Showing posts with label Credit Suisse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Credit Suisse. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Tuesday, July 22, 2014 - Curb Your Enthusiasm

Curb Your Enthusiasm
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 61 = 17,113
SPX + 9 = 1983
NAS + 31 = 4456
10 YR YLD - .01 = 2.46%
OIL - .17 = 104.42
GOLD – 4.70 = 1308.50
SILV + .04 = 21.07

We start with a couple of economic reports. The National Association of Realtors reports existing home sales were up 2.6% in June to a seasonally adjusted rate of 5.04 million, compared to 4.91 million in May. Sales in June were 2.6% higher than last month, but were 2.3% below the June 2013 rate. Total inventory rose 2.2% in June to 2.3 million existing homes for sale; unsold inventory is up 6.5% from a year ago.

At June’s pace of sales, there was a 5.5 month supply of homes for sale. The Realtors’ group considers a 6-month supply to be a balanced market. Higher supplies favor buyers and lower supplies favor sellers. The Federal Housing Finance Agency says home prices in May rose 0.4% from the prior month and were 5.5% above their level of May 2013. Distressed sales accounted for just 11% of sales in June, down from 15% last year, 25% in 2012, and 30% in 2011. Fewer distressed sales probably explains why there were fewer sales than June of last year.

The Consumer Price Index, or CPI, measures inflation at the retail level; the CPI increased 0.3% in June. The core CPI looks at prices excluding food and energy, which is important for people who don’t eat food or drive cars or use electricity; core CPI was up 0.1% in June. On a year over year basis, CPI is up 2.1%, and the core CPI is up 1.9%. The big driver for the increase in June was higher prices for gasoline.

In earnings reports:
Quarterly profit at McDonald's fell more than expected. Second quarter net income fell almost 1% to $1.3 billion, or $1.40 per share. Sales at McDonald’s restaurants in the US dropped for a third straight quarter.

Coca Cola’s 2Q net income dropped to $2.6 billion from $2.68 billion a year earlier.

Verizon reported second quarter earnings nearly doubled, but it was a confusing report because Verizon paid for Vodaphone shareholders in the quarter, plus they sold some of their wireless spectrum to T-Mobile; cutting through the clutter, Verizon added 1.4 million devices; Verizon added three tablets for every new smartphone. Earnings were just a smidge above expectations.

Comcast reported net income of almost $2 billion for the second quarter, with total revenue of $16.8 billion, up 3.5% from the same period last year. The revenue increase came from high speed internet service. Comcast lost cable video customers, as more people bypass cable and satellite subscriptions in favor of cheaper streaming alternatives.

Credit Suisse reported a second quarter loss of $779 million, the largest loss since 2008; reflecting the charge of $2.6 billion related to the settlement with US law enforcement for a guilty plea to conspiring to aid tax evasion in helping American customers hide money in Swiss accounts. Or another way to look at it, they were one criminal conviction away from a $1 billion quarterly profit. Credit Suisse also announced it would exit the commodities trading business.

Meanwhile, it looks like bond traders are exiting the bond trading business. Trading in US government bonds has dropped 25% in the past few weeks compared to the same time period a year ago. Since the end of the second quarter, trading in investment grade bonds has dropped 17% and trading in junk bonds has dropped 8%.

Last week, Fed Chair Janet Yellen talked about overvaluation in the biotech and social media sectors. One of the most common measures of value is the P/E, or price to earnings ratio; there are certainly other measures of value, but PE is common. Generally, a low PE can point toward value, while a high PE might indicate overvaluation, or even an unprofitable company. Currently the S&P 500 trades at 16.1 times forward 12-month consensus earnings per share. So, you might think a PE of 165 would mean a stock was extremely overvalued, ready to crash; or not. In September 2003, Apple had a PE of 165; since then it has gained about 6,000%.

After the close of trade today, Apple posted fiscal third quarter results. Revenue came in at $37.4 billion versus $38 billion expected; EPS was $1.28 versus $1.23 expected; iPhone sales were on track; iPad sales were a little weak; Mac sales were a little better than expected. Apple posted profit of $7.75 billion, up from $6.9 billion in the year-ago period. Apple announced a new iPhone 6, not yet available, but ready to swamp stores before the end of the year; it will have a bigger screen. Curb your enthusiasm.

Also after the close, Microsoft posted profit of $4.6 billion, or 55 cents a share, on revenue of $23.4 billion. During the year-ago period, the world's largest software company earned $4.97 billion, or 59 cents a share, on $19.9 billion in sales. So, sales were up, profit was a slight miss, due to the Nokia acquisition. Bing search ad revenue is up 40%, and Bing now has about 20% of the market share for search engines. Microsoft is big in the cloud, where revenue is up almost 150%, topping 4 billion.

Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman went on CNBC yesterday and promised he would deliver the death blow against Herbalife. Ackman has been shorting the stock for about a year, a $1 billion bet the company will crash. Then he delivered a 3 hour diatribe with 250 slides in his PowerPoint presentation, alleging that Herbalife is not just a multi-level marketing nutritional club, it is a pyramid scheme preying on minorities, and the biggest fraud since Enron. Ackman didn’t present a great deal of evidence. Today the stock was up 15%, for no apparent reason, other than surviving an Ackman death blow.

There were two rulings from two federal appeals court panels on Obamacare today. The question was whether the government could subsidize health insurance premiums for people in states that use the federal insurance exchange; 36 states use the federal exchange, while the other states set up their own state exchanges. This goes back to wording in the original law that says subsidies can be applied to state exchanges.

 The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the government could not subsidize insurance for people in states that use the federal exchange. That decision could potentially cut off financial assistance for more than 4.5 million people who were found eligible for subsidized insurance in the federal exchange, or marketplace.

A couple of hours later, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, upheld the subsidies, saying that a rule issued by the Internal Revenue Service was “a permissible exercise of the agency’s discretion.”

For now, nothing changes, with the exception that there will be many more billable hours for the attorneys.

Bloomberg reports that regulators are ready to label Metlife a potential threat to the financial system, subjecting the insurer to oversight by the Federal Reserve. MetLife, the biggest US life insurer, could be subjected to stricter capital, leverage and liquidity requirements as a result of Fed supervision. A decision by the Financial Stability Oversight Council may come as early as July 31, and MetLife would have 30 days to request a hearing before the FSOC to contest the decision.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is now 4 years old, even though it isn’t really in effect; just 52% of the rules mandated under Dodd-Frank have been finalized by regulators; Another 23% have been proposed but they’re still working out details, and regulators haven’t even gotten around to 24% of the rules. A recent report by consumer watchdog Public Citizen called out the Securities and Exchange Commission as a particularly egregious delayer, noting that it had pushed back the deadlines for 13 of the 23 rules it was supposed to finalize this year.

City workers and retired city workers in Detroit have agreed to pension cuts to help bailout the city from bankruptcy. General retirees would get a 4.5% pension cut and lose annual inflation adjustments. They accepted the changes with 73% of ballots in favor. Support for the pension changes triggers an extraordinary $816 million bailout from the state of Michigan, foundations and the Detroit Institute of Arts. The money would prevent the sale of city-owned art and avoid deeper pension cuts.

Most people travel to or from Israel by air, and the major airport, really the only airport is Ben Gurion in Tel Aviv; last year, 14 million people went through Ben Gurion Airport, in a country with a population of 8 million.  Yesterday a rocket from Gaza landed about one mile from the airport; we don’t have further details on that rocket; it didn’t hit the airport; it was a mile away. When news spread, Delta diverted a flight to Paris. United airlines cancelled flights. The Federal Aviation Administration banned all US passenger and cargo flights to and from Tel Aviv for at least the next 24 hours. European airlines cancelled flight to Israel. The possibility of a passenger jet being shot down over a war zone is a very realistic and fresh memory.

