Metales a la baja
Copper April 28,08:05
Bid/Ask 3.3629 - 3.3634
Change -0.0054 -0.16%
Low/High 3.3207 - 3.3843
Charts
Nickel April 28,08:06
Bid/Ask 11.4063 - 11.4971
Change -0.1633 -1.41%
Low/High 11.1795 - 11.7465
Charts
Aluminum April 28,08:06
Bid/Ask 0.9435 - 0.9481
Change -0.0041 -0.43%
Low/High 0.9318 - 0.9658
Charts
Zinc April 28,08:04
Bid/Ask 1.0332 - 1.0377
Change -0.0159 -1.51%
Low/High 1.0182 - 1.0582
Charts
Lead April 28,08:04
Bid/Ask 1.0086 - 1.0132
Change -0.0009 -0.09%
Low/High 0.9914 - 1.0209
Miercoles 28/04/10 La decision del Fed, Europa cae
por admin » Mié Abr 28, 2010 7:13 am
Grecia dice que es posible un aumento de la cantidad que el Fondo Monetario Internacional les facilitara
Grecia dijo que era posible que el IMF aumente los $18.76 billones de prestamo entre 5 y 6 billones de euros mas.
El miembro del gobierno Griego que dio esta noticia no fue identificado y el IMF no ha ratificado el anuncio.
Greece Official: IMF Loan Boost Possible
By COSTAS PARIS and ANDREW MONAHAN A Greek official said the International Monetary Fund is considering increasing its promised €15 billion ($19.76 billion) loans to Greece by between €5 billion and €10 billion, but expressed doubts about whether the boost will happen.
"There has been talk that the IMF could boost its contribution in the support mechanism. But at this point we don't believe it will happen. The talk is for another €5-10 billion," said the official, who asked not to be identified. "But everything is still very fluid. If our partners and creditors feel that more money is needed to finally calm the markets and stop hurting the euro, more money could be approved. It is being discussed among all parties involved," he added, without elaborating.
The IMF wasn't immediately available for comment. The fund's Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Khan is set to arrive in Berlin today for talks with German officials on the Greek aid package.
The Greek official added that it wasn't clear whether any extra IMF money would boost the total €45 billion pledged last month by the European Union and IMF or whether the IMF contribution would make up for a possible shortfall by the EU, but he added that Athens is "very confident that all EU partners will honor their commitments."
Germany, which is expected to shoulder the biggest part of the EU pledge, has said it will honor its promise, but has asked Athens to put together tougher austerity measures for the money to be released.
Europe's Debt Crisis
Germany's delayed approval has been one of the reasons for concern in financial markets that the deal won't come in time. German public opinion is strongly against any Greek bailout, making the rescue package a politically charged issue ahead of an important May 9 regional election.
Greece asked for the EU-IMF bailout Friday, saying it could no longer borrow from the financial markets. That raised doubts over whether it could repay bondholders by a major redemption deadline May 19.
Late Tuesday, Standard and Poor's Corp. downgraded Greek debt three notches from triple-B-plus to double-B-plus with a negative outlook, making it junk-grade. It was the first time since the common currency's launch in 1999 that a euro-zone member lost its investment grade. The move fueled speculation that Athens may default on its massive debt and prompted investors to dump the common currency on the view that it could fall further. Standard & Poor's also slashed its ratings on Portugal two notches to single-A-minus from single-A-plus, raising the specter of broader debt problems in the euro zone.
Wednesday, Greece's market regulator, the Hellenic Capital Markets Commission, said it was banning all short selling on the Athens stock market for the next two months. "The Capital Markets Commission, taking into account the extraordinary conditions in the Greek market, has decided to prohibit short selling of listed shares on the Athens Stock Exchange," the commission said in a statement. "The prohibition is in effect from today, April 28, and remains in force through June 28, 2010," it added.
There has been increased market speculation in recent days that Greece would need more money. Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Saturday at the IMF spring meeting that some European countries were concerned that the agreed package might not big enough.
EU President Herman Van Rompuy told reporters in Tokyo Wednesday that he plans to hold a summit of euro-zone leaders by around May 10, where they will move to implement the bailout package.
"On the basis of reports to be finalized in the coming days, the heads of state and of government will decide to activate the financing of the joint program under negotiation now between the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and of course the Greek government," he said. "The negotiations are going on and they are well on track," Mr. Van Rompuy said. "There is no question about restructuring of the debt."
Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council, at a press conference at Japan National Press Club in Tokyo.
.Mr. Van Rompuy's comments are the latest indication that a bailout may be on the way for Greece. But the remarks may do little to calm financial markets as investors await details of the bailout. Earlier in the week, Mr. Van Rompuy said he was confident "we shall maintain the stability of the euro zone," despite lingering uncertainty over Europe's response to Greece's problems. The EU-IMF aid framework, hashed out late last month, "in itself, is no small achievement," Mr. Van Rompuy said in a speech Monday at Kobe University, in western Japan.
