|
Who's
afraid of a Big, Bad Bailout?
By John Mauldin
September 26, 2008
In
this issue:
Who's Afraid of a Big, Bad Bailout?
It's the End of the World As We Know It
The TED Spread Flashes Trouble
The Transmission Mechanism
Let's Make a Deal
Colorado, California, London, and Sweden
"A tournament, a tournament, a tournament of lies.
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives and I decline.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
(It's time I had some time alone.)"-
Lyrics from R.E.M., 1987
Flying last Tuesday, overnight from Cape Town in South Africa to London,
I read in the Financial Times that Republican Congressman Joe Barton of
Texas was quoted as saying (this is from memory, so it is not exact) that
he had difficulty voting for a bailout plan when none of his constituents
could understand the need to bail out Wall Street, didn't understand the
problem, and were against spending $700 billion of taxpayer money to solve
a crisis for a bunch of (rich) people who took a lot of risk and created
the crisis. That is a sentiment that many of the Republican members of
the House share.
As it happens, I know Joe. My office is in his congressional district.
I sat on the Executive Committee for the Texas Republican Party representing
much of the same district for eight years. This week, Thoughts from the
Frontline will be an open letter to Joe, and through him to Congress, telling
him what the real financial problem is and how it affects his district,
helping explain the problem to his constituents , and explaining why he
has to hold his nose with one hand and vote for a bailout with the other.
Just for the record, Joe has been in Congress for 24 years. He is the
ranking Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is one of
the three most important committees and is usually considered in the top
five of Republican House leadership. He is quite conservative and has been
a very good and effective congressman. I have known Joe for a long time
and consider him a friend. He has been my Congressman at times, depending
on where they draw the line. I called his senior aide and asked him how
the phone calls were going. It is at least ten to one against supporting
this bill, and that is probably typical of the phones all across this country.
People are angry, and with real justification. And watching the debates,
it reminds us that one should never look at how sausages and laws are made.
It is a very messy process.
I think what follows is as good a way as any to explain the crisis we
are facing this weekend. This letter will print out a little longer, because
there are a lot of charts, but the word length is about the same. Let's
jump right in.
It's the End of the World As We Know It
Dear Joe,
I understand your reluctance to vote for a bill that 90% of the people
who voted for you are against. That is generally not good politics. They
don't understand why taxpayers should spend $700 billion to bail out rich
guys on Wall Street who are now in trouble. And if I only got my information
from local papers and news sources, I would probably agree. But the media
(apart from CNBC) has simply not gotten this story right. It is not just
a crisis on Wall Street. Left unchecked, this will morph within a few weeks
to a crisis on Main Street. What I want to do is describe the nature of
the crisis, how this problem will come home to your district, and what
has to be done to avert a true, full-blown depression, where the ultimate
cost will be far higher to the taxpayers than $700 billion. And let me
say that my mail is not running at 10 to 1 against, but it is really high.
I am probably going to make a lot of my regular readers mad, but they need
to hear what is really happening on the front lines of the financial world.
First, let's stop calling this a bailout plan. It is not. It is an economic
stabilization plan. Run properly, it might even make the taxpayers some
money. If it is not enacted very soon (Monday would be fine), the losses
to businesses and investors and homeowners all over the US (and the world)
will be enormous. Unemployment will jump to rates approaching 10%, at a
minimum. How did all this come to pass? Why is it so dire? Let's rewind
the tape a bit.
We all know about the subprime crisis. That's part of the problem, as
banks and institutions are now having to write off a lot of bad loans.
The second part of the problem is a little more complex. Because we were
running a huge trade deficit, countries all over the world were selling
us goods and taking our dollars. They in turn invested those excess dollars
in US bonds, helping to drive down interest rates. It became easy to borrow
money at low rates. Banks, and what Paul McCulley properly called the Shadow
Banking System, used that ability to borrow and dramatically leverage up
those bad loans (when everyone thought they were good), as it seemed like
easy money. They created off-balance-sheet vehicles called Structured Investment
Vehicles (SIVs) and put loans and other debt into them. They then borrowed
money on the short-term commercial paper market to fund the SIVs and made
as profit the difference between the low short-term rates of commercial
paper and the higher long-term rates on the loans in the SIV. And if a
little leverage was good, why not use a lot of leverage and make even more
money? Everyone knew these were AAA-rated securities.