US and United Nations diplomats are in Israel, trying to broker a ceasefire of some sort. Israel continues to pound targets across the Gaza Strip. It does not appear a ceasefire is near. If there is any light at the end of the tunnel, the tunnel will be destroyed.

The European Union today threatened Russia with harsher sanctions if Russia doesn’t cooperate in the investigation of the downing of the Malaysian flight 17 and if Russia doesn’t stop sending weapons to Russian backed separatists in Ukraine. But it was just a threat, and they’ll get together later in the week to draft proposals for sanctions.




Tuesday, June 3, 2014

Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - Always Look on the Bright Side

Always Look on the Bright Side
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 21 = 16,722
SPX – 0.73 = 1924
NAS – 3 = 4234
10 YR YLD + .06 = 2.59%
OIL + .37 = 102.84
GOLD + 1.40 = 1245.90
SILV + .05 = 18.91

Automakers reported strong sales of new cars in May, the strongest annual sales rate since before the 2008 financial crisis. Industry sales rose 11.3%. Chrysler and GM had their best month of May in 7 years. A record number of recalls at GM since the first of the year did not crimp demand for the automaker's new vehicles. Average transaction price for a new vehicle in May was $32,307, according to research firm Kelley Blue Book, which said average new-car prices were up $653 from a year ago, but down slightly from April.

The city council of Seattle Washington has voted to raise the city’s minimum wage to $15 an hour, the highest level of any major US city. Wages would begin to rise next year, ultimately reaching $15 from Washington state's minimum of $9.32 over three to seven years, depending on the business. Under the plan, firms with more than 500 employees nationally will be given at least three years to phase in the increase, those who provide health insurance subsidies would get four years and smaller businesses would be given seven years. US minimum wage is $7.25, although 38 states have set higher levels. The states of California, Connecticut and Maryland have recently passed laws increasing their respective wages to $10 or more in coming years.

Yesterday we heard the EPA proposal to cut power plant carbon emissions by 30% over the next 15 years. Even before the announcement we heard concerns about how that might affect jobs, most of it conjecture. In 2010 when the country was debating a clean energy bill aimed at cutting carbon emissions by 17%, the Congressional Budget Office predicted how destructive the law would be for American jobs. The CBO report concluded it wouldn’t be destructive at all, rather it would probably add more jobs than it killed.

The report found that overall, unemployment would probably increase in the short term. Workers may lose jobs by the thousands across industries that include coal mining, oil and gas extraction and transportation, the report said. And, it added, people who found new jobs by relocating or by learning new skills would probably be earning lower wages than before.

But the CBO report also said that, as polluting industries like coal mining shrink, industries with fewer carbon emissions would expand by as many as a half-million new jobs by 2025. States that are heavily coal-dependent will have to shift to some degree away from coal and to other, new resources; but the electricity has to come from somewhere, so there will be new facilities built to produce it.

In general, the debate about how environmental regulation will affect the economy is so polarized that studies end up with contradictory conclusions. In a 2012 review of more than two dozen such studies, a team of researchers at a New York University think tank found that studies commissioned by big energy companies usually found that regulations increase unemployment, while those by environmental groups found the opposite.

You’ve probably heard about the controversy surrounding the book Capital in the 21st Century by Thomas Pikkety. A reporter from the Financial Times says some of Pikkety’s statistics are flawed. Pikkety responded by saying his research is solid. Now we have a new source to support Pikkety. According to a new report by stock market strategists at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, the rich are going to keep getting richer all over the world, pretty much just as French economist Thomas Piketty describes in his bestselling book.

And according to the folks at Merrill Lynch, this represents an opportunity for Merrill Lynch. They write: "We are aware of the controversy over Piketty’s math (see the FT Money Supply blog), but are generally comfortable with the thrust of his analysis, having read his 577-pager, looked at his (problematic) spreadsheets, and cross-checked his data with alternative, credible sources. His questionable assumptions do not detract from the power of his thesis."

Merrill pointed out that it has been predicting the rise of "plutonomies -- economies where economic growth is powered by and largely consumed by the wealthy few" -- for the past decade. While this might sound like a nightmare world for some of us, it is also a chance to make a bunch of money, for those mostly rich people with the means to invest in companies that most profit from the wealthy elite. This includes luxury goods makers, money managers and private banks.

Always look on the bright side.

For the past two years, European Central Bank President Mario Draghi has been saying “whatever it takes”, giving the impression the ECB was ready to take on a stimulus program, jawboning the markets with the hint of bold monetary action, right around the corner. Today, a report showed Eurozone inflation at just 0.5% in May. A separate report showed the Eurozone jobless rate at 11.7% in April, ticking down from 11.8% in March, but still more than 25% in Spain and Greece. For 2 years Draghi said “whatever it takes” and for 2 years he has done nothing. On Thursday, the ECB meets to determine monetary policy and Draghi is expected to do something, and it better be something worth the wait.

It is widely anticipated the ECB will cut its target on loans from one-quarter percent to 0.1%, maybe down to a flat zero; and they are expected to eliminate paying banks on their deposits, cutting that into negative territory, essentially charging the banks to park cash at the central bank. And if that’s all the ECB does, it will probably be considered a huge disappointment; cutting rates won’t change borrowing conditions materially for most companies and it won’t be enough to lift the Eurozone out of the deflationary cycle.


It’s time for another edition of banks behaving badly. This is really an ongoing saga but sometimes we turn our gaze away and focus on other important issues; you might think that means the banksters haven’t been misbehaving, but the truth is their transgressions are never-ending.
Last month, Credit Suisse agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges of helping tax cheats avoid paying US taxes. Credit Suisse was fined $2.6 billion, which is a hefty fine but the bank basically got off with punishment fitting a civil suit. Still, it sent a message.

The Treasury Department announced that more than 77,000 foreign banks from 70 countries have agreed to share information about US account holders as part of a crackdown on offshore tax evasion. Participating countries include all the world's financial giants, as well as many places where Americans have traditionally hid assets, including Switzerland, the Cayman Islands and the Bahamas. Under the law, foreign banks that do not agree to share information with the IRS face steep penalties when doing business in the US. The law requires American banks to withhold 30% of certain payments to foreign banks that don't participate in the program. And if the US banks fail to withhold the tax, they would be liable for it themselves.

Next on the list is BNP Paribas; the Justice Department is looking into claims the French bank broke trade sanctions against Sudan, Iran, and Cuba between 2002 and 2009; essentially, international money laundering. BNP Paribas is facing possible criminal charges and possible penalties of $10 billion. In December 2012, HSBC faced similar charges that it breached US sanctions and laws against money laundering; HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion in civil penalties.

 Now, US authorities are seeking criminal charges and a stiffer fine, the equivalent of a year’s profit for the French bank. The precise amount of the fines and the conditions attached to them is still a matter of speculation and probably negotiation. The crimes of BNP are probably no more egregious than the wrongdoing of HSBC, but for a long time BNP refused to admit wrongdoing. If you’ve ever watched a cop show on TV, you know how that works; cooperate and the punishment will be more lenient.

President Obama is traveling to France on Thursday to commemorate the 70th anniversary of D-Day, the landing at Normandy. And while the visit is supposed to be a celebration of the liberation of France by its allies, relations between France and the US are a bit rocky. Many in France are concerned that America lets its own banks off rather lightly and cracks down on foreign banks instead to appease voters’ hatred of the banksters. American rules sometimes differ from European rules, and criminalize behavior that might be legal in the banks’ home country. And two more French banks, Societe Generale and Credit Agricole, are also thought to be in the crosshairs of American authorities for allegedly breaking sanctions and money laundering.