But many investors are skeptical that Greece can stave off further problems with its fiscal solvency in the months ahead, even if it receives bailout funds in the coming weeks.
The premium that investors were demanding to hold 10-year Greek government bonds rather than their German equivalent rose to a record high Tuesday. The cost of insuring against a Greek default for five years also rose to its highest level ever.
Adding to concerns, Greece's central bank said Tuesday the country's debt-to-gross domestic product ratio may rise to 130% by 2014.
Mr. Van Rompuy will be joined by European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Union foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton at the summit later in the day with Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada. The leaders will discuss political and economic relations between Europe and Japan, according to the EU delegation.
Grecia dijo que era posible que el IMF aumente los $18.76 billones de prestamo entre 5 y 6 billones de euros mas.
El miembro del gobierno Griego que dio esta noticia no fue identificado y el IMF no ha ratificado el anuncio.
Greece Official: IMF Loan Boost Possible
By COSTAS PARIS and ANDREW MONAHAN A Greek official said the International Monetary Fund is considering increasing its promised €15 billion ($19.76 billion) loans to Greece by between €5 billion and €10 billion, but expressed doubts about whether the boost will happen.
"There has been talk that the IMF could boost its contribution in the support mechanism. But at this point we don't believe it will happen. The talk is for another €5-10 billion," said the official, who asked not to be identified. "But everything is still very fluid. If our partners and creditors feel that more money is needed to finally calm the markets and stop hurting the euro, more money could be approved. It is being discussed among all parties involved," he added, without elaborating.
The IMF wasn't immediately available for comment. The fund's Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Khan is set to arrive in Berlin today for talks with German officials on the Greek aid package.
The Greek official added that it wasn't clear whether any extra IMF money would boost the total €45 billion pledged last month by the European Union and IMF or whether the IMF contribution would make up for a possible shortfall by the EU, but he added that Athens is "very confident that all EU partners will honor their commitments."
Germany, which is expected to shoulder the biggest part of the EU pledge, has said it will honor its promise, but has asked Athens to put together tougher austerity measures for the money to be released.
Europe's Debt Crisis
Germany's delayed approval has been one of the reasons for concern in financial markets that the deal won't come in time. German public opinion is strongly against any Greek bailout, making the rescue package a politically charged issue ahead of an important May 9 regional election.
Greece asked for the EU-IMF bailout Friday, saying it could no longer borrow from the financial markets. That raised doubts over whether it could repay bondholders by a major redemption deadline May 19.
Late Tuesday, Standard and Poor's Corp. downgraded Greek debt three notches from triple-B-plus to double-B-plus with a negative outlook, making it junk-grade. It was the first time since the common currency's launch in 1999 that a euro-zone member lost its investment grade. The move fueled speculation that Athens may default on its massive debt and prompted investors to dump the common currency on the view that it could fall further. Standard & Poor's also slashed its ratings on Portugal two notches to single-A-minus from single-A-plus, raising the specter of broader debt problems in the euro zone.
Wednesday, Greece's market regulator, the Hellenic Capital Markets Commission, said it was banning all short selling on the Athens stock market for the next two months. "The Capital Markets Commission, taking into account the extraordinary conditions in the Greek market, has decided to prohibit short selling of listed shares on the Athens Stock Exchange," the commission said in a statement. "The prohibition is in effect from today, April 28, and remains in force through June 28, 2010," it added.
There has been increased market speculation in recent days that Greece would need more money. Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Saturday at the IMF spring meeting that some European countries were concerned that the agreed package might not big enough.
EU President Herman Van Rompuy told reporters in Tokyo Wednesday that he plans to hold a summit of euro-zone leaders by around May 10, where they will move to implement the bailout package.
"On the basis of reports to be finalized in the coming days, the heads of state and of government will decide to activate the financing of the joint program under negotiation now between the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and of course the Greek government," he said. "The negotiations are going on and they are well on track," Mr. Van Rompuy said. "There is no question about restructuring of the debt."
Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council, at a press conference at Japan National Press Club in Tokyo.
.Mr. Van Rompuy's comments are the latest indication that a bailout may be on the way for Greece. But the remarks may do little to calm financial markets as investors await details of the bailout. Earlier in the week, Mr. Van Rompuy said he was confident "we shall maintain the stability of the euro zone," despite lingering uncertainty over Europe's response to Greece's problems. The EU-IMF aid framework, hashed out late last month, "in itself, is no small achievement," Mr. Van Rompuy said in a speech Monday at Kobe University, in western Japan.
But many investors are skeptical that Greece can stave off further problems with its fiscal solvency in the months ahead, even if it receives bailout funds in the coming weeks.
The premium that investors were demanding to hold 10-year Greek government bonds rather than their German equivalent rose to a record high Tuesday. The cost of insuring against a Greek default for five years also rose to its highest level ever.
Adding to concerns, Greece's central bank said Tuesday the country's debt-to-gross domestic product ratio may rise to 130% by 2014.
