Rally It Up - But What About Good Assets & The Household?

Posted by Noah Rosenblatt on March 24, 2009 at 8.40 AM

A: Another crazy day in the world of equities. This time the spark was Geithner's toxic asset plan. You've probably read about it everywhere so I won't dissect it, but basically the goal is to revitalize private capital via incentives to take on risk provided by the public; a so called public-private investment program (PPIP). The plan eliminates a major chunk of uncertainty for tradable markets and when applied to a market that plunged 60% or so, you end up with a monster rally. I learned long ago that bull markets don't rally 23% in a month off bottoms, bear markets do. So please do not confuse this bear market rally, which are always fierce, with the start of a new bull market because everything is OK again. As equities reprice the clarity that was just provided (whether you like the plan or not doesn't matter here), you must prepare yourself for a few future realities: more sour upcoming macro economic data reflecting the past three months of economic activity + spreading of toxicity to higher quality debt classes as more performing loans deteriorate + fed printing money to buy the government issued bonds to fund the incentives for the PPIF. So while this trillion dollar asset purchase plan works to rid one area of the banks balance sheet, trust me, other areas are still worsening! The fed & treasury's job now is to maintain order, limit chaos, and prevent global collapse. Well, we just saw their latest move. Don't think for a second that all these free lunches come with no strings attached.

It seems to me the goal of this plan is to just get private money into the market for residential mortgage backed securities that weren't trading. Why weren't they trading? Because the current bid in the marketplace was too low for banks (for what its worth, I am hearing that the banks are having a great quarter) to consider selling at; we know what happens when banks sell securities below their current marks, and the need to raise capital due to the writedowns. Enter the treasury to make the trade work.

Calculated Risk puts it best:

The key problem with the Geithner plan is that it incentivizes investors to pay more than market value for toxic assets by providing a non-recourse loan and with below market interest rates. The investors do not receive this incentive, the banks do. And the taxpayers pay it, so this is a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to the shareholders of the banks. The taxpayers will pay the price of the option in the future, the investors receive any future benefit, and the banks receive the current value of the option in cash. Geithner apparently believes the future value will be zero, and that is a possibility. If so, this is a great plan - if not, the taxpayers will pay that future value (and it could be significant).

Lower than market rates, financing provided by FDIC, use of leverage, and investors can buy assets with very little equity at risk; what a world! So, the public-private investment fund will buy the stuff that nobody wanted to raise their bid for in the free, open market last week? Okay. So lets use leverage, subsidies, and put most of the downside potential onto the taxpayer so that private money is incentivized to buy these bad assets that nobody seemed to want yesterday. Great, confidence seems to be restored and there is a market again for these securities. Nothing like artificially propping up a market when the bid is too low!

But what about the stuff that is considered GOOD on the books, and is not being traded in this program? Let us not forget that this plan is for the more toxic assets, the assets with no bid that were being held on the books of banks at much higher mark-to-model prices. Does this mean that ALL toxic assets are now transferred off the books, and all is well again? Candy canes and sugar cones? Doubtful.

Second, think about who this plan helps and who it doesn't. Are consumers really getting jobs, salary, and repaired balance sheets from this? I mean, did the economy just turn around on a dime because of this bad bank asset plan and the huge stock rally that came with it? Did households balance sheets just fully delever and get repaired? Did distressed sellers just get a solid bid at full ask and go into contract on their homes they have been trying to desperately sell? Did the mall landlord just fill all their empty spaces? Did the office complex owner just rent out their vacancies? Did those with massive credit card debt just wake up debt free? No, no, and no! So I ask you, what happens to the assets on the books that are considered good right now, but then start non-performing if the economy continues to struggle? Let's at least keep it real here and avoid the smoke & mirrors that this is a magic bullet to fix our ailing economy. The banks may be in better shape, but the household is not!

Via Steve Waldman:

Of course the whole notion of repairing bank balance sheet is a lie and misdirection. The balance sheets we should want to see repaired are household balance sheets. Banks have failed us profoundly. We want them reorganized, not repaired. A world in which the banks are all fixed but households are still broken is worse than what we have right now. Too-big-to-fail banks restored to health are too-big-to-fail banks restored to power. The idea that fixing legacy banks is prerequisite to fixing the broad economy is a lie perpetrated by legacy bankers.
Waldman also discusses the saving grace for bondholders of troubled banks' and why it is worth it to participate in this plan, and take a loss on one investment to secure that no haircuts are taken on bigger holdings. An excellent point and a great read.

Back to the point. Have we forgotten that this is a complete debt crisis that is quickly spreading to higher quality debt classes. It was only four days ago that Moodys came out and announced that they may downgrade $241 billion of securities backed by prime quality 'Jumbo' mortgages:

In a move reflecting widening stress in the U.S. housing market, Moody's Investors Service on Thursday said it may downgrade $240.7 billion of securities backed by prime-quality "jumbo" U.S. residential mortgages because defaults will be higher than they expected.

Moody's put on review for downgrade 4,988 tranches of jumbo residential mortgage-backed securities with a current outstanding balance of $173.3 billion, and an original balance of $240.7 billion. The securities are backed by mortgages issued between 2005 and 2008.