The French are getting nervous. The French foreign minister says the fine against BNP would be unfair and it would hit BNP Paribas' funds and result in fewer loans for French businesses. They claim the US is using its position as the leading global financial market to bully their banks. So on Thursday, Presidents Obama and Hollande will get together for D-Day festivities and dinner and conversation. The banking fines will be a major topic, but there are other acrimonious subjects; France seems determined to continue military hardware sales to Russia, which might not violate the recently imposed sanctions but certainly violates the spirit of the sanctions.

The US has embarked on a new way of fighting, and it involves sanctions and economic weapons; it is certainly preferable to the battles waged 70 years ago in Europe, but it won’t work if the banksters put their greed ahead of other priorities. The French politicians might whine about the hardships, but they need to get their banks in order, and for that matter so does the US.



Thursday, May 22, 2014

Thursday, May 22, 2014 - A Heckuva Business Model

A Heckuva Business Model
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 10 = 16,543
SPX + 4 = 1892
NAS + 22 = 4154
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.55%
OIL - .31 = 103.76
GOLD + 1.80 = 1294.70
SILV + .10 = 19.59

Yesterday we told you Russia and China had signed a 30 year, $400 billion dollar deal for Russia to deliver natural gas to China. Today, both countries vetoed a United Nations Security Council Resolution seeking to refer Syria to the International Criminal Court for possible war crimes. In the short-term, the Russia-China gas deal won’t have a big impact. The deal will not be in place until 2018 and even then will only see Russia selling a fraction of its gas exports to China every year, exports to the EU could still well be two to four times the size.

The economic links between Russia and Europe will continue to be significant and they will continue to be reliant on each other when it comes to energy; the former to sell the latter to buy, but this link gives an advantage to Russia, especially when the weather turns cold. At least symbolically the deal highlights Russia’s desire to move away from links with Europe. Combine this with Europe’s desire to increase energy security and the relations between the two sides could become increasingly cold and distant. Although, some countries due to geographical proximity, such as Bulgaria or Hungary; or due to long standing economic links, such as Germany - will surely continue to have good relationships with Russia. The entire Ukraine crisis has brought the return of a Cold War, and the gas deal sets up an East and West Economic Bloc.

It also raises questions over future tie ups between Russia and China. Areas such as payments systems, broader financial markets, transportation and machinery have all been touted as sectors for potential cooperation between the two countries. Again while a long term issue, such ties up may concern the West since Russia and China are currently reliant on their exports in many of these areas. Both the EU and US will need to figure a clearer policy for how to deal with such changes.

Unrest continues in Ukraine. BBC reports at least 11 Ukrainian soldiers were killed during an attack on a government checkpoint in eastern Ukraine. The attackers were described as heavily armed terrorists. Russia has claimed that it was pulling back troops from the Ukrainian border, but that has not been confirmed by satellite photos.

Thailand’s army chief went on television today to announce a military coup, after two attempts to negotiate an end to political impasse failed. The country’s Constitution was “temporarily suspended,” and the military said it terminated the caretaker government but said it expected the nation’s Senate, courts and independent organizations to function normally. The military imposed a nationwide curfew, and ordered all street protesters to leave their rallying sites.

In economic news, the National Association of Realtors reports existing home sales increased 1.3% to an annual rate of 4.65 million units, marking only the second gain in sales in nine months. Sales remain down 15% from a peak of 5.38 million units hit in July. Compared to April last year, sales fell 6.8%.The inventory of unsold homes on the market increased 6.5% from a year-ago to 2.29 million in April. That was the highest level since August 2012. The median home price rose 5.2%, the slowest pace since March 2012.

In this cycle we’ve had enormous price increases before we had the demand, which was a function of institutional buying of homes, which pushed prices higher. One thing we should have learned about housing is that when prices start rising, there is a herd mentality that kicks in. It wasn’t just institutional buying, it was a combination of events that swirled around institutional buying. The institutional buyer bought up distressed properties, resulting in fewer distressed inventory, add in people who were locked into their homes by negative equity or low equity;  and for many would-be buyers, it’s just tough to get a decent mortgage, or any mortgage at all.


This doesn’t mean banks aren’t lending – they are; it turns out that banks are ready, willing, and able to lend to small businesses, but you might not like the deal. Typical interest rates are about 125%.  Subprime business lending, the industry prefers to be called “alternative”, has swelled to more than $3 billion a year; that’s twice the volume of small loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration. Wall Street banks are helping the industry expand by lending originators money. They’re starting to package the loans into securities that can be sold to investors, just as they did for subprime-mortgage lenders. It’s a heckuva business model.

Manufacturing activity picked up in May; Markit's "flash" US manufacturing purchasing managers index rose to 56.2 from 55.4 in April.

New applications for unemployment benefits rose sharply in mid-May, reversing a big drop earlier in the month that put initial claims at a seven-year low. The number of people who applied for new benefits climbed by 28,000 to 326,000 in the week ended May 17. That number might grow in the coming weeks thanks to HP.

Hewlett Packard announced earnings after the close, sales fell, revenue fell, but profits were higher, and they will cut an additional 11,000 jobs, bringing the total for outstanding job cuts to 16,000.  It’s a heckuva business model.

Yesterday, William Dudley, the president of the New York Fed gave a speech to the Regional Economic Press Briefing in New York, and he said: “There have been significant and long-lasting changes to the nature of work. As a result, many middle-skilled workers displaced during the recession are likely to find that their old jobs will never come back. Furthermore, workers are increasingly facing higher skill requirements in order to land a good job. These dynamics in the labor market present a host of challenges for the region to address. However one thing is clear: workers will need more education, training and skills to take full advantage of the types of job opportunities being created in our region, as well as across the nation.”

No doubt education is important. More education and skills will not stop your fall but it might slow it down. And a point that Mr. Dudley failed to grasp, or at least communicate is that a significant percentage of corporate profits have relied upon the widespread loss of worker economic share over the past few decades.

If you have bought or sold on eBay in the past few months, change your password and monitor your financial information. The company says hackers attacked between late February and early March with login credentials obtained from "a small number" of employees. They then accessed a database containing all user records and copied "a large part" of those credentials.

The hackers stole email addresses, encrypted passwords, birth dates, mailing addresses and other information, though no financial data, nor PayPal databases were compromised. The eBay breach would be larger than the one Target Corp disclosed in December, which included some 40 million payment card numbers and another 70 million customer records. Why are we just hearing about the eBay hack now? That is a very good question and so far eBay hasn’t provided a good answer.

We’ve noted many times that bankers have a get out of jail card. This week, Credit Suisse entered a criminal guilty plea in New York for its role in an ongoing tax evasion scheme, but that was a corporate entity, and no actual human bankers went to jail; in fact, the CEO and Chairman get to keep their jobs; but today we note that the handcuffs have been slapped on a banker, the former head of investment banking for JPMorgan Chase, in China.

You may recall the recent allegations against JPMorgan in China. Jamie Dimon had a clever little business development strategy to hire the children of Chinese politicians, to win support for JPMorgan banking activities in China; it’s a heckuva business model, except apparently the SEC’s antibribery unit thinks this might be bribery and thus a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; except the SEC was not behind today’s arrest, and we all know that US law enforcement and regulators would never actually arrest a banker. However, finding jobs for the children of China’s elite in exchange for bank underwriting is apparently illegal in China, too.  And in China they have this strange custom of arresting people who break the law, even if work for JPMorgan.

In case you missed it, this week’s criminal settlement with Credit Suisse marked a turning point for law enforcement in dealing with the big banks. The Department of Justice says it proves they will go after the big banks and slap them with felonies convictions, even though they get misdemeanor punishment. Well, the proof is in the putting.