Mr. Van Rompuy will be joined by European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Union foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton at the summit later in the day with Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada. The leaders will discuss political and economic relations between Europe and Japan, according to the EU delegation.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por admin » Mié Abr 28, 2010 7:20 am
Lo que mas me impresiona de la situacion de Grecia es el hecho de que S&P les haya bajado el rating de la manera que lo ha hecho a categoria basura y el informe que ha dado respecto al pais dice desvastadoramente que no tendra crecimiento por los proximos ocho anios. Es para llorar, que tragedia Griega.
Ademas el problema es que asi le faciliten todos los prestamos que Grecia necesite, el costo de prestarse dinero en el mercado libre es tan alto que el pago de los intereses sera insostenible lo cual de una manera u otra forzaria un default o falta de pago.
El asunto se agrava cuando se considera que en los primeros dias del mes de Mayo Grecia enfrenta pagos de deuda que de no solucionarse lo del paquete de ayuda no podra pagar, eso va a asustar a los mercados aun mas.
Los analistas dicen que Europa puede ayudar y asimilar los problemas de Grecia y Portugal por que son economias chicas, lo que no podra hacer es rescatar a Espania que es una economia mas grande, la cuarta en tamanio en la zona euro.
El contagio es comprensible por que los yields (intereses que pagan los bonos soberanos) de los paises con deficits altos en Europa han subido tanto que se extendera a todo el continente y a todo el mundo, de pronto a pesar de que los intereses son bajisimos en todo el mundo oficialmente, el mercado privado o sea los inversionistas estan exigiendo una prima, es decir un interes mucho mas alto para tomar el riesgo de comrpar los bonos de los paises en cuestion.
Hay que entender que el aumento de los intereses es como un alza de impuestos, todo costo adicional quita puntos en el PBI de una pais (GDP)
Las perspectivas de Europa son oscuras, muy oscuras.
Lo impresionante es que ese continente en sus epocas de bonanza, cuando todo estaba bien solo crecia entre el 1% y 2%, lo que solo los lleva a pensar que sus economias estaran estancadas por decadas. Que horror!!
Ademas el problema es que asi le faciliten todos los prestamos que Grecia necesite, el costo de prestarse dinero en el mercado libre es tan alto que el pago de los intereses sera insostenible lo cual de una manera u otra forzaria un default o falta de pago.
El asunto se agrava cuando se considera que en los primeros dias del mes de Mayo Grecia enfrenta pagos de deuda que de no solucionarse lo del paquete de ayuda no podra pagar, eso va a asustar a los mercados aun mas.
Los analistas dicen que Europa puede ayudar y asimilar los problemas de Grecia y Portugal por que son economias chicas, lo que no podra hacer es rescatar a Espania que es una economia mas grande, la cuarta en tamanio en la zona euro.
El contagio es comprensible por que los yields (intereses que pagan los bonos soberanos) de los paises con deficits altos en Europa han subido tanto que se extendera a todo el continente y a todo el mundo, de pronto a pesar de que los intereses son bajisimos en todo el mundo oficialmente, el mercado privado o sea los inversionistas estan exigiendo una prima, es decir un interes mucho mas alto para tomar el riesgo de comrpar los bonos de los paises en cuestion.
Hay que entender que el aumento de los intereses es como un alza de impuestos, todo costo adicional quita puntos en el PBI de una pais (GDP)
Las perspectivas de Europa son oscuras, muy oscuras.
Lo impresionante es que ese continente en sus epocas de bonanza, cuando todo estaba bien solo crecia entre el 1% y 2%, lo que solo los lleva a pensar que sus economias estaran estancadas por decadas. Que horror!!
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por admin » Mié Abr 28, 2010 7:50 am
Senadores vs Goldman
Los senadores tienen problemas para encontrar a los verdaderos culpables
Si un inversionista compra acciones de GE y las acciones de GS bajan en el futuro, va a culpar al New York Stock Exchage? Que pasa si el inversionista decide comprar esas acciones a traves de TD Ameritrade o Charles Schwab? Es el broker tambien responsable por esas perdidas?
Los Senadores interrogando a los ejecutivos de Goldman ayer parecian creer que la firma tiene la obligacion de proteger a todos los inversionistas institucionales y socios de trading de tomar malas decisiones. Esa proteccion nunca se ha extendido a los inversionistas pequenios comunes y corrientes y por buen motivo. Pero Washington piensa que los que apostaron con su dinero en una siempre creciente burbuja de bienes racies son los culpables.
En resumen, fue otro mal dia para el caso de la SEC contra Goldmanm pero los senadores estuvieron muy empeniados en encontrar culpable a la firma de satisfacer la demanda de los inversionistas institucionales por el riesgo subprime de bienes raices.
Nosotros no estamos seguros si el cuestionamiento a los ejecutivos de Goldman Sachs es lo que mas ha confundido a los espectadores hasta ahora. El mimo chairman de la comision Carl Levin parece no saber la diferencia entre un market-maker (el que hace el mercado para que los inversionistas compren y vendan) y el de un investment adviser (el que da asesoria) cuyo rol es el de actuar en el interes del cliente como fiduciary.
