.
www.maximeters.com
0
Like
|
Re: Apocalypse Now article that Max posted earlier; Bloody hell, that's pretty depressing. Easy to dismiss it as scare mongering, but a lot of it makes sense. Bear in mind this was published over a week ago. Quote: " Although it is hard to predict the consequences, we should expect ramifications of equal significance — including the re-emergence of violent Far Right parties....".
What just happened in Austria? " The country's two far-Right parties, which campaigned on anti-immigrant and anti-European Union platforms, took almost 30 per cent of the vote to deliver a stunning blow to Austria's political establishment." Read the whole article here
_______________________
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please"
Mark Twain
0
Like
|