And then the music stopped. It became evident that some of these SIVs
contained subprime debt and other risky loans. Investors stopped buying
the commercial paper of these SIVs. Large banks were basically forced to
take the loans and other debt in the SIVs back onto their balance sheets
last summer as the credit crisis started. Because of a new accounting rule
(called FASB 157), banks had to mark their illiquid investments to the
most recent market price of a similar security that actually had a trade.
Over $500 billion has been written off so far, with credible estimates
that there might be another $500 billion to go. That means these large
banks have to get more capital, and it also means they have less to lend.
(More on the nature of these investments in a few paragraphs.)
Banks can lend to consumers and investors about 12 times their capital
base. If they have to write off 20% of their capital because of losses,
that means they either have to sell more equity or reduce their loan portfolios.
As an example, for every $1,000 of capital, a bank can loan $12,000 (more
or less). If they have to write off 20% ($200), they either have to sell
stock to raise their capital back to $1,000 or reduce their loan portfolio
by $2,400. Add some zeroes to that number and it gets to be huge.
And that is what is happening. At first, banks were able to raise new
capital. But now, many banks are finding it very difficult to raise money,
and that means they have to reduce their loan portfolios. We'll come back
to this later. But now, let's look at what is happening today. Basically,
the credit markets have stopped functioning. Because banks and investors
and institutions are having to deleverage, that means they need to sell
assets at whatever prices they can get in order to create capital to keep
their loan-to-capital ratios within the regulatory limits.
Remember, part of this started when banks and investors and funds
used leverage (borrowed money) to buy more assets. Now, the opposite is
happening. They are having to sell assets into a market that does not have
the ability to borrow money to buy them. And because the regulators require
them to sell whatever they can, the prices for some of these assets are
ridiculously low. Let me offer a few examples.
Today, there are many municipal bonds that were originally sold to expire
10-15 years from now. But projects finished early and the issuers wanted
to pay them off. However, the bonds often have a minimum time before they
can be called. So, issuers simply buy US Treasuries and put them into the
bond, to be used when the bond can be called. Now, for all intents and
purposes this is a US government bond which has the added value of being
tax-free. I had a friend, John Woolway, send me some of the bid and ask
prices for these type of bonds. One is paying two times what a normal US
Treasury would pay. Another is paying 291% of a normal US Treasury. And
it is tax-free! Why would anyone sell what is essentially a US treasury
bond for a discount? Because they are being forced to sell, and no one
is buying! The credit markets are frozen.
Last week, I wrote about a formerly AAA-rated residential mortgage-backed
security (RMBS) composed of Alt-A loans, better than subprime but less
than prime. About 5% of the loans were delinquent, and there are no high-risk
option ARMs in the security. It is offered at 70 cents on the dollar. If
you bought that security, you would be making well over 12% on your money,
and 76% of the loans in the portfolio of that security would have to default
and lose over 50% of their value before you would risk even one penny.
Yet the bank which is being forced to sell that loan has had to write down
its value. As I wrote then, that is pricing in financial Armageddon. (You
can read the full details here.)
Let's look at the following graph. It is an index of AAA-rated mortgage
bonds, created by www.markit.com. It is composed of RMBSs similar to the
one I described above. Institutions buy and sell this index as a way to
hedge their portfolios. It is also a convenient way for an accounting firm
to get a price for a mortgage-backed security in a client bank's portfolio.
With the introduction of the new FASB 157 accounting rule, accountants
are very aggressive about making banks mark their debt down, as they do
not want to be sued if there is a problem. Notice this index shows that
bonds that were initially AAA are now trading at 53 cents on the dollar,
which is up from 42.5 cents two months ago.
 Accountants might look at the bond I described above, look at this index,
and decide to tell their clients to mark the bonds down to $.53 on the
dollar. The bank is offering the bond at $.70 because it knows there is
quality in the security. They are being forced to sell. And guess what?
There are no buyers. An almost slam-dunk 12% total-return security with
loss-coverage provisions that suggest 40% of the loans could default and
lose 50% before your interest rate yields even suffered, let alone risk
to your principal – and it can't find a buyer.
One of the real reasons these and thousands of other good bonds are not
selling now is that there is real panic in the markets. The oldest money
market fund "broke the buck" last week, because they had exposure
to Lehman Brothers bonds. We are seeing massive flights of capital from
money market funds, including by large institutions concerned about their
capital. What are they buying? Short-term Treasury bills. Three-month Treasury
bills are down to 0.84%.