Una de las miembras, Susan Collins de Maines mostro que entendia la diferencia, pero igual ignoro que el papel de market makers de Goldman y admitir que ellos no tenian la obligacion de protegerlos. Por supuesto que Goldman no tenia la obligacion de protegerlos, ellos son sofisticadso inversionistas que deberian saber en lo que estan invirtiendo. Fue tambien muy notable que no estuvieron presentes ninguno de los traders e instituciones que ahora el Senado quiere hacer aparacer como victimas y que estuvieron buscando el mayor riesgo posible durante el 2007 con la intencion de enriquecerse, aquellos muchos que invirtieron en los bienes raices subprime.
La Senadora de Missouri Claire McCaskill estuvo muy cerca de la verdad cuando describio a Goldman como el facilitador del trading de las hipotecas y las describio como pura timba y le dijo a sus ejecutivos: "y ustedes eran la casa"
Esta fue una contribucion muy valida e importante. Les recordo a los espectadores que las transacciones producto de esta investigacion e interrogatorio eran CDOs sinteticos, es decir que no contenian ninguna hipoteca. Estas eran una de las dos partes de la apuesta. Uno puede discutir, como lo hizo uno de nuestros lectores al decir que Mr. Paulson fue uno de los que redujo el impacto de la crisis de bienes raices por que permitio que los estupidos que apostaban a favor del subprime evitaron que se crearan mas prestamos basura.
Si la interrogacion de ayer tuvo algun valor, fue el del reconocimiento, de los mismos miembros de la inquisicion del Senado que la verdadera raiz del problema fue el otorgar demasiadas prestamos de mala calidad con muy bajos requerimientos y demasiadas agrupaciones de malos prestamos que estuvieron sellados con un rating de tres A. Explorando la creacion de los prestamos basura debaria llevar a los Senadores al mismo lugar donde los contribuyentes siguen perdiendo dinero-FRE y FNM.
El ex CCO de Fannie Mae Edwar Pinto calcula que hasta Junio del 2008 las mellizas toxicas (FRE y FNM) y otras instituciones del gobierno son respobsables de mas de $2.7 trillones en suplime Alt-A hipotecas, El negocio de Goldman son papas muy chiquitas comparado con FRE Y FNM, la verdad es que las cifras de las gigantes son tres veces el balance entero de Golman Sachs.
La regulacion financiera que aun esta pendiente no contempla la regulacion de FRE y FNM. Recien salidos de la reunion de ayer, los Senadores deben insistir en comenzar a usar regulacion valida que incluya a FNM y FRE.
Senators vs. Goldman
The committee members fumble toward finding the real villains.
If an investor buys shares in General Electric, and then GE's stock declines in the future, is the New York Stock Exchange to blame? What if the investor chooses to purchase the shares through TD Ameritrade or Charles Schwab? Is the broker also responsible for the losses?
Senators interrogating Goldman Sachs executives yesterday appear to believe the firm has a duty to protect all of its institutional trading partners from making bad decisions. Such protection has never been extended even to mom-and-pop investors of course, and for good reason. Yet much of the Beltway class, looking back at the financial crisis, now believes that gamblers who bet their money on an always-inflating housing bubble are the real victims.
Yesterday's hearing of the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations came in the wake of a Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit accusing Goldman of fraud. The SEC case concerns a 2007 transaction arranged by Goldman in which John Paulson's hedge fund bet that subprime mortgage-backed securities would decline, while institutional investors IKB and ACA bet they would rise.
The SEC claims that Goldman's Fabrice Tourre misled ACA into thinking Mr. Paulson's firm would be going long on subprime, just like ACA. It's not clear that this would have mattered, but Mr. Tourre flatly denied the allegation under oath yesterday.
The SEC also claims Goldman should have disclosed that Mr. Paulson's firm suggested some of the particular mortgage-backed securities on which the two sides in the transaction would bet. Yet Mr. Tourre testified that the pool referenced in the transaction performed no worse than similar pools of subprime loans not included in the transaction.
In sum, it appeared to be another bad day for the SEC's specific case against Goldman. But lawmakers seemed intent on finding the firm generally guilty of meeting institutional demand for subprime housing risk.
We're not sure which of the politicians at yesterday's Senate hearing did the most to confuse spectators. Investigations subcommittee chairman Carl Levin of Michigan seemed unaware of the difference between a market-maker, whose role is to offer prices at which a client may buy or sell a given asset, and an investment adviser, whose role is to act in the interests of the client as a fiduciary.
Ranking member Susan Collins of Maine showed that she understood the difference, yet still decided to badger the market makers at Goldman Sachs to admit they weren't acting as fiduciaries. Of course they weren't, as their sophisticated institutional customers would have known. Noticeably absent were any of these alleged victims who in 2007 were happily chasing yield and hoping to enrich themselves off subprime housing.
Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri veered closer to the truth when she described Goldman's facilitation of trading in mortgage-related instruments as "pure gambling" and told the executives: "and you are the house."