And now we have a new case that will show whether there is really any crackdown on wrongdoing, specifically money laundering; regulators are investigating Charles Schwab Corp and Bank of America Corp's Merrill Lynch brokerage over whether the brokerages missed red flags that could indicate attempts to move money illicitly or to feed proceeds from illegal activities into the financial system. The SEC is probing Schwab and Merrill Lynch for violations of anti-money laundering rules that require the brokerages to know their customers.

Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen began urging regulators two years ago to make sure financial institutions are identifying the true beneficial owners of their accounts. Cohen's exhortations came amid concerns that bad actors, such as drug cartel members and terrorists, are growing more creative in their attempts to secretly transfer tainted funds.

The SEC's investigation so far has found Charles Schwab and Merrill did not pay close enough attention to their clients' true identities, and accepted shell companies and individuals with fake addresses as clients. In both cases, some of the accounts, whose ownership the brokerages did not adequately investigate, were eventually linked to drug cartels. The investigation is not yet complete, and the only thing we know with certainty is that it’s a heckuva business model.



Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Tuesday, May 20, 2014 - Protected Species

Protected Species
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 137 = 16,374
SPX -12 = 1872
NAS – 28 = 4096
10 YR YLD - .02 = 2.51%
OIL + .87 = 102.98
GOLD + 1.70 = 1295.30
SILV + .05 = 19.49

Today is Tuesday and that means that General Motors has announced another recall; this time 2.6 million more cars. Last week, GM recalled 3 million vehicles. So far this year, GM has announced 29 recalls affecting more than 15 million cars globally. The list of recalled vehicles is long. It’s easier to list the vehicles that haven’t been recalled; they have recalled 58 versions of Chevrolet and GMC pickups.

Last week the Dow hit a record high; since then it has been floundering. For the fourth straight session, the Nasdaq Composite has posted more 52-week lows than 52-week highs; 55 lows versus 38 highs. The Russell 2000 Index of small and mid-cap stocks hit a high on March 4th and since then it has dropped almost 10%.

Meanwhile, interest rates have been moving steadily lower despite winding down of large scale asset purchases under the Fed’s quantitative easing, and the talk about raising interest rates at some point down the road. With yields on the 10-yr Treasury note dipping down around 2.5%, that means somebody is buying Treasuries, but if not the Fed, then who?

Well, it’s certainly not Russia. Putin sold off more than $100 billion in Treasuries in March; he was probably expecting Treasury prices to tumble, but that didn’t happen. The most likely buyer is Belgium; from November of last year through January 2014, Belgium bought approximately $142 billion in US Treasuries, which is quite a bit considering the Belgian GDP is about $480 billion; so their bond buys were equal to about 30% of GDP.

As a member of the Eurozone, Belgium can’t just print new money. So, something is rotten. Or maybe the Fed has opened up a branch office in Antwerp.

Anyway, Putin is in China today to talk up the virtues of Russian natural gas. Putin met with Chinese President Xi Jinping at a start of a two-day meeting on Asian security with leaders from Iran and Central Asia. Putin is hoping to extend his country's dealings with Asia and diversify markets for its gas, which now goes mostly to Europe. Russia has been negotiating for more than a decade on a proposed 30-year deal to supply gas to China. Officials said they hoped to complete work in time to sign a contract while Putin is in Shanghai, but they have not yet announced a signed agreement. Putin told Chinese reporters ahead of his visit that China-Russia cooperation had reached an all-time high.

Russia is worried about its European gas market, seeing lackluster European demand and political efforts, intensified since the Ukrainian crisis, to diversify away from Russian gas constraining future sales to the West. At the same time, the shale gas phenomenon, with possible US and Canadian liquid natural gas exports to come, has Moscow concerned about what prices it can hope to attain from the European market. Developing new, potentially lucrative markets in the east seems to be the answer to Russia’s European gas concerns.

China also feels a new impetus for a deal. Despite a slowing of the domestic economy, future demand for energy, the key to both growth and political stability, will be robust. Efforts to develop China’s domestic shale resources are promising, but are unlikely to produce consequential volumes until the next decade. Meanwhile, China has been meeting growing energy consumption with coal powered plants, and they are literally choking on that decision, as the air quality has been nearly destroyed.

Tomorrow we will get the minutes of the last Federal Reserve FOMC meeting. Today we had Fed heads giving speeches. William Dudley, the president of the New York Fed is saying the Fed will take its time raising interest rates.  Noting both market and Fed expectations that the first hike will come some time near the middle of 2015, Dudley said, “if the economy is stronger than expected, causing the excess slack in the labor market to be absorbed sooner and inflation to rise more quickly than forecasted, then lift-off is likely to be pulled forward in time. If, instead, economic growth disappoints, inflation stays unusually low and the labor market continues to exhibit evidence of considerable excess slack, then lift-off will likely be pushed back in time.”

As for the over $4 trillion worth of bonds on its balance sheet, Dudley expects them to be reduced via “automatic pilot”; in other words, as Treasury securities mature and mortgages are repaid. Dudley offered his two cents on why the housing sector’s contribution to the economy has “stalled out” over the past few quarters.  While he said some decline in activity was to be expected following the jump in mortgage rates last year, “the extent of the slowdown has surprised me given that the recent pace of housing starts, roughly 1 million per year, is far below what is consistent with the economy’s underlying demographics.”

Dudley said mortgage credit is still unavailable to borrowers with lower credit scores. Also, student debt has delayed the entry of new first-time home buyers; that could make it harder even for existing homeowners to sell their homes and trade up, slowing the traditional turnover of the housing market. Dudley said he expects the housing recovery to continue, “the pace will likely be slow, especially relative to past economic recoveries.”

The online real estate site, Zillow reports 18.8% of US homeowners with a mortgage, or 9.7 million households, were underwater on their mortgages at the end of the first quarter. That's an improvement from the end of last year when this figure was 19.4%, and it's a large improvement from a peak of 31.4% in 2012, but it shows that negative equity is still an issue in the housing market.

What's more, there is an additional 10 million households that have 20% or less equity in their homes. For those homeowners, it would be difficult to sell without coming up with some money to cover the broker fees, closing costs and the down payment for the next home.

European Union regulators have charged banks JPMorgan, HSBC and Credit Agricole with colluding to manipulate the price of financial products linked to interest rates.

The European Commission's regulator said the banks will now have a chance to respond to the preliminary findings. If the Commission ultimately concludes they have broken the law, it can impose a fine of up to 10% of their annual revenue. In December 2013, the Commission levied fines totaling $1.4 billion on Barclays, Deutsche Bank, RBS and Societe Generale as part of the same case, which covers financial derivatives linked to a benchmark interest rate called Euribor in the period 2005-2008. Barclays escaped fines for having notified the Commission of the existence of the cartel, and the others were granted a reduction in their fine for cooperating in a settlement.

Late yesterday, Credit Suisse entered a guilty plea for conspiring to help US customers evade taxes, the first such guilty plea by a major financial institution in years. Today Credit Suisse shares rose almost 1%. Apparently a felony conviction is a good thing. And why not? Top bank executives will get to keep their jobs, the bank can pin the whole thing on a handful of underlings, and it won't have to give up a list of client names to the government. Credit Suisse will have to let an independent monitor keep an eye on it, but that's a minor inconvenience at worst. The guilty plea could cost the bank some clients here and there, but investors and analysts are betting there won't be much impact. The most painful part of the deal, the $2.6 billion in fines, is manageable, less than one quarter's revenue.

For the most part, the mainstream media is dutifully accepting the spin of the Department of Justice, that this case is significant by virtue of being the first plea of this sort made by a bank in over two decades. The fact that those intervening years saw regulators generally take a very hands off approach to banks, and that we had a global financial crisis with no measures of this sort taken against the perps somehow escapes mention.