It gets worse. Last week one-month Treasury bills were paying a negative
1%!!! That means some buyers were so panicked that they were willing to
buy a bond for $1 that promised to pay them back only $.99 in just one
month. The rate is at 0.16% today. If something is not done this weekend,
it could go a lot lower over the next few days. That is panic, Joe.
I don't want to name names, as this letter goes to about 1.5 million people
and I don't want to make problems for some fine banking names; but there
is a silent bank run going on. There are no lines in the street, but it
is a run nevertheless. It is large investment funds and corporations quietly
pulling their money from some of the best banks in the country. They can
do this simply by pushing a button. We are watching deposit bases fall.
It does not take long. Lehman saw $400 billion go in just a few months
this summer. Think about that number. Any whiff of a problem and an institution
that is otherwise sound could be brought low in a matter of weeks. And
the FDIC could end up with a large loss that seemed to have come from out
of nowhere.
The TED Spread Flashes Trouble
 There is something called the TED spread, which is the difference between
three-month LIBOR (the London Inter Bank Offered Rate which is in euro
dollars, also called The Euro Dollar Spread, thus TED) and three-month
US Treasury bills. Three-month LIBOR is basically what banks charge each
other to borrow money. Many mortgages and investments are based on various
periods of LIBOR. Look at the chart below. Typically the TED spread is
50 basis points (0.50%) or less. When it spikes up, it is evidence of distress
in the financial markets. The last time the TED spread was as high as it
is now was right before the market crash of 1987. This is a weekly chart,
which does not capture tonight's (Friday) change, which would make it look
even worse. Quite literally, the TED spread is screaming panic.
The Fed has lowered rates to 2%. Typically, three-month LIBOR tracks pretty
close to whatever the Fed funds rate is. Starting with the credit crisis
last year, that began to change. Look at the chart below.
The Fed has lowered rates to 2%. Typically, three-month LIBOR tracks
pretty close to whatever the Fed funds rate is. Starting with the credit
crisis
last year, that began to change. Look at the charts below.
 
 Now let's look at the next chart. This is the amount of Tier 1 commercial
paper issued. This is the life blood of the business world. This is how
many large and medium-sized businesses finance their day-to-day operations.
The total amount of commercial paper issued is down about 15% from a
year ago, with half of that drop coming in the last few weeks. Quite
literally, the economic body is hemorrhaging. Unless something is done,
businesses all over the US are going to wake up in a few weeks and find
they simply cannot transact business as usual. This is going to put a
real crimp in all sorts of business we think of as being very far from
Wall Street.
I could go on. Credit spreads on high-yield bonds that many of our best
high-growth businesses use to finance their growth are blowing out to levels
which make it impossible for the companies to come to the market for new
funds. And that is even if they could find investors in this market! There
are lots of other examples (solid corporate loans selling at big discounts,
asset-backed securities at discounts, etc.), but you get the idea. Suffice
it to say that the current climate in the financial market is the worst
since the 1930s. But how does a crisis in the financial markets affect
businesses and families in Arlington, Texas, where my office and half of
your district is?
The Transmission Mechanism
The transmission in a car takes energy from the engine and transfers
it to the wheels. Let's talk about how the transmission mechanism of
the economy works.
Let's start with our friend Dave Moritz down the street. He needs financing
to be able to sell an automobile. To get those loans at good prices, an
auto maker has to be able to borrow money and make the loans to Dave's
customers. But if something does not stop the bleeding, it is going to
get very expensive for GM to get money to make loans. That will make his
cars more expensive to consumers. Cheap loans with small down payments
are the life blood of the auto selling business. That is going to change
dramatically unless something is done to stabilize the markets.
Credit card debt is typically packaged and sold to investors like pension
funds and insurance companies. But in today's environment, that credit
card debt is going to have to pay a much higher price in order to find
a buyer. That means higher interest rates. Further, because most of the
large issuers of credit cards are struggling with their leverage, they
are reducing the amount of credit card debt they will give their card holders.
If they continue to have to write down mortgages on their books because
of mark-to-market rules which price assets at the last fire-sale price,
it will mean even more shrinkage in available credit.
Try and sell a home above the loan limits of Fannie and Freddie today
with a nonconforming jumbo loan. Try and find one that does not have very
high rates, because many lenders who normally do them simply cannot afford
to keep them on their balance sheets. And a subprime mortgage? Forget about
it. This is going to get even worse if the financial markets melt down.