This was a valuable contribution. It reminded spectators that the transactions getting all of the attention—synthetic collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)—did not contain any mortgages. These were side bets. One could argue, as an astute reader did in a recent letter to the Editor, that investors like Mr. Paulson may even have helped reduce the impact of the housing crisis because they allowed stupid housing bulls to make their bets without actually creating any more bad loans.
If yesterday's hearing had any value, it was the recognition, even by the Senate inquisitors, of the real root causes of the crisis: too many bad mortgage loans with poor underwriting, and too many pools of these bad loans carrying a triple-A rating. Exploring the creation of junk loans should lead Senate investigators to the same place where most of the taxpayer losses are occurring—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Former Fannie Mae Chief Credit Officer Edward Pinto calculates that as of June 2008, the toxic twins and other government entities were responsible for more than $2.7 trillion in subprime and Alt-A mortgage exposure. Goldman's mortgage business was small potatoes in comparison; in fact this figure is three times Goldman's entire balance sheet.
The Senate's pending financial-regulation bill has no reform of Fannie and Freddie. Fresh off their meeting yesterday with the marketplace, the committee members might start on the road to useful reform by insisting on a rewrite.
Los senadores tienen problemas para encontrar a los verdaderos culpables
Si un inversionista compra acciones de GE y las acciones de GS bajan en el futuro, va a culpar al New York Stock Exchage? Que pasa si el inversionista decide comprar esas acciones a traves de TD Ameritrade o Charles Schwab? Es el broker tambien responsable por esas perdidas?
Los Senadores interrogando a los ejecutivos de Goldman ayer parecian creer que la firma tiene la obligacion de proteger a todos los inversionistas institucionales y socios de trading de tomar malas decisiones. Esa proteccion nunca se ha extendido a los inversionistas pequenios comunes y corrientes y por buen motivo. Pero Washington piensa que los que apostaron con su dinero en una siempre creciente burbuja de bienes racies son los culpables.
En resumen, fue otro mal dia para el caso de la SEC contra Goldmanm pero los senadores estuvieron muy empeniados en encontrar culpable a la firma de satisfacer la demanda de los inversionistas institucionales por el riesgo subprime de bienes raices.
Nosotros no estamos seguros si el cuestionamiento a los ejecutivos de Goldman Sachs es lo que mas ha confundido a los espectadores hasta ahora. El mimo chairman de la comision Carl Levin parece no saber la diferencia entre un market-maker (el que hace el mercado para que los inversionistas compren y vendan) y el de un investment adviser (el que da asesoria) cuyo rol es el de actuar en el interes del cliente como fiduciary.
Una de las miembras, Susan Collins de Maines mostro que entendia la diferencia, pero igual ignoro que el papel de market makers de Goldman y admitir que ellos no tenian la obligacion de protegerlos. Por supuesto que Goldman no tenia la obligacion de protegerlos, ellos son sofisticadso inversionistas que deberian saber en lo que estan invirtiendo. Fue tambien muy notable que no estuvieron presentes ninguno de los traders e instituciones que ahora el Senado quiere hacer aparacer como victimas y que estuvieron buscando el mayor riesgo posible durante el 2007 con la intencion de enriquecerse, aquellos muchos que invirtieron en los bienes raices subprime.
La Senadora de Missouri Claire McCaskill estuvo muy cerca de la verdad cuando describio a Goldman como el facilitador del trading de las hipotecas y las describio como pura timba y le dijo a sus ejecutivos: "y ustedes eran la casa"
Esta fue una contribucion muy valida e importante. Les recordo a los espectadores que las transacciones producto de esta investigacion e interrogatorio eran CDOs sinteticos, es decir que no contenian ninguna hipoteca. Estas eran una de las dos partes de la apuesta. Uno puede discutir, como lo hizo uno de nuestros lectores al decir que Mr. Paulson fue uno de los que redujo el impacto de la crisis de bienes raices por que permitio que los estupidos que apostaban a favor del subprime evitaron que se crearan mas prestamos basura.
Si la interrogacion de ayer tuvo algun valor, fue el del reconocimiento, de los mismos miembros de la inquisicion del Senado que la verdadera raiz del problema fue el otorgar demasiadas prestamos de mala calidad con muy bajos requerimientos y demasiadas agrupaciones de malos prestamos que estuvieron sellados con un rating de tres A. Explorando la creacion de los prestamos basura debaria llevar a los Senadores al mismo lugar donde los contribuyentes siguen perdiendo dinero-FRE y FNM.
El ex CCO de Fannie Mae Edwar Pinto calcula que hasta Junio del 2008 las mellizas toxicas (FRE y FNM) y otras instituciones del gobierno son respobsables de mas de $2.7 trillones en suplime Alt-A hipotecas, El negocio de Goldman son papas muy chiquitas comparado con FRE Y FNM, la verdad es que las cifras de las gigantes son tres veces el balance entero de Golman Sachs.