Let me return to one critical issue: why no individuals were prosecuted or even fined. This case, like so many we have discussed, seems ideally made for at least a civil action under Sarbanes Oxley against the CEO and CFO, since they must certify the adequacy of internal controls. The most charitable coloration you can put on what looks an awful lot like obstruction of justice (although Credit Suisse was not charged with that) was that it was a failure of internal controls. And Sarbanes Oxley is designed so that a civil action can easily tee up a criminal case on the same control deficiencies.


Credit Suisse was in many ways the perfect major financial institution from which to demand a guilty plea. Although its investment banking and wealth management operations are global, the commercial banking operation in the United States is largely confined to its New York branch. It does not own a subsidiary in this country providing bank services to local customers, so it really only had to negotiate with the New York authorities and the federal government to resolve the case. That meant the effort to mitigate potential collateral consequences of a guilty plea was confined to just a few agencies. So, if you think the Credit Suisse case will become the template to go after American banks, well, yeah, that’s not going to happen. The banking class remains a protected species. 

Monday, May 19, 2014

Monday, May 19, 2014 - Still Too Big to Jail


Still Too Big to Jail
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 20 = 16511
SPX + 7 = 1885
NAS + 35 = 4125
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.54%
OIL + .58 = 102.16
GOLD - .10 = 1293.60
SILV - .01 = 19.44

Merger Mania Monday. Late yesterday, AT&T announced an offer to buy DirecTV for $48 billion, or $95 per share. The combined AT&T-DirecTV would serve 26 million customers; that would make it the second-largest pay TV operator behind a combined Comcast-Time Warner Cable, which would serve 30 million under a $45 billion merger proposed in February. The Comcast deal still faces regulatory hurdles.

AT&T and DirecTV promised consumer benefits like more economical bundles that tie mobile phone, pay TV and Internet service together on a single bill. The deal could face regulatory scrutiny from the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice. Unlike the cable company tie-up, the AT&T-DirecTV merger would effectively cut the number of video providers from four to three for about 25% of US households. That's a situation that could result in higher prices for consumers and usually gives regulators cause for concern.

The value that DirecTV offers that no other national TV provider offers is a special deal for football fans; for $240 to $330 you can buy a special package that gets you all the NFL football games, including your hometown favorite no matter where you live. That’s why DirecTV paid an estimated $4 billion to the NFL for the latest Sunday Ticket contract; that deal expires at the end of the upcoming NFL season. If the Sunday Ticket arrangement were not to be extended, AT&T would reportedly have a legal out, according to terms of the takeover.

Part of the value of DirecTV is what it isn’t. DirecTV does not offer fixed-line or mobile Internet service, and its rights to airwave frequencies for satellite TV are not the kind that AT&T can use to improve its mobile phone network. If AT&T can convert DirecTV’s customers into high-speed Internet subscribers, they could have 25% of all pay TV subscribers and then two companies would control 55% to 60% of all Internet subscriptions in the US.

The board of AstraZeneca has rejected the improved, and apparently final $119 billion takeover offer from US drugmaker Pfizer. Pfizer, which is the world's second-biggest drugmaker by revenue, has been courting No. 8 AstraZeneca since January. Yesterday, Pfizer raised the offer 15% to $119 billion; that would be the richest acquisition ever among drugmakers and the third-biggest in any industry. AstraZeneca didn't take long to reject the new offer, its board arguing Pfizer is making "an opportunistic attempt to acquire a transformed AstraZeneca, without reflecting the value of its exciting pipeline" of experimental drugs.

Pfizer's offer comes amid a surge of other deals among drugmakers. Those deals include Switzerland's Novartis agreeing to buy GlaxoSmithKline's cancer-drug business for up to $16 billion, to sell most of its vaccines business to GSK for $7.1 billion, plus royalties, and to sell its animal health division to Eli Lilly for about $5.4 billion. Canada's Valeant Pharmaceuticals has also made an unsolicited offer of nearly $46 billion for Botox maker Allergan, which has turned it down, so far.

Law enforcement agents have arrested more than 90 hackers accused of infecting more than half-a-million computers worldwide with malicious snooping software. The suspects were charged with developing, selling and marketing a remote access tool, or “RAT,” that allowed users to infiltrate computers, view files and steal personal data from unwitting victims. Talk about creepy; the malware could even take over your webcam and take pictures and videos of you. The original creator of the software, who founded an organization called “Blackshades,” was arrested in June 2012, but investigators said an international ring of hackers continued to sell and disseminate the software after his arrest, reaching thousands of people in more than 100 countries; 19 countries participated in the arrests, and more than 300 searches had been conducted in what law enforcers described as one of the largest cybersecurity operations in history.

The United States charged five Chinese government officials with allegedly orchestrating cyber-attacks against six major American companies. It marks the first time the US has formally charged foreign government officials for explicitly acting at the behest of a foreign government in cyber-crimes. The companies targeted by hackers were Alcoa, Westinghouse, Allegheny Technologies, US Steel, United Steelworkers Union, and Solar World.

Attorney General Eric Holder said: “In some cases, they stole trade secrets that would have been particularly beneficial to Chinese companies at the time they were stolen. In others, they stole sensitive, internal communications that would provide a competitor, or adversary in litigation, with insight into the strategy and vulnerabilities of the American entity. In sum, the alleged hacking appears to have been conducted for no reason other than to advantage state-owned companies and other interests in China, at the expense of businesses here in the United States.”

The Justice Department has criminally charged Credit Suisse AG and two of its units with conspiring to willfully help Americans evade taxes. A Virginia federal court filing accuses Credit Suisse of conspiring to in part "advise the preparation and presentation of false income tax returns and other documents to the Internal Revenue Service.'' The four-page criminal information charges the bank with "assisting clients in using sham entities'' as the purported owners of secret offshore accounts and "soliciting IRS forms that falsely stated under penalties of perjury that the sham entities … owned the assets in the accounts.''

The criminal case follows a Senate subcommittee investigation that found the bank provided accounts in Switzerland for more than 22,000 US clients totaling $10 billion to $12 billion. The report said Credit Suisse sent Swiss bankers to recruit American clients at golf tournaments and other events, encouraged US customers to travel to Switzerland and actively helped them hide their assets.

Credit Suisse has apparently agreed as part of a settlement to plead to one count of conspiring to aid tax evasion. It would mark the first time in more than 20 years that a major bank has plead guilty to criminal wrongdoing. But make no mistake, this was a negotiated guilty plea that does not bear the consequences of criminal guilt. Credit Suisse will pay about $2.6 billion in penalties and hire an independent monitor for up to two years, which sounds exactly like a civil penalty. Recognizing that criminal charges could prompt regulators to revoke a bank’s license to operate, the corporate equivalent of the death penalty, prosecutors met with regulators to discuss punishing Credit Suisse without putting it out of business and imperiling the economy. The biggest challenge facing Credit Suisse could be that some of its own clients, such as pension funds, have internal requirements that prohibit them from doing business with an entity that has pleaded guilty to a crime.

Otherwise, this amounts to another slap on the wrist. The CEO and Chairman keep their positions. Credit Suisse will admit to a statement of facts that shows the U.S. tax evasion was widely fostered by the bank, the people said. The firm won’t have to disclose the names of US account holders under terms of the agreement.


The Credit Suisse plea won’t be the last. BNP Paribas is expected to plead guilty in coming weeks to doing business with countries like Sudan and Iran that the United States has blacklisted; BNP is also expected to pay more than $5 billion in fines. And eventually, we could see criminal charges brought against American banks such as JPMorgan and Citigroup, which are the subjects of criminal investigations, but those inquiries are at an earlier stage and it is unclear whether they would result in criminal charges. The Justice Department's highest-profile settlement over sales of risky mortgage securities in the run-up to the financial crisis — the $13 billion deal among the department, state regulators and JPMorgan Chase — was a civil case, and no bank executives were charged. Federal prosecutors in California have been conducting a related criminal investigation.