We are in a recession. Unemployment is going to rise to well over 6%.
Consumer spending is going to slow. This is an environment which normally
means it is tougher for small businesses and consumers to get financing
in any event. Congress or the Fed cannot repeal the business cycle. There
are always going to be recessions. And we always get through them, because
we have a dynamic economy that figures out how to get things moving again.
Recessions are part of the normal business cycle. But it takes a major
policy mistake by Congress or the Fed to create a depression. Allowing
the credit markets to freeze would count as a major policy mistake.
I have been on record for some time that the economy will go through a
normal recession and a slow recovery, what I call a Muddle Through Economy.
This week I met with executives of one of the larger hedge funds in the
world. They challenged me on my Muddle Through stance. And I had to admit
that my Muddle Through scenario is at risk if Congress does not act to
stabilize the credit markets.
Let's Make a Deal
Why do we need this Stabilization Plan? Why can't the regular capital
markets handle it? The reason is that the problem is simply too big for
the market to deal with. It requires massive amounts of patient, long-term
money to solve the problem. And the only source for that would be the
US government.
There is no reason for the taxpayer to lose money. Warren Buffett, Bill
Gross of PIMCO, and my friend Andy Kessler have all said this could be
done without the taxpayer losing money, and perhaps could even make a profit.
As noted above, these bonds could be bought at market prices that would
actually make a long-term buyer a profit. Put someone like Bill Gross in
charge and let him make sure the taxpayers are buying value. This would
re-liquefy the banks and help get their capital ratios back in line.
Why are banks not lending to each other? Because they don't know what
kind of assets are on each other's books. There is simply no trust. The
Fed has had to step in and loan out hundreds of billions of dollars in
order to keep the financial markets from collapsing. If you allow the banks
to sell their impaired assets at a market-clearing fair price (not at the
original price), then once the landscape is cleared, banks will decide
they can start trusting each other. The commercial paper market will come
back. Credit spreads will come down. Banks will be able to stabilize their
loan portfolios and start lending again.
Again, the US government is the only entity with enough size and patience
to act. We do not have to bail out Wall Street. They will still take large
losses on their securities, just not as large a loss as they are now facing
in a credit market that is frozen. As noted above, there are many securities
that are being marked down and sold far below a rational price.
If we act now, we will start to see securitization of mortgages, credit
cards, auto loans, and business loans so that the economy can begin to
function properly.
What happens if we walk away? Within a few weeks at most, financial markets
will freeze even more. We will see electronic runs on major banks, and
the FDIC will have more problems than you can possibly imagine. The TED
spread and LIBOR will get much worse. Businesses which use the short-term
commercial paper markets will start having problems rolling over their
paper, forcing them to make difficult cuts in spending and employment.
Larger businesses will find it more difficult to get loans and credit.
That will have effects on down the economic food chain. Jim Cramer estimated
today that without a plan of some type, we could see the Dow drop to 8300.
That is as good a guess as any. It could be worse. Home valuations and
sales will drop even further.
The average voter? They will see stock market investments off another
25% at the least. Home prices will go down even more. Consumer spending
will drop. What should be a run-of-the-mill recession becomes a deep recession
or soft depression. Yes, that may be worst-case scenario. But that is the
risk I think we take with inaction.
A properly constructed Stabilization Plan hopefully avoids the worst-case
scenario. It should ultimately not cost the taxpayer much, and maybe even
return a profit. The AIG rescue that Paulson arranged is an example of
how to do it right. My bet is that the taxpayer is going to make a real
profit on this deal. We got 80% of AIG, with what is now a loan paying
the taxpayer over 12%, plus almost $2 billion in upfront fees for doing
the loan. That is not a bailout. That is a business deal that sounds like
it was done by Mack the Knife.
This deal needs to be done by Monday. Every day we wait will see more
and more money fly out the doors of the banks, putting the FDIC at ever
greater risk. Panic will start to set in, moving to ever smaller banks.
Frankly, we are at the point where we need to consider raising the FDIC
limits for all deposits for a period of time, until the Stabilization Plan
quells the panic.
I understand that this is a really, really bad idea according classical
free-market economic theory. You know me; I am as free market as it comes.
But I also know that without immediate action a lot of people are really
going to be hurt. Unemployment is not a good thing. Losses on your home
and investments hurt. It is all nice and well to talk about theories and
contend the market should be allowed to sort itself out; and if we have
a deep recession, then that is what is needed. But the risk we take is
not a deep recession but a soft depression. The consequences of inaction
are simply unthinkable.