La regulacion financiera que aun esta pendiente no contempla la regulacion de FRE y FNM. Recien salidos de la reunion de ayer, los Senadores deben insistir en comenzar a usar regulacion valida que incluya a FNM y FRE.
Senators vs. Goldman
The committee members fumble toward finding the real villains.
If an investor buys shares in General Electric, and then GE's stock declines in the future, is the New York Stock Exchange to blame? What if the investor chooses to purchase the shares through TD Ameritrade or Charles Schwab? Is the broker also responsible for the losses?
Senators interrogating Goldman Sachs executives yesterday appear to believe the firm has a duty to protect all of its institutional trading partners from making bad decisions. Such protection has never been extended even to mom-and-pop investors of course, and for good reason. Yet much of the Beltway class, looking back at the financial crisis, now believes that gamblers who bet their money on an always-inflating housing bubble are the real victims.
Yesterday's hearing of the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations came in the wake of a Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit accusing Goldman of fraud. The SEC case concerns a 2007 transaction arranged by Goldman in which John Paulson's hedge fund bet that subprime mortgage-backed securities would decline, while institutional investors IKB and ACA bet they would rise.
The SEC claims that Goldman's Fabrice Tourre misled ACA into thinking Mr. Paulson's firm would be going long on subprime, just like ACA. It's not clear that this would have mattered, but Mr. Tourre flatly denied the allegation under oath yesterday.
The SEC also claims Goldman should have disclosed that Mr. Paulson's firm suggested some of the particular mortgage-backed securities on which the two sides in the transaction would bet. Yet Mr. Tourre testified that the pool referenced in the transaction performed no worse than similar pools of subprime loans not included in the transaction.
In sum, it appeared to be another bad day for the SEC's specific case against Goldman. But lawmakers seemed intent on finding the firm generally guilty of meeting institutional demand for subprime housing risk.
We're not sure which of the politicians at yesterday's Senate hearing did the most to confuse spectators. Investigations subcommittee chairman Carl Levin of Michigan seemed unaware of the difference between a market-maker, whose role is to offer prices at which a client may buy or sell a given asset, and an investment adviser, whose role is to act in the interests of the client as a fiduciary.
Ranking member Susan Collins of Maine showed that she understood the difference, yet still decided to badger the market makers at Goldman Sachs to admit they weren't acting as fiduciaries. Of course they weren't, as their sophisticated institutional customers would have known. Noticeably absent were any of these alleged victims who in 2007 were happily chasing yield and hoping to enrich themselves off subprime housing.
Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri veered closer to the truth when she described Goldman's facilitation of trading in mortgage-related instruments as "pure gambling" and told the executives: "and you are the house."
This was a valuable contribution. It reminded spectators that the transactions getting all of the attention—synthetic collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)—did not contain any mortgages. These were side bets. One could argue, as an astute reader did in a recent letter to the Editor, that investors like Mr. Paulson may even have helped reduce the impact of the housing crisis because they allowed stupid housing bulls to make their bets without actually creating any more bad loans.
If yesterday's hearing had any value, it was the recognition, even by the Senate inquisitors, of the real root causes of the crisis: too many bad mortgage loans with poor underwriting, and too many pools of these bad loans carrying a triple-A rating. Exploring the creation of junk loans should lead Senate investigators to the same place where most of the taxpayer losses are occurring—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Former Fannie Mae Chief Credit Officer Edward Pinto calculates that as of June 2008, the toxic twins and other government entities were responsible for more than $2.7 trillion in subprime and Alt-A mortgage exposure. Goldman's mortgage business was small potatoes in comparison; in fact this figure is three times Goldman's entire balance sheet.
The Senate's pending financial-regulation bill has no reform of Fannie and Freddie. Fresh off their meeting yesterday with the marketplace, the committee members might start on the road to useful reform by insisting on a rewrite.
Última edición por admin el Mié Abr 28, 2010 9:20 pm, editado 1 vez en total
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por gatominero » Mié Abr 28, 2010 7:58 am
Al cumplir 100 años, la empresa peruana creadora de Inca Kola, Corporación Lindley, anunció un plan de inversiones de US$ 100 millones destinados a la construcción de una nueva planta en Trujillo, la repotenciación de una planta en el Callao y una nueva imagen corporativa.
Johnny Lindley Suárez, gerente general de Corporación Lindley, precisó que la construcción de la planta en Trujillo forma parte de su desarrollo descentralizado. Detalló además que están repotenciando la planta del Callao con dos líneas nuevas para vidrios y plástico. Además, evalúan comprar nuevos terrenos para la construcción de plantas, pero descartó la posibilidad de instalarse en Lurín o Huachipa.
La empresa es líder en la categoría de gaseosas (65% del mercado); aguas (40%); y jugos (46%). Entre los productos que embotella y comercializa destacan Inca Kola y Coca- Cola, además de Frugos, San Luis, Fanta, Sprite, Crush, Kola Inglesa y Bimbo. Está presente en todo el país y espera facturar este año 13% más que en el 2009.