So for now we have a new strategy for controlling the illegality of the big banks: charge them with criminal activity and punish them with civil penalties. So what we have, in the end, seems to be a version of the anemic civil settlements and deferred-prosecution agreements that banks always get when they commit crimes. As usual, it is little more than the cost of doing business. Eric Holder can say that no bank is too big to jail, but then he folds like a tortilla when it comes to pursuing criminal charges that actually carry criminal penalties. For now, the government's message to banks remains the same: Go ahead and break the law. If worse comes to worst, your low-level bankers will take the fall, and your shareholders will pick up the tab.

Monday, May 12, 2014

Monday, May 12, 2014 - More Milk and Cookies

More Milk and Cookies
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 112 = 16,695
SPX + 18 = 1896
NAS + 71 = 4143
10 YR YLD + .03 = 2.65%
OIL + .63 – 100.62
GOLD + 5.60 = 1296.70
SILV + .35 = 19.60

Record highs for both the Dow and the S&P 500. We celebrate when the Dow hits a record high; there is no specific celebration for the S&P, which doesn’t really make sense. We have a party with milk and cookies. Today we have some lemon zest cookies and I think they have poppy seed sprinkles, which means we would all fail a drug test for the next few days.

The latest thing to worry about is the market divergence. The Dow hit record highs but the Russell 2000 index of small and midcap stocks closed below its 200 day moving average last week. The idea is that small caps will drag down the blue chips, or maybe the blue chips will lift up the small caps, but one way or another, something has got to give. Another consideration is the number of NYSE stocks making new highs minus the number of NYSE stocks making new lows continues to look mediocre at best even as the Dow and S&P make all-time highs. You don't typically want to see large caps struggling at recent highs with less underlying participation by individual stocks because narrowing of participation at highs is how tops are formed. You also don't typically want to see new all-time highs for the S&P while the more economically sensitive small caps are in a correction. These things can resolve in either direction, but the historical bias is toward a resolution to the downside.

The basic truth is that not all stocks are hitting record highs. That’s not how it works; there are winners and losers, even in a bull market, even in a bear market. The other reality is that we don’t make record highs forever, 2013 being the exception to the rule. At some point this market will roll-over, we don’t know exactly when, but rather than sticking our head in the sand, we remain vigilant.

Yesterday was Election Day in Ukraine. A preliminary count from eastern Ukraine showed 89% of voters in the Donetsk region and 97% in neighboring Luhansk voted for greater autonomy; which is to say they are voting to split from Ukraine and be more closely associated with Russia. The Russian government did not even say that it recognized the results of the voting, which the authorities in Kiev and their Western supporters all declared illegal from the start. The Kremlin issued a statement saying only that it “respects the will of the population of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions,” and that the crisis should be resolved through dialogue.

As part of that dialogue, Gazprom, the gas company controlled by the Russian government, announced it would send Ukraine an advance bill for natural gas deliveries in June. So the dialogue is “pay up or no gas.” The Euro Union is slowly tightening economic sanctions on Russia, but slowly, hoping they don’t have to face Gazprom turning off the spigot on supplies to the continent. This entire conflict could turn ugly fast, but each day that goes on without a meltdown is a good day for the markets.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice is reportedly getting closer to actually enforcing the law, at least with respect towards a big bank. There are signs and last minute meetings that point toward possible criminal charges against two large European banks. No giant bank has been found guilty of criminal charges in the US for at least 20 years. Lawyers for BNP Paribas and Credit Suisse have been meeting with prosecutors to try and wrangle a deal for leniency. BNP is suspected of doing business with countries like Sudan and Iran that were on a US sanctions blacklist; Credit Suisse is suspected of offering tax shelters to wealthy Americans.

There have been criminal charges against subsidiaries of big banks, but the parent companies have been spared. Credit Suisse recently set up a subsidiary to house their US offshore business; the idea being that they could create a subsidiary to serve as a sacrificial lamb. Word is that US prosecutors are unwilling to criminally charge the newly formed unit.

Criminal charges could prompt regulators to revoke a bank’s license to operate, the corporate equivalent of the death penalty. When HSBC faced criminal charges a couple of years ago, the bank set up a subsidiary in Asia to take the fall. That deal was apparently accepted because the Justice Department is afraid of a criminal charge of the parent company could wreak havoc on the broader economy, far beyond the boundaries of France or Switzerland. The BNP and Credit Suisse investigations could lay the groundwork for actions against American banks as well. We may see how this strategy develops within the week.

There were no significant economic reports today, there was a fairly important weather report from NASA and some scientists at the University of California – Irvine. They say that glaciers and ices shelves along the western part of Antarctica are melting, and as they melt they’re releasing roughly the equivalent of the entire Greenland ice sheet into the ocean every year; enough ice to raise the world’s sea level by about 4 feet, which means my dream of owning oceanfront property in Arizona is alive and well. Eventually, they say the oceans will rise by about 14 feet, but that’s a long way down the road. The scientists say the melting process has passed the point of no return.

Now, why do we talk about it here on the Financial Review? Because it is changing the financial landscape. John Nelson, the chairman of Lloyd’s of London has posted an article in the Guardian explaining how climate change is changing the insurance industry’s catastrophe modeling. “According to the World Bank, weather-related losses and damage have risen from an annual average of about $50bn in the 1980s to close to $200bn. Lloyd's knows this all too well, the damage wrought on the US by the hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma in 2005 and Superstorm Sandy in 2012 to name but a few all brought significant claims to the insurance market.”

And so, Lloyd’s is changing models to account for climate change, by building in forward projections, not just historical data. This will likely lead to changes in insurance pricing, and in this way, we will all be affected, but it doesn’t stop there. This means changes in environmental policy of course, and also housing and land use policy. And this is not just about insurance companies trying to jack your rates. “Ultimately, insurance exists to pick up the pieces and pay the claims” when extreme weather hits, but there may also come a time when insurance companies stop paying claims, and deem certain areas uninsurable, which is the equivalent of a financial death sentence. And that’s just the start; wait until the Environmental Protection Agency announces rules intended to slow the pace of climate change.

And what happens when the EPA moves on to regulation of greenhouse gas emissions? And it won’t be long before you start hearing more about cap and trade; and I predict that in the not so distant future we’ll all be familiar with the R.E.C. market, which is almost non-existent today. You don’t know about REC now, but you will.

Flood insurance will disappear for some areas, drought and crop insurance will vanish in other areas. And even if you live on a hill, it doesn’t mean you escape consequences, because this will also require massive investment in infrastructure; above and beyond updating outdated bridges. And this will eventually result in a complete revamp of our power structure. The days of coal fired power plants and flaring off natural gas in the oil fields are coming to an end just as surely as the days of whale oil lanterns passed into the darkness of history. And because necessity is the mother of invention, these are when we need, and I believe we will find imaginative and innovative solutions.



Monday, May 5, 2014

Monday, May 05, 2014 - Riggers’ Propaganda

Riggers’ Propaganda
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 17 = 16,530
SPX + 3 = 1884
NAS + 14 = 4138
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.61%
OIL - .38 = 99.38
GOLD + 9.10 = 1310.70
SILV + .13 = 19.69

Last week we told you about prosecutors and regulators preparing to criminally prosecute Credit Suisse and maybe BNP Paribas, and the slap on the wrist enforcement efforts of the past decade, and especially under the mis-guidance of Attorney General Eric Holder’s “Too Big to Jail” policy. The Swiss finance minister met Holder on Friday to discuss a US probe into Swiss banks that allegedly helped Americans evade US taxes, which includes Credit Suisse. Today, Holder posted a video on the Justice Department website saying that the DOJ is pursuing criminal investigations of financial institutions that could result in action in the coming weeks and months, and adding that no company was “too big to jail.”