Joe, I am telling you that the markets are screaming panic. Yes, Senator
Richard Shelby has his 200 economists saying this is a bad deal. But they
are ivory tower kibitzers who have never sat at a trading desk. They have
never tried to put a loan deal together or had to worry about commercial
paper markets collapsing. I am talking daily with the people on the desks
who are seeing what is really happening. Shelby's economists are armchair
generals far from the front lines. I am talking to the foot soldiers who
are on the front lines.
Every sign of potential disaster is there. You and the rest of the House
have to act. It has to be bipartisan. This should not be about politics
(even though Barney Frank keeps talking bipartisan and then taking partisan
shots, but I guess he just can't help himself). It should be about doing
the right thing for our country and the world. I know it will not be fun
coming back to the district. Talking about TED spreads and LIBOR will not
do much to assuage voters who are angry. But it is the right thing to do.
And I will be glad to come to the town hall meeting with you and help if
you like.
With your help, we will get through this. In a few years, things will
be back to normal and we can all have stories to tell to our grandkids
about how we lived through interesting times. But right now we have to
act.
Colorado, California, London, and Sweden
It is time to hit the send button. This was personally a great week.
For whatever reason, I did not suffer jet lag flying to South Africa
for just two days, then overnight to London, and back the next day. It
was a good trip. I will report more about South Africa in a later letter,
but this e-letter is already a little long.
I leave Sunday for a quick trip to Longmont, Colorado (near Boulder) to
look at a very interesting technology company (InPhase) that makes holographic
memory disks, with good friend Dr. Bart Stuck of Signal Lake Partners.
I will be in San Diego and Orange County the 16th and 17th of October
for back-to-back speeches, then I leave Sunday for London for two days
and then on to Sweden for a conference and speeches there, a quick trip
to Malta, and then back home, where I will be chained to my desk by daughter
Tiffani as we do interviews and write a book.
I do enjoy traveling from time to time, seeing the rest of the world.
One of my secret pleasures is reading International Living and thinking
about what it would be like to have another home somewhere. Cheap thrills.
You can subscribe if you like by following this link.
Have a great week. I fully believe (OK, deeply hope) that Congress will
act. We can all breathe a collective sigh when they do.
Your still believing in Muddle Through analyst,
John Mauldin
John@FrontLineThoughts.com
Copyright 2008 John Mauldin. All Rights Reserved
Note: The generic Accredited Investor E-letters are not an offering for
any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium
Wave Investments. It is intended solely for accredited investors who have
registered with Millennium Wave Investments and Altegris Investments at
www.accreditedinvestor.ws or directly related websites and have been so
registered for no less than 30 days. The Accredited Investor E-Letter is
provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Accredited Investor
E-Letter are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional
investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their
personal investment counsel.
John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA),
which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John
Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC,
(MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool
Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the
CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments
is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates
in the consulting on and marketing of private investment offerings with
other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Absolute Return Partners,
LLP; Pro-Hedge Funds; EFG Capital International Corp; and Plexus Asset
Management. Funds recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees
to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and
thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information
purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement,
or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or
elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor's services or making an investment
in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure
document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive
fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products
with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.
John Mauldin, Best-Selling author and recognized financial expert,
is also editor of the free Thoughts From the Frontline that goes to over
1 million readers each week. For more information on John or his FREE
weekly economic letter go to: http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/learnmore
To subscribe to John Mauldin's E-Letter please click here:
http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/subscribe.asp
To change your email address please click here:
http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/change.asp
If you would ALSO like changes applied to the Accredited Investor E- Letter,
please include your old and new email address along with a note requesting
the change for both e-letters and send your request to wave@frontlinethoughts.com
To unsubscribe please refer to the bottom of the email.
PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS
AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN
CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD
CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE
IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE
THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE
PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX
TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE
NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN
CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT
TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER.
John Mauldin is also president of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC, a registered
investment advisor. All material presented herein is believed to be reliable
but we cannot attest to its accuracy. All material represents the opinions
of John Mauldin. Investment recommendations may change and readers are
urged to check with their investment counselors before making any investment
decisions. Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior
notice. John Mauldin and/or the staff at Thoughts from the Frontline may
or may not have investments in any funds cited above. Mauldin can be reached
at 800-829-7273.
|