Precisó también que Aquarius, el más reciente producto fabricado y distribuido por Corporación Lindley, ha igualado las ventas de todas las versiones de té listo para beber que se han puesto en venta en el mercado.
La empresa además presentó su nueva imagen. “Esta renovación forma parte de un plan mayor que incluye mantener y profundizar nuestro liderazgo comercial en cada vez más segmentos de bebidas no alcohólicas; atraer el mejor talento disponible en el mercado; llevar a cabo actividades de responsabilidad social empresarial más comprometidas con el entorno donde nos desarrollamos; y lograr solidez y respaldo financiero”, explicó Juan Flores, gerente de Relaciones Institucionales.
Johnny Lindley Suárez, gerente general de Corporación Lindley, precisó que la construcción de la planta en Trujillo forma parte de su desarrollo descentralizado. Detalló además que están repotenciando la planta del Callao con dos líneas nuevas para vidrios y plástico. Además, evalúan comprar nuevos terrenos para la construcción de plantas, pero descartó la posibilidad de instalarse en Lurín o Huachipa.
La empresa es líder en la categoría de gaseosas (65% del mercado); aguas (40%); y jugos (46%). Entre los productos que embotella y comercializa destacan Inca Kola y Coca- Cola, además de Frugos, San Luis, Fanta, Sprite, Crush, Kola Inglesa y Bimbo. Está presente en todo el país y espera facturar este año 13% más que en el 2009.
Precisó también que Aquarius, el más reciente producto fabricado y distribuido por Corporación Lindley, ha igualado las ventas de todas las versiones de té listo para beber que se han puesto en venta en el mercado.
La empresa además presentó su nueva imagen. “Esta renovación forma parte de un plan mayor que incluye mantener y profundizar nuestro liderazgo comercial en cada vez más segmentos de bebidas no alcohólicas; atraer el mejor talento disponible en el mercado; llevar a cabo actividades de responsabilidad social empresarial más comprometidas con el entorno donde nos desarrollamos; y lograr solidez y respaldo financiero”, explicó Juan Flores, gerente de Relaciones Institucionales.
- gatominero
- Mensajes: 17
- Registrado: Lun Abr 26, 2010 9:23 pm
por admin » Mié Abr 28, 2010 7:59 am
Es decir que lo que esta pasando con Goldman Sachs y para ilustrarlo con un ejemplo aplicado al foro es que el forista XX esta invirtiendo en FAS o FAZ, pierde dinero, el no reclama, pero viene el gobierno a acusar a donde ellos compraron esos ETFs, ya sea el Banco de Credito o TDAmeritrade o donde sea que ellos compraron las acciones.
Completamente ridiculo. Puro show, pura politica, los democratas solo quieren mostrar que ellos estan interesados en proteger a los inversionistas. Los que tenemos cuatro dedos de frente nos damos cuenta de todas sus maniobras.
Ayer pasaron todo el dia el show de Goldman y los Senadores y de verdad que fue un show. Realmente los Senadores no tienen la menor idea de lo que hablan, es lamentable la manera como hacen el ridiculo, por supuesto que los mortales comunes y corrientes estan mas entretenidos mirando la novela o los shows que muestran en la television. Doblemente lamentable.
Lo unico que yo digo es cual es la autoridad moral que tienen los Senadores democratas para investigar a nadie si fue ese partido el que nunca quizo que FRE y FNM fueran reguladas, cuando los republicanos exigian que se les aumente los requerimientos de capital a FRE y FNM las defendian diciendo que su papel era extraordinario al permitir que la gente pobre pudiera comprar casas. Los demas es historia.
Lo que mas me exaspera es que son esas mismas caras las que ahora tengo que mirar tomando la otra parte del asunto, ahora son ellos los que quieren defender los intereses de los contribuyentes, ya esta demostrado que los unicos intereses que ellos cuidan son los de su bolsillo primero y despues los de su partido, a ellos no les interesa ni el pais, ni nadie, solo el poder.
Cuando se lee en los medios de comunicacion, todos sin excepcion van a criticar a Goldman por abusivos y demas flores. Nadie va a respirar un segundo y va a decir, un momento, de verdad es asi como nos lo muestran.
Haganse un favor y lean el articulo anterior completo. Es muy ilustrador.
Completamente ridiculo. Puro show, pura politica, los democratas solo quieren mostrar que ellos estan interesados en proteger a los inversionistas. Los que tenemos cuatro dedos de frente nos damos cuenta de todas sus maniobras.
Ayer pasaron todo el dia el show de Goldman y los Senadores y de verdad que fue un show. Realmente los Senadores no tienen la menor idea de lo que hablan, es lamentable la manera como hacen el ridiculo, por supuesto que los mortales comunes y corrientes estan mas entretenidos mirando la novela o los shows que muestran en la television. Doblemente lamentable.
Lo unico que yo digo es cual es la autoridad moral que tienen los Senadores democratas para investigar a nadie si fue ese partido el que nunca quizo que FRE y FNM fueran reguladas, cuando los republicanos exigian que se les aumente los requerimientos de capital a FRE y FNM las defendian diciendo que su papel era extraordinario al permitir que la gente pobre pudiera comprar casas. Los demas es historia.