A criminal conviction of an entity regulated in the United States could lead authorities to potentially revoke a charter, essentially a death sentence for a bank. In his video, Holder said prosecutors are working closely with regulators to address the issues before taking action, "Rather than wall off banks from prosecution, the potential for such severe consequences simply means that federal prosecutors conducting these investigations must go the extra mile to coordinate closely with the regulators that oversee these institutions' day-to-day operations."

It’s starting to sound like Holder is going after criminal charges without the consequences of criminal charges; maybe he can collect a slightly bigger fine, but still leave the bank charter in place. Otherwise, this is a big pile of baloney. And the proof will be in the putting. Until we see a banker jailed and a charter revoked, AG Holder is just spouting propaganda.

The propaganda mill is spinning fast in Washington DC these days. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Mary Jo White flatly rejected claims that retail investors are being fleeced by high-frequency traders who can use their speed to jump ahead with buy and sell orders that fetch better prices.

White told a US House of Representatives panel last week, "The markets are not rigged." White reiterated that her agency's investigators are actively pursuing probes into high-speed traders and dark pools, or anonymous trading venues, but she also sought to dispel the notion that using high-speed technologies to trade ahead of others using stock quotes disseminated on public data feeds could meet the legal definition of "unlawful insider trading." She acknowledged at one point that the market is not "perfect" and told lawmakers that the agency's "data-driven" review of market structure issues surrounding areas such as order types, dark pool trading and data feeds was still ongoing. Even though the SEC has not concluded or barely even launched the investigation, White already knows the facts, saying: "I want to be very clear that the market metrics suggest that the retail investor is very well-served by the current market structure."

The rather unusual reason why SEC Chair White and Congress are suddenly concerned about rigged markets is because of Michael Lewis' latest book Flash Boys and HFT (high-frequency trading) and whether the markets are manipulated. What they're not talking about is how the markets have been set up for institutionalized rigging. And they are rigged; have been for a long time.

It goes back to the time when the NYSE was the only game in town, and prices were quoted in fractions: a half, a quarter, an eighth. Buyers and sellers of listed shares used brokers to send orders to the NYSE Floor for execution. On the Floor, "specialists" are in charge of every stock. Their job was, and still is, to match up buyers and sellers and "keep a fair and orderly market" as they facilitate "price discovery."

The specialist used to see all orders for the stocks they were in charge of because all orders had to come to them. Besides matching up buyers and sellers, specialists can also trade for their own account. That means they can try and make money trading the stocks where they are specialists. Here's how the specialist makes real money, besides getting paid a small fee for matching up orders.

The key to being the specialist is seeing all the order flow. Because specialists have knowledge of who is buying, who wants to buy and how much and at what prices, and the same is true for knowing the sell side, the specialist essentially gets to trade on inside information. The specialist could raise the bid if he wanted to buy stock because he knew there were more buy orders coming into his book, and if he was right and the stock moved higher, he could sell his position for a nice profit.

And that is pretty much how the system works today. Eventually, investors grew weary of having the specialists slice off profits on insider information. Even though we got rid of the fractional system, we still have the insiders slicing off small profits on each trade. Now the Nasdaq doesn’t have a specialist system because there is no central trading floor where dealers meet and call out prices, but in the automated, cyberspace world, each dealer is his own specialist.

Eventually, electronic communications networks (ECNs) sprang up. ECNs were and still are networks where dealers who weren't part of Nasdaq could place their quotes and buy and sell with each other. From there it wasn't long before Nasdaq dealers wanted to get onto all the ECNs and demands were made to trade NYSE and AMEX stocks on the computer networks. That's how technology changed the old specialist system into a mass of different trading venues that now includes entirely new exchanges like BATS, and dark pools where banks and crossing services trade for clients demanding anonymity.

The problem now is that there is no longer any one central place where all orders go to be executed. Orders are spread around based on cost, and services, and, most importantly, "payment for order flow." So, now the online brokerage firms like Schwabb, and Etrade, and whoever, don’t have their own traders to execute trades and they don’t have their own trading desks, so they have to route those orders to an exchange or a couple of exchanges to match up buyers and sellers. In order for exchanges and networks that offer execution of orders to be successful, they have to have orders coming in so they can match up buyers and sellers. Otherwise, if there aren't enough orders to allow matching of buyers and sellers at prices where customers want to transact, that exchange would have no "liquidity" and it would lose business.

So how do all these competing exchanges get orders? They pay for them. They pay Schwab, and Ameritrade and Scottrade for their "order flow." That's right; your order at your discount brokerage is sold to someone so it can be traded on their exchange. Who gets paid for your order? Not you. Your brokerage gets paid.

So, after the switch to decimalization in 2001, we had the rise of the market makers. Market makers are the same as specialists, except they are mini-specialists in the stocks they trade electronically for their broker-dealer or bank trading desk who trade on Nasdaq or on the ECNs or anywhere where an intermediary can interpose himself into a trade, and they will impose their trade ahead of your trade. That’s why they buy order flow, so they can create an internal “book” so they can have their own inside information on the order flow, so they can trade against it, or sell it to other traders.

HFT operators are looking at all the order flow going into all the different exchanges and trading venues they can peer into. They look into the total flow of orders, which no single exchange can see, and with their empirically modeled time sequencing of orders, spreads, and depth that they run through reinforcement learning algorithms, they come up with a trade that steps in to buy or sell shares before someone who intended to transact there gets a chance to.

Speed is critical to high-frequency trading. Exchanges rent HFT shops space next to their servers (co-location) so they get their data faster than everyone else. That's legal. They couldn't do it if there weren't so many exchanges and trading venues competing for orders. You can thank the SEC for making that a reality without sensible limits. They couldn't do it if there was no such thing as payment for order flow; yes, they get paid for their order flow too. You can thank the SEC for allowing that neat little scheme.  HFT shops can buy and sell at the same price (that's a zero profit or loss), but because they provided some venue "liquidity" by sending their super-fast order there to be executed, they get paid. That's not arbitrage in the traditional sense; that's just playing the game. They couldn't do it if they didn't have all the information at the speed they get it at from the exchanges the SEC regulates.

And so you pay whenever you make a trade; you lose about a penny per share, sometimes more, and you’re expected to accept this little slice in the name of liquidity, but it isn’t really liquidity, it’s really just volume. High-frequency trading has nothing to do with what liquidity is, what liquidity means to the market. Volume is not liquidity.


Everything is usually fine when markets are moving up or are relatively stable. We won't really notice HFT. But, in a wicked downdraft, when HFT players turn off their computers, we will see that there are no bids on any specialists' books or parked with market makers. There will be no stopping stocks from falling for that reason. We saw it in the May 2010 flash crash. That's what HFT has done to the market. It has made it a dark pool, and a dark pool is not required to yell out a price like the old-school specialists; instead prices come in at a more leisurely pace, when it suits the ECNs, after they scalped their share. What this means is that we don’t really know what the price is, and you can’t have a market without prices, which means one day we could have a catastrophic market failure; despite the propaganda otherwise. 

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Thursday, May 01, 2014 - If the Cops Never Arrest the Killer, Nobody Really Died

If the Cops Never Arrest the Killer, Nobody Really Died
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 21 = 16,558
SPX – 0.27 = 1883
NAS + 12 = 4127
10 YR YLD - .04 = 2.60%
OIL - .39 = 99.35
GOLD – 6.40 = 1285.90
SILV - .13 = 19.12

No record high for the Dow today. The Industrial Average was up and down, up and down throughout the day, but couldn’t hold positive territory. Today’s economic reports showed consumer spending increased, as did manufacturing activity, and unemployment claims.