It said 70 percent of the 2005 senior securities will likely remain investment-grade, with the rest falling to "junk." Securities issued later may suffer deeper downgrades. Moody's also said subordinated securities from 2006, 2007 and 2008 transactions "will likely be completely written down."

I think we will end up seeing PPIP round two and maybe round three before all is set & done, especially if the first round only works to remove toxic subprime/alt-a assets held on books that were causing the arteries to clog up. What about jumbo-prime, lbo's, cmbs, credit card, helocs, option arms, cosi/cofi, auto loans, student loans, etc.. Do not forget the nature of this crisis (debt) and how many types of debt were securitized back when there was a market for these assets. And do not forget about the consumer balance sheets that are still distressed and comprise 70% of the US economy.


Comments (7)

wow, you just can't get positive can you Noah?

Your points make sense. I have been reading your blog for about 2 years now so I can vouche that you have called this a 'complete debt crisis' from the very beginning. If anything you have proven to be more real than most. How do you know when a new plan in fact is, the turning point?

I just keep thinking one day I will come here and see a headline stating, 'Okay, I'm Bullish Again'!

Posted by paul.b | March 24, 2009 9:04 AM

Hey paulb - well, strong economies do not need ZIRP policy, capital injection funds, 15+ fed credit facilities and bad bank asset purchase plans.

very weak economies need that.

Posted by Noah | March 24, 2009 9:31 AM

Excellent post, Noah. Thoughtful and well written.

As you point out, the average person is not benefiting from the QE and associated purchases of bad/frozen assets. Most people I know are simply mad as hell at all the money going into what seem to be black holes, to those who should probably be broke and in exile somewhere or in jail.

The overwhelming debt on all levels just has to wind down (yet the gov is trying to fix this by incurring massive amounts of more debt -- shifting nearly all risk and little upside if any to the taxpayer), and unfortunately people will continue to lose wealth, more businesses will fail, jobs and income will continue to drop, and the RE market will sink until it finds sustainable prices once again. A painful but inevitable process it seems. And far from over.

But banks of course benefit immediately. And I doubt the everyday consumer ever will when all costs are ultimately tallied up.

Seems as is generally the case (ie just read 2500 years of history for confirmation) the people in power take care of the wealthy first. Little people pay the taxes and suffer, especially in hard times. Does anything ever change?

I can't help but feel the problem we haven't yet begin to see play out, however, are the tier 3 "assets" and various yet to be identified derivative obligations embedded everywhere.

Some analysts put these worldwide at well over a quadrillion dollars (notational), and even if just 5-10 percent are "bad" or effectively unpayable when triggered in mass as in the AIG case, that means many bonds still listed as assets at book value really aren't insured and are worthless -- this reality when exposed and as it ripples through the interconnecting system will be devastating I would think.

I think this is the biggest hidden time bomb yet to detonate.
Any thoughts on this problem?


Posted by Aquarian | March 24, 2009 9:56 AM

Aquarian raises an important point. At some point, the populist anger may rise to the point where it threatens the basic foundations of our society. How can people want to continue to support the sanctity of contracts, when making the parties to those contracts whole / close to whole results in the decimation of everyone else. I am no socialist / communist, and I do not want to see our capitalist system go down. But it has become grossly unfair, and some rebalancing needs to occur. Losses on all of these assets should be shared between banks, creditors and shareholders of the banks, and taxpayers...in that order.

Posted by WestSideMan | March 24, 2009 10:25 AM

The unintended consequences of govt interference are a decrease in PRIVATE bond buyers. After all, why would you - or me - lend money to Uncle Sam at <4% for 30 years...when we can get much better rates of return in other asset classes that are ALSO guaranteed by the feds?

http://debtsofanation.blogspot.com/2009/03/debts-of-spenders-crowding-out-30-year.html

Posted by In Debt We Trust | March 24, 2009 1:34 PM

Noah - Good points and a great post, but I would like to make an attempt at presenting the theoretical answer to your question: 'Did households balance sheets just fully delever and get repaired?'

The belief is that repairing the banks will eventually lead to lending, which has been frozen over the past 6 - 9 months. Businesses, large and small, have been shelving projects waiting for banks to lend again. Every type of company from Joe the plumber waiting for the small business loan so that he can restart his business again to mega-developers that have shelved mega-projects seeking funding. If businesses like automakers and manufacturers can re-negotiate outstanding debt, then they can stop the lay-offs. As jobs are created with these banks opening the flow of money to these opportunities: auto plants re-opening, construction projects, small businesses re-propping up their debt, etc. then and only then will we see household balance sheets get back in check.

This will not happen tomorrow, this cycle will take time. The belief is anywhere from 3 - 10 years. We can only take one step at a time. The thing to watch out for is that we do not allow banks to cause us to encounter another tail spin, such as this.

Regulation is a key factor.

Posted by FlipSide | March 25, 2009 11:44 AM

flipside - great point and I would agree! Thanks for comment and hope to see you here more often

Posted by Noah | March 25, 2009 2:10 PM

Post a comment


To help maintain the integrity of the conversation we ask that each user simply paste the keyword (below in red) into the confirmation field below. Sorry, but if you forget this step, your comments will not be saved!