Lo que mas me exaspera es que son esas mismas caras las que ahora tengo que mirar tomando la otra parte del asunto, ahora son ellos los que quieren defender los intereses de los contribuyentes, ya esta demostrado que los unicos intereses que ellos cuidan son los de su bolsillo primero y despues los de su partido, a ellos no les interesa ni el pais, ni nadie, solo el poder.
Cuando se lee en los medios de comunicacion, todos sin excepcion van a criticar a Goldman por abusivos y demas flores. Nadie va a respirar un segundo y va a decir, un momento, de verdad es asi como nos lo muestran.
Haganse un favor y lean el articulo anterior completo. Es muy ilustrador.
Última edición por admin el Mié Abr 28, 2010 8:00 am, editado 1 vez en total
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por Maurice » Mié Abr 28, 2010 8:02 am
Goldman a $200 Stock, 'You Should Own It': Bove
Published: Wednesday, 28 Apr 2010 | 7:15 AM ET Text Size By: Antonia Oprita
Web Producer, CNBC.com
DiggBuzz FacebookTwitter More Share
Goldman Sachs' problems are over after Tuesday's marathon Senate hearings and the stock is likely to rise, Rochdale Securities banking analyst Richard Bove told CNBC Wednesday.
"I think the SEC suit will be thrown out of court, I think Goldman's [GS 153.04 --- UNCH (0) ] reputation will improve," Bove said.
"I think it's a $200 stock. I think the company's earnings are very good, I think you should own it, I think it's a tremendous opportunity," he added.
Goldman officials said they have not seen customers leaving the company and at this point the bank's business is not diminishing as a result of the fraud accusation, Bove said.
He said he had told Goldman Sachs officials before the hearings that he hoped they would explain to Senators that financial firms did not create the crisis and that derivatives actually helped the economy.
"They could have explained what a synthetic (collateralized debt obligation) is …. The whole discussion was useless," he said, referring to the nearly 11-hour hearings.
Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein, who denied the SEC's accusations of fraud, said near the end of Tuesday's hearings that the criticism his bank faced would lead to some analysis of what went wrong.
"Everything that's been the subject of criticism will be tightened up," Blankfein said.
Senators on both sides of the political spectrum bitterly criticized Goldman. Sen. Carl Levin, D- Mich., quoted Goldman e-mails involving the words "sh**ty deal."
"How much of that sh**ty deal did you sell to your clients?" Levin asked David Sparks, the former head of Goldman's mortgage department.
Bove said there was nothing to suggest Goldman did anything appropriate in creating the collateralized debt obligation that is at the center of the SEC's fraud charge.
"The firestorm hitting Goldman just burned itself out yesterday," he said. "It appeared to me that Senators overplayed their hand. They came out firing."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36820878
Published: Wednesday, 28 Apr 2010 | 7:15 AM ET Text Size By: Antonia Oprita
Web Producer, CNBC.com
DiggBuzz FacebookTwitter More Share
Goldman Sachs' problems are over after Tuesday's marathon Senate hearings and the stock is likely to rise, Rochdale Securities banking analyst Richard Bove told CNBC Wednesday.
"I think the SEC suit will be thrown out of court, I think Goldman's [GS 153.04 --- UNCH (0) ] reputation will improve," Bove said.
"I think it's a $200 stock. I think the company's earnings are very good, I think you should own it, I think it's a tremendous opportunity," he added.
Goldman officials said they have not seen customers leaving the company and at this point the bank's business is not diminishing as a result of the fraud accusation, Bove said.
He said he had told Goldman Sachs officials before the hearings that he hoped they would explain to Senators that financial firms did not create the crisis and that derivatives actually helped the economy.
"They could have explained what a synthetic (collateralized debt obligation) is …. The whole discussion was useless," he said, referring to the nearly 11-hour hearings.
Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein, who denied the SEC's accusations of fraud, said near the end of Tuesday's hearings that the criticism his bank faced would lead to some analysis of what went wrong.
"Everything that's been the subject of criticism will be tightened up," Blankfein said.
Senators on both sides of the political spectrum bitterly criticized Goldman. Sen. Carl Levin, D- Mich., quoted Goldman e-mails involving the words "sh**ty deal."
"How much of that sh**ty deal did you sell to your clients?" Levin asked David Sparks, the former head of Goldman's mortgage department.
Bove said there was nothing to suggest Goldman did anything appropriate in creating the collateralized debt obligation that is at the center of the SEC's fraud charge.
"The firestorm hitting Goldman just burned itself out yesterday," he said. "It appeared to me that Senators overplayed their hand. They came out firing."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36820878
- Maurice
- Mensajes: 40
- Registrado: Jue Abr 22, 2010 10:28 am
¿Quién está conectado?
Usuarios navegando por este Foro: No hay usuarios registrados visitando el Foro y 17 invitados