Consumer spending increased 0.9 percent in March after rising by 0.5 percent in February, the largest gain in more than 4-1/2 years. The top 6 automakers backed up the spending report by reporting year over year gains in sales. The spending report supports the notion that cold weather just paused consumer activity and there is pent up demand that will lead to more economic activity in the second quarter. Income increased 0.5 percent in March, the biggest gain since last summer, but with spending outpacing income growth, the saving rate, which is the percentage of disposable income households are socking away, hit a 14-month low.

The Institute for Supply Management said its manufacturing index of national factory activity rose to 54.9 last month, up from 53.7 in March. A reading above 50 indicates expansion in the nation's factories. Manufacturing activity has now accelerated for 3 consecutive months and last month's gains were driven by a pickup in employment, export orders and inventories; although new orders were unchanged.

The Labor Department reports initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 14,000 to a seasonally adjusted 344,000. Tomorrow morning we’ll get the monthly nonfarm payrolls report; look for 210,000 net new jobs in April and the unemployment rate to dip to 6.6%. That wouldn’t be enough to lift the labor market out of the doldrums but it would be another small step in the right direction.

A couple of news articles caught my attention, one from the Murdoch Street Journal and the other from the NY Times. You are forgiven if you missed them; they deal with banksters, and fraud, and regulators who look the other way, hoping for a post-government job with a golden parachute, and prosecutors without spines.

The Journal story deals with the Swiss units of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, and how they’ve agreed to hand over potentially incriminating details about how they helped Americans evade taxes; in return the banks won’t face prosecution.  Goldman's Swiss private bank had about $12 billion in assets under supervision as of the end of last year. Morgan Stanley's Swiss private bank had $50.7 billion in assets under management as of last year. The other big US banks likely did the same things, but they haven’t worked out a deal just yet.

Goldman and Morgan Stanley figured out the playbook, and it appears to go something like this: Senior officers of the banks aid and abet tax fraud by wealthy American clients, fail to make legally required criminal referrals, fail to comply with subpoenas, and then demand immunity from prosecution. Department of Justice prosecutors pee their pants and cave in to a slap on the wrist deal. No senior banker or bank was prosecuted. No banker was sued civilly by the government. No banker had to pay back his bonus that he “earned” through fraud. And the tax cheats that they aided and abetted have plenty of time to cover their tracks and might get away scot free, because the banksters aren’t required to turn over the client lists.

Then I read a New York Times story that claims federal prosecutors are getting close to criminal charges against at least a couple of major banks: Credit Suisse, for offering tax shelters to Americans, and BNP Paribas for doing business with countries like Sudan and Iran that the US has placed under sanctions. Prosecutors in New York and Washington have apparently held talks with BNP about a guilty plea from the bank’s parent company. Ben Lawsky, New York’s top regulator reportedly plans to impose steep penalties against BNP and its employees but would not revoke the bank’s license. Prosecutors have secured similar assurances from the New York Fed.

The discussions between regulators and prosecutors and lawyers was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, and they demonstrate that defense lawyers were pushing prosecutors not to act without assurances that regulators will keep a bank in business. The question of culpability seems fairly straightforward; BNP conducted its own internal investigation that identified significant volume of transactions that could be considered impermissible under sanctions in place between 2002 and 2009, including improperly routing money through its New York branches.

There doesn’t seem to be a big concern at BNP about the possibility of criminal convictions that might result in loss of the bank’s charter, much less worry over executives facing jail time. It’s as if the criminal acts were performed by ghosts or phantasms.  BNP has set aside $1.1 billion in legal reserves; they expect a fine; it’s the cost of doing business.

Of course this is nothing new; two years ago, HSBC escaped criminal charges for violating economic sanctions and what appeared to be clear cut money laundering. JPMorgan recently paid a $2 billion dollar fine for its role in assisting Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, without having to admit guilt. Of course no one goes to jail. Almost no one. In January, Kareem Serageldin, a mid-to-upper level executive for Credit Suisse (not a CEO or CFO) was sentenced to 30 months in prison for concealing hundreds of millions in losses in the bank’s mortgage backed securities portfolio. Why this guy ended up going to prison and not somebody from Lehman, Bear Stearns, AIG, Countrywide, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, HSBC – go figure; there is no rhyme or reason beyond the notion that regulators and prosecutors are simpering little cowards.

It didn’t used to be this way. After the crash of 1929, the Pecora Hearings seized upon public outrage, and the head of the New York Stock Exchange landed in prison. When FDR took office he immediately announced a banking holiday and the bankers snapped to attention. After the savings-and-loan scandals of the 1980s, 1,100 people were prosecuted, including top executives at many of the largest failed banks and S&Ls. In the late 90s and the turn of the century, when the tech bubble burst and revealed widespread corporate accounting scandals, top executives from WorldCom, Enron, Qwest and Tyco, among others, went to prison. And the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen was criminally convicted for its complicity in the fraudulent steaming scam that was Enron; Andersen went out of business in 2002; delivering pink slips to many good and decent accountants along with the pond scum. Since then prosecutors have walked lightly for fear of collateral damage.

Since then, the bankers realized they could act with impunity, and they have. There has been no crackdown following the meltdown of 2008. From 2004 to 2012, the Justice Department reached 242 deferred and nonprosecution agreements with corporations, compared with 26 in the previous 12 years. The idea behind a deferred prosecution agreement, or DPA, is that the banksters stop doing the illegal stuff and if they do any other illegal stuff, the deal is off the table, and prosecutors can come down with full weight for past and current wrongdoing. Instead, there is no follow-up. It’s like a criminal is released on parole, violates parole, violates parole again, and again, and again; and the courts turn a blind eye.

So, now, with the BNP and Credit Suisse cases, the prosecutors goal seems to be criminal prosecution without making the banks actually suffer the consequences of criminal charges. Prosecutors consider them test cases; BNP and Credit Suisse aren’t the biggest banks; prosecutors aren’t sure what would happen with criminal charges; they don’t really know what to expect if they actually get a criminal guilty plea. If they start small, it might mean the end of the BNP tennis tournament or it might mean 200-thousand pink slips for bank employees, or it might be the spark that ignites a financial panic. They overlook the slow, insidious, systemic rot of the foundations of all global financial transactions – trust. In the long run, that seems far more dangerous.

Attorney General Eric Holder has testified before the Senate “that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute, if we do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy.”

The bank lawyers play on this fear; they claim bank clients -- including trustees, fiduciaries and pension funds -- could be forced to cut ties with a financial institution labeled a criminal enterprise.  Counterparties also might think twice before entering into billion-dollar transactions with such firms. Damaging a bank’s business could lead to broader fallout across the financial industry, just as Lehman’s collapse in 2008 prompted investors to withdraw from other firms on concern its exit would set off a wave of losses. Even the threat of criminal action must be handled in such a way as to not spook customers.  

It seems to be a spurious argument; akin to a doctor telling you that surgery to remove a cancerous tumor is dangerous and painful, so there is nothing to do but let the cancer overwhelm the host, curl up and wait to die. And then there is the more absurd part of the defense; the idea that pension funds would be forced to cut ties with criminal banksters; as if it is perfectly fine to have pension funds and trustees doing business with bankers involved in criminal activity, just so long as there are no official criminal charges. A complete denial of wrongdoing based upon a lack of enforcement. If the cops never arrest the killer, nobody really died. Yea, that’s it, pay no attention to the bloody corpse, pay no attention to the wreckage and devastation of the global financial meltdown; whistle past the graveyard.

You know the meltdown involved criminal wrongdoing; the regulators know it; the prosecutors know it. What they don’t seem to know is the collateral damage from non-enforcement and non-prosecution. Every action has a consequence, and non-action is a form